Oldham , have won the same amount of games as us

but drawn 4 more, they have scored one goal less than us and conceded four less.

What is the big thing I am missing in this appointment ? Why do we think Lee Johnson is so much better than we had ?

I do not have any opinion on him at all, I just wondered why we wanted him ?

 

Dunno, maybe they think he can do better than Wilson did with one of the biggest budgets in the division?

 

On a smaller budget with a worse squad with lower crowds after being in that league for years

 

So he had a settled squad then?

 

If doing average with a crap team is good management we should have stuck with Davey.

 

no, he was forced to sell 4 or 5 of best players to pay for a new stand

 

That explains it then, 4 or 5 players in one team all worth money. Apart from the odd 1 or 2 we generally cant give ours away.

 

Compared to the ***** we've had recently, Davey would be brilliant!

 

To be fair to him he did give us some great memories and for a club like ours that is all we can really hope for.

 

Think they were impressed with what he's achieved on crowds half the size of ours. Probably helped his cause that Oldham haven't had to pay off a few guys contracts due to it not working out. That for such an inexperienced manager he's doing well for himself on a small budget.

 

Its all in the logarithms

 

Because he was the 1st ball pulled out of the hat.

I wish him all the best and hope he does much better than his predecessor.

Won't take much though!

All appointments are are gamble but this one is quite a big one.

Lets all hope this is the turning point and things start to improve.

He needs to hit the ground running otherwise season ticket renewals will be average to say the least!

Stranger thing have happened!

Welcome to Oakwell Lee Johnson and I wish you luck and success!

 

It is interesting yet many wanted DW out here while Oldham fans wanted to keep LJ.

 

I would suspect that he is outperforming the population mean - that is something like 80-90% of the standard deviation of any clubs league position is explained by wage bill. Therefore, given Oldhams relative wage bill compared to the rest of the league they are outperforming and that is then down to some other variable other than wage, usually that thing being the head coach/manager.

 

Is it fair to criticise Wilson on the size of the wage bill and our performance in relation to it when it was recently pointed out that a large percentage of that is taken up by the wages paid to Cranie, Jennings, Nyatanga and M'Voto, the only four players already at the club and already on secure contracts before he arrived?

How does our wage bill compare to that of Oldham's when we go with the players Wilson brought in and the youth players he's promoted from the academy?

It seems to me we're judging a manager on contracts he had absolutely nothing to do with for players he may not have wanted.

 

I don't want to criticise Wilson particularly, nevertheless it is striking the correlation between wage bill and league position over the last 30 or more years when the study has been done, only a few managers manage to outperform against the relative wage bill in their league, this is over the long term, so short term factors can be at play, therefore Wilson could justifiably argue that over the course of less than 1 season you cannot judge his performance. Similarly you would need to judge Johnson over more than the time he's been in charge at Oldham to say he is outperforming, also we don't actually know the relative wage bill of the two clubs compared to the rest of the league - that would be the interesting test - I suspect it wouldn'd be too far away from the current league table, with a few outliers showing either over or under performance - I would suspect that we are an under performing outlier though.

 

I don't disagree with any of that. What I'm asking is, is it fair to say we're under performing in terms of wage bill to points scored when getting on towards 50% of the wages are taken up by four players who the manager didn't sign and maybe doesn't even want. Those four are on such huge wages that it completely skews the data. There's no doubt we've got a big wage bill, but it's not down to the players the manager brought in. If you took the four highest earners out of the wage bill of every team in the division and then gave us the figures on the rest, I wonder if we'd be closer to the bottom five in terms of wage budget rather than the top. I rather suspect we would.

 

We actively tried to move Cranie on and I doubt there were many takers for Nyatanga, M'voto or Jennings. Yes Danny could have cut his losses and released them, but seen as they are on a decent wage this would be expensive in itself as they wouldn't walk out without being paid off from their hefty contracts.

All clubs wage bill would drop if you take the top 4 earners out, but think the point was that ours would drop significantly more than the average club. As in our wage bill is very lopsided. Danny is not to blame for this as he didn't sign any of those players. You could however point the finger at him for not getting the best out of Jennings in particular. Be VERY interesting to see if Johnson can.

 

Because after a rigorous interview process he was the outstanding candidate?

Let's not forget that some of our outstanding managers - Hunter, Clarke and Wilson himself first time round - had absolutely no managerial experience whatsoever.