Freedman out!

[boltonboris]

Who gives a shiny one which dwarf is the tallest?

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Usually the shortest dwarf

[Prufrock]

Who gives a shiny one which dwarf is the tallest?

I do. So fcuk you, self-appointed forum police .

[Bruce Rioja]

We could do with one of them Shit'o'meter thingamajigs to gain the true answer as to who really is/was the shittest

I've done a handy pie chart, Jonny.

Who is the shittiest manager of all time?



Douglas Freedman

Owen Coyle

Charlie Wright

Special Darren

[LeverEnd]

Darren did a reasonable job of the half-time challenge I noticed. Darren in!

[LeverEnd]

I bet Coyle's printing the league table off every week for his next interview though. Dougie's doing him a big favour!

[jaffka]

Special Darren, is he the bloke the burnden paddock used to chuck money at and he picked the coins up?

[BWFC_Insane]

I would struggle to say who was best tactically between Mourinho, Pellegrini and Wenger, but I can point to who has the highest wage bill and who has won most pots. That in itself doesn't help me understand who's best tactically.

Really?

[Prufrock]

It'd be a long post if we were to go back and forwards criticising the tactically mistakes made by Coyle and Freedman, so I won't expand on what I've already said on Freedman's failings. What I will say, however, is that the proof of tactical success lies in results and Coyle's results, however awful some mistakes were, have been better throughout his career than what Freedman has done.

Coyle did a very good job at St. Johnstone and then did an even better job at Burnley. It's easy for us now to slag off his achievements in hindsight but what he did with Burnley was remarkable and he deserves massive praise for that. Even with us, his overall PPG during his stay with us would be enough for a mid-table finish most seasons, so it wasn't a complete failure. What was a failure, was his last season in charge but even then, it's not like we were relegated with absolute shame like Wolves were, we narrowly missed out on survival and given the injuries we'd had that season, it was always going to be tough. Coyle was unable to turn things around and made plenty of mistakes, but there's managerial talent in him, otherwise he wouldn't have had as much success as he has had.

Freedman, however, did nowhere near as good of a job at Palace that Coyle did at Burnley. It's not even close and Freedman had the better group of players at his disposal too. Since coming to Bolton, Freedman has had the same group of players that narrowly got relegated in the Premier League and has turned them into a struggling Championship side, which plays awful football that can't defend and is woeful going forward. Freedman blames his failings on the "nucleus" that Coyle had during his stay but Coyle did a much, much better job with those same group of players. If Coyle had failed as much as Freedman has done, we'd have been relegated on about 9 points for the season, and it certainly wouldn't have gone to the last day.

Coyle is a much better manager than Freedman is. He's done more already and will have a much better future.

Ha! So it's a worry that you might run out of internet rather than that you haven't actually got a clue what you're on about?

Seriously though, there are only so many ways everyone can agree Freedman is shit before it gets mind-numbingly dull and catty. Let's have something different. Let's hear this *analysis*...

[jonnycooper]

We could do with one of them Shit'o'meter thingamajigs to gain the true answer as to who really is/was the shittest

I've done a handy pie chart, Jonny.

Who is the shittiest manager of all time?



Douglas Freedman

Owen Coyle

Charlie Wright



Just shoving up a BIG BLUE BALL! Shirley thats cheating? Dougie doesn't stand a chance.





Special Darren

[Worthy4England]

I would struggle to say who was best tactically between Mourinho, Pellegrini and Wenger, but I can point to who has the highest wage bill and who has won most pots. That in itself doesn't help me understand who's best tactically.

Really?

Yes, because I've not seen them perform when all things are equal.

[BWFC_Insane]

I would struggle to say who was best tactically between Mourinho, Pellegrini and Wenger, but I can point to who has the highest wage bill and who has won most pots. That in itself doesn't help me understand who's best tactically.

Really?

Yes, because I've not seen them perform when all things are equal.

I mean I get what you're saying, it was more the Wenger inclusion that made me wonder....

Personally I know which of the three I'd choose as being the best tactically (one has won a lot of trophies in a variety of settings with a variety of resources available). Though having said that, I think tactics are fairly low on a list of important qualities. Man management and psychology seem to be the rage nowadays. And I think that is where the best managers stand out.

[coffeymagic]

Arguing about 'who was the shitest' isn't really going to get us anywhere but it shows how bad things have gone.

On the subject of Coyle I know a lad who was in the youth team at Motherwell when Coyle played there under McLeish.

He said that no matter what anyone did in training they could never break into the first team because McLeish always picked his mates (including Coyle).

It didn't matter if the forwards didn't score for weeks, McLeish would 'eramin loyal' to his team.

Perhaps this 'loyalty' rubbed off on Coyle and that's why he stuck with the same formation/players despite all the evidence.

Dougie? I don't know what's going on his mind.

I think it's booze.

[Worthy4England]

I would struggle to say who was best tactically between Mourinho, Pellegrini and Wenger, but I can point to who has the highest wage bill and who has won most pots. That in itself doesn't help me understand who's best tactically.

