Rate the Managers

[TheScarf]

9 hours ago, Ric said:

McInnes the second best manager in Scotland?

The thread is the best manager in the Premiership not Scotland. Guys like Dick Campbell and John Robertson are miles better managers than most on that list. 

[Melanius Mullarkey]

4 hours ago, Dee Man said:

What a stupid thread. 

This

[Dons_1988]

10 hours ago, Ric said:

McInnes the second best manager in Scotland?

Exactly. Gerrard can't even claim a league cup to his name.

 

[Ric]

3 hours ago, TheScarf said:

The thread is the best manager in the Premiership not Scotland. Guys like Dick Campbell and John Robertson are miles better managers than most on that list. 

Apologies, I was being Premier-centric with my comments. Although the reaction remains the same when putting McInnes as 2nd best manager in Scotland's top flight.

 

2 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:

Exactly. Gerrard can't even claim a league cup to his name.

While McInnes has not had the luxury of huge financial resources like Gerrard, he did manage your club for 5 years when Rangers weren't even in the top division and managed one cup where he had the kindest draw possible. That's something you may say? Sure but it's the same thing we achieved the year before with much less resources at our disposal.

McInnes' reign at Aberdeen, to me - notably not a fan, is viewed as one of numerous missed opportunities. He has all the tools at his disposal to do much better but (nearly) always comes up short.

[coprolite]

1.  Kettlewell

2= Robinson

2= Davidson

4= Goodwin

4= McInnes

4= Gerrard

7= Mellon

7= Lennon

9= Ross

9= Dyer

9= Rice

Previous efforts haven't suitably adjusted for the budgets (B) the position of the club when the manager arrived (P- expressed as 1/3 season average league placing), ability to replace players (R-proportion of players out of contract in first year) and time in the job (T). Current league placing is L. 

Using the formula ((1/L)/B)*((P+R)/T), I've created a ranking system and have ranked the managers by the length of their name. 

[Dons_1988]

13 minutes ago, Ric said:

While McInnes has not had the luxury of huge financial resources like Gerrard, he did manage your club for 5 years when Rangers weren't even in the top division and managed one cup where he had the kindest draw possible. That's something you may say? Sure but it's the same thing we achieved the year before with much less resources at our disposal.

McInnes' reign at Aberdeen, to me - notably not a fan, is viewed as one of numerous missed opportunities. He has all the tools at his disposal to do much better but (nearly) always comes up short.

I was only really joking.

The Mcinnes debate happens frequently on the Aberdeen thread, I'm not sure I have the energy for another.

[Ric]

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

I was only really joking.

The Mcinnes debate happens frequently on the Aberdeen thread, I'm not sure I have the energy for another.

Forgive me I thought you were defending him there. I mean, you have a point regarding Gerrard.

[G51]

McInnes is an interesting one to me. He's probably achieved league positions roughly in line with expectations at Aberdeen since his arrival. That's worth more than people think when you consider the amount of managers who can't do that.

However, his teams are only set up for success against weaker teams. When it comes to facing a stronger team, he has almost no idea how to handle that and takes a bodying nearly every time.

I think he's probably an okay to good manager with some glaringly obvious flaws? And it's worth mentioning he'd have left to go to Rangers if it wasn't for [REDACTED]

Edited December 1, 2020 by G51

[Dons_1988]

2 minutes ago, Ric said:

Forgive me I thought you were defending him there. I mean, you have a point regarding Gerrard.

I would defend him if I had the energy. But I wouldn't sit here and declare him the best manger in the league.

I think he's destined for his legacy to be more appreciated in the boardroom than it ever will be by the fanbase.

[RandomGuy.]

25 minutes ago, coprolite said:

1.  Kettlewell

2= Robinson

2= Davidson

4= Goodwin

4= McInnes

4= Gerrard

7= Mellon

7= Lennon

9= Ross

9= Dyer

9= Rice

Previous efforts haven't suitably adjusted for the budgets (B) the position of the club when the manager arrived (P- expressed as 1/3 season average league placing), ability to replace players (R-proportion of players out of contract in first year) and time in the job (T). Current league placing is L. 

Using the formula ((1/L)/B)*((P+R)/T), I've created a ranking system and have ranked the managers by the length of their name. 

FWIW, at a guess any system would throw out...

1. McInnes

2. Lennon

3. Gerrard

4. Robinson

5. Ross

6. Mellon

7. Dyer

8. Goodwin

9. Rice

10. Kettlewell 

11. Davidson

Purely based on how they've done over the course of their career so far.

[TheScarf]

Neil Lennon has proven beyond any doubt that he's a shite manager.

[Ric]

For all the chat about Lennon being shit, and I'm no defender of him, he's got a good win record. To be fair, he has all the advantages too.

1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said:

Purely based on how they've done over the course of their career so far.

Similar to what I'd written above, I cannot see how anyone can justify McInnes being anywhere near the top of the list. He might have done favourably well at St Johnstone but at Aberdeen if I was to use a colour to describe him, it'd be beige.

Edited December 1, 2020 by Ric

[afc_blockhead]

1 hour ago, Dons_1988 said:

I was only really joking.

The Mcinnes debate happens frequently on the Aberdeen thread, I'm not sure I have the energy for another.

The point stands about Gerrard though. A lot of people rating him as the best.

Spent masses of money in Scottish Football terms to win f**k all so far. Hes not proven hes a decent manager. 

