[Archived] Sam's Rovers Record

[slough_rover]

So how did Sam compare to the men who previously led the Blue and White Army. Below are some stats I have pinched from the official website's messageboard:

Kenny Dalglish : W 102 L 47 D 46. Win ratio 52.3%

Howard Kendall: W 41 D 27 L 21. Win ratio 46.1%

Mark Hughes: W 82 D 47 L 59. Win ratio 43.6%

Graeme Souness: W 86 D 61 L 65. Win ratio 40.6%

Don Mackay: W 91 D 64 L 77. Win ratio 39.2%

Ray Harford: W 24 D 13 L 27. Win ratio 37.5%

Bobby Saxton: W 90 D 71 L 85. Win ratio 36.6%

Tony Parkes: W 21 D 19 L 19. Win ratio 35.59%

Sam Allardyce: W 32 D 24 L 34. Win ratio 35.56%

Roy Hodgson: W 22 D 18 L 22. Win ratio 35.5%

Paul Ince: W 6 D 4 L 11. Win ratio 28.6%

Brian Kidd: W 12 D 18 L 14. Win ratio 27.3%

Looking at his stats I can see why the new owners felt that he wasn't the man to lead the club to bigger and better things. Couple this win ratio with his shocking tactics surely people can't complain too much about his departure. Personally I thought they may have waited until the end of the season before giving him the boot, but I haven't been this excited about attending a Rover's game for a long long time.

Also interesting to note that Big Jack also gave Don Mackay who had a pretty decent record the boot as he also felt that he wasn't the right man to lead the club onto greater things. Looking at Dalglish's record Uncle Jack was proved right. Let's hope Venky's can follow suit.

[Wilky]

I've got massive hopes about venkys... Sacking Sam was the first major decision they've made...

Who wants to watch boring football?

Big Sam is a little team manager.. if venkys want to turn rovers into a big team then the cheque book needs to come out following sams sacking otherwise it was a pointless exercise...

[den]

Looking at his stats I can see why the new owners felt that he wasn't the man to lead the club to bigger and better things.

Want to explain how you can compare Allardyce's record, to say - Kenny Dalglish's?

[tony gale's mic]

So how did Sam compare to the men who previously led the Blue and White Army. Below are some stats I have pinched from the official website's messageboard:

Kenny Dalglish : W 102 L 47 D 46. Win ratio 52.3%

Howard Kendall: W 41 D 27 L 21. Win ratio 46.1%

Mark Hughes: W 82 D 47 L 59. Win ratio 43.6%

Graeme Souness: W 86 D 61 L 65. Win ratio 40.6%

Don Mackay: W 91 D 64 L 77. Win ratio 39.2%

Ray Harford: W 24 D 13 L 27. Win ratio 37.5%

Bobby Saxton: W 90 D 71 L 85. Win ratio 36.6%

Tony Parkes: W 21 D 19 L 19. Win ratio 35.59%

Sam Allardyce: W 32 D 24 L 34. Win ratio 35.56%

Roy Hodgson: W 22 D 18 L 22. Win ratio 35.5%

Paul Ince: W 6 D 4 L 11. Win ratio 28.6%

Brian Kidd: W 12 D 18 L 14. Win ratio 27.3%

Looking at his stats I can see why the new owners felt that he wasn't the man to lead the club to bigger and better things. Couple this win ratio with his shocking tactics surely people can't complain too much about his departure. Personally I thought they may have waited until the end of the season before giving him the boot, but I haven't been this excited about attending a Rover's game for a long long time.

Also interesting to note that Big Jack also gave Don Mackay who had a pretty decent record the boot as he also felt that he wasn't the right man to lead the club onto greater things. Looking at Dalglish's record Uncle Jack was proved right. Let's hope Venky's can follow suit.

Total rubbish.

Kendall's stats were largely achieved when the team was in the 3rd division. How can that possibly be compared with Sam managing in the Premier League against the best in the country?

Graeme Souness again, half of his reign was spent down in what is now the Championship and he was blessed with having the likes of David Dunn, Matt Jansen and Damien Duff in the team. I'm sure if Sam inherited that team in a division below his win stats would have been fantastic too.

Ray Harford inherited the title winning side including Shearer and took them down to 6th. Do