Really?

Yes, because I've not seen them perform when all things are equal.

I mean I get what you're saying, it was more the Wenger inclusion that made me wonder....

Personally I know which of the three I'd choose as being the best tactically (one has won a lot of trophies in a variety of settings with a variety of resources available). Though having said that, I think tactics are fairly low on a list of important qualities. Man management and psychology seem to be the rage nowadays. And I think that is where the best managers stand out.

I'd be tempted to say Mourinho, but.

He was at the biggest Club in Portugal and probably the best funded - so no surprise on the domestic front. He did bag the Champs League though which was a plus

He had the best funded club in England when Abramovich took over Chelsea and won some domestic trophies.

He went to the 2nd best funded Club in Italy (which became the best funded during his tenure) won another Champs League (Inter's two largest loss making years, excluding one-off exceptional charges, by some considerable distance were the two years he was there), followed by the best funded Club in Spain.

I don't believe either Pellegrini nor Wenger have had those same advantages.

I deliberately didn't mention Ferguson, as he was obviously way ahead. Pellegrini not winning the title this year would be a poor show IMO.

The point I was making, was you can't just take win% or PPG% in isolation of other factors.

[BWFC_Insane]

I'd be tempted to say Mourinho, but.

He was at the biggest Club in Portugal and probably the best funded - so no surprise on the domestic front. He did bag the Champs League though which was a plus

He had the best funded club in England when Abramovich took over Chelsea and won some domestic trophies.

He went to the 2nd best funded Club in Italy (which became the best funded during his tenure) won another Champs League (Inter's two largest loss making years, excluding one-off exceptional charges, by some considerable distance were the two years he was there), followed by the best funded Club in Spain.

I don't believe either Pellegrini nor Wenger have had those same advantages.

I deliberately didn't mention Ferguson, as he was obviously way ahead. Pellegrini not winning the title this year would be a poor show IMO.

The point I was making, was you can't just take win% or PPG% in isolation of other factors.

Absolutely agree on the last point. However, the other way of looking at it, is he won the champions league at Porto which I'd say is more than a plus, a near-miracle in the modern game.

He won the champions league at Inter, a club that hadn't won Europe's top compeition since 1965. And haven't won it since either.

I'd put Mourinho ahead of Ferguson also. Managing the biggest club in England and for the majority of that time out-spending everyone else isn't as impressive as winning what Mourinho has at a variety of clubs, and with various issues and resourcing levels.

But I do take your point that even if things were equal, tactical ability, is hard to judge. Good man managers and people who appoint good backroom teams are probably far superior to the great tacticians in isolation.

[bwfcdan94]

The key for me is that Ferguson has retired whereas Mourinho still has at least 20 years of managing ahead of him.

[Bruce Rioja]

We could do with one of them Shit'o'meter thingamajigs to gain the true answer as to who really is/was the shittest

I've done a handy pie chart, Jonny.

Who is the shittiest manager of all time?



Douglas Freedman

Owen Coyle

Charlie Wright

Special Darren

Just shoving up a BIG BLUE BALL! Shirley thats cheating? Dougie doesn't stand a chance.

Hours of painstaking research - and for what, eh? And for what?!

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Well it delivered a perfect summary to me...

[coffeymagic]

Of course he's a football genius this morning. Heard him on Radio Manchester after the game which was a surprise in itself because he's normally nowhere to be found after a defeat.

Talking about how he's not changed his plan because he's been unable to change his plan and it's all under extreme circumstances and blah blah blah.

What made me scratch my head was that he said he's been 'unable to play with two up front because he's not had two strikers fit enough to play'.

I was sure we did have some strikers at one point, we had that Davies bloke, that Beckford character, that N'Gog (remember him), plus Eaves and that Sammi Whatisface....

Perhaps I imagined those names.

I don't know if he believes his own lies but as long as we're winning, and it sounded like we played well then he can tell himself whatever the hell he likes.

Only one striker indeed.

[BWFC_Insane]

Of course he's a football genius this morning. Heard him on Radio Manchester after the game which was a surprise in itself because he's normally nowhere to be found after a defeat.

Talking about how he's not changed his plan because he's been unable to change his plan and it's all under extreme circumstances and blah blah blah.

What made me scratch my head was that he said he's been 'unable to play with two up front because he's not had two strikers fit enough to play'.

I was sure we did have some strikers at one point, we had that Davies bloke, that Beckford character, that N'Gog (remember him), plus Eaves and that Sammi Whatisface....

Perhaps I imagined those names.

I don't know if he believes his own lies but as long as we're winning, and it sounded like we played well then he can tell himself whatever the hell he likes.

Only one striker indeed.

Talking about lies, the two bits in bold.....

He is interviewed every single week, win lose or draw. I've never known him not to give an interview.

He said

Many will point to the fact we had two strikers but I have never really had the opportunity to play two of the type I really like.

Which is very different from what you are trying to make out he said.