[Ric]

1 minute ago, afc_blockhead said:

The point stands about Gerrard though. A lot of people rating him as the best.

Spent masses of money in Scottish Football terms to win f**k all so far. Hes not proven hes a decent manager. 

I'm certainly no fan of Gerrard, but in regard to European football I think he's done pretty well - considering the record of other Scottish teams.

[RandomGuy.]

37 minutes ago, Ric said:

if I was to use a colour to describe him, it'd be beige.

And? Its still better than the murky brown colour of bottom dwellers like Rice and Goodwin.

[craigkillie]

2 hours ago, G51 said:

McInnes is an interesting one to me. He's probably achieved league positions roughly in line with expectations at Aberdeen since his arrival. That's worth more than people think when you consider the amount of managers who can't do that.

However, his teams are only set up for success against weaker teams. When it comes to facing a stronger team, he has almost no idea how to handle that and takes a bodying nearly every time.

I think he's probably an okay to good manager with some glaringly obvious flaws? And it's worth mentioning he'd have left to go to Rangers if it wasn't for [REDACTED]

This is a good summary of McInnes. He's clearly a good manager, and has taken Aberdeen from a long-term laughing stock to being top 4 certainties every year, and has had several 2nd place finishes. Yes, he has a very large budget relative to the others, but that's no guarantee of anything as previous Aberdeen, Hearts and Hibs managers have shown on numerous occasions. He does pretty well in Europe too, it's rare that they don't at least perform to their seeding, which again isn't always the case.

His big problem is essentially his consistency - the way his teams play mean that they basically win nearly every game they're expected to win, but hardly ever win any that they're not. Consistency tends to get you good league finishes but doesn't win you cups unless you get a lucky draw - he's only really had two of those (both in 2013/14) and he managed to win a League Cup but f**k up a Scottish Cup.

Regardless of all that, I'd say he's clearly in a different league to any other non-Old Firm manager of the last 10 years, with the exception of Steve Clarke and perhaps Tommy Wright.

Edited December 1, 2020 by craigkillie

[Ric]

59 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

And? Its still better than the murky brown colour of bottom dwellers like Rice and Goodwin.

Comparing him to who you consider him worse than doesn't equally mean he should be ranked 2nd (or 1st). I'd put Ross, Lennon, Robinson, Gerrard ahead of him in the list.

In terms of those two, Rice has been around a lot longer than both Goodwin and McInnes (albeit not as a number one) but to me he seems the worst of the bunch. Goodwin is clearly punching way below where he should be with the team at his disposal. I'd rate him higher than Kettlewell, although like Goodwin he's still early in his career.

[Dons_1988]

27 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

This is a good summary of McInnes. He's clearly a good manager, and has taken Aberdeen from a long-term laughing stock to being top 4 certainties every year, and has had several 2nd place finishes. Yes, he has a very large budget relative to the others, but that's no guarantee of anything as previous Aberdeen, Hearts and Hibs managers have shown on numerous occasions. He does pretty well in Europe too, it's rare that they don't at least perform to their seeding, which again isn't always the case.

His big problem is essentially his consistency - the way his teams play mean that they basically win nearly every game they're expected to win, but hardly ever win any that they're not. Consistency tends to get you good league finishes but doesn't win you cups unless you get a lucky draw - he's only really had two of those (both in 2013/14) and he managed to win a League Cup but f**k up a Scottish Cup.

Regardless of all that, I'd say he's clearly in a different league to any other non-Old Firm manager of the last 10 years, with the exception of Steve Clarke and perhaps Tommy Wright.

Basically.

I mentioned his legacy being in the boardroom because the consistent league finishes and European efforts/cup runs have given the club the stability off the pitch to grow revenue, develop a training ground, expand the football budget etc. It's a far better club all round than the one he inherited and he's played a huge part in that. 

From many supporters perspective, it is just one trophy and an inability to break the glass ceiling of finishing in European spots, albeit I don't think he's had enough credit for finishing 2nd ahead of Rangers twice, even if they were weakened. Particularly over the last 2 or 3 seasons there's not been enough 'big' moments for the fans to cling to. The extra time win at Killie was probably the only one last season, Ferguson winner at Hampden against Rangers maybe the only one from the season before?

 

[Coventry Saint]

14 hours ago, Scotty Tunbridge said:

Started typing 1-11 then sacked it.

11. Rice

RICE OUT.

I started to post this as a joke post before realising I'm 100% serious: I think 11th is too high for Rice. It's safe to assume whoever Livi bring in will be better. Rice is a worse manager than the placeholder.

[RandomGuy.]

11 minutes ago, Ric said:

Comparing him to who you consider him worse than doesn't equally mean he should be ranked 2nd (or 1st). I'd put Ross, Lennon, Robinson, Gerrard ahead of him in the list.

What has Jack Ross done thats better than McInnes?

Their early careers are almost identical except McInnes has achieved what Ross is aiming to do. 

Robinson is arguable, but again, what's he achieved that McInnes hasn't? Slightly better results, sometimes, with a worse team over a shorter period?

Lennon at Bolton/Hibs was no better than McInnes at Aberdeen. So you're basically saying McInnes should be downgraded because of his budget, yet Lennon should be higher despite having a bigger budget.

Same with Gerrard. You want McInnes dropped down for failing to win trophies with a large budget, yet have decided Gerrard, with an even bigger budget and less trophies, is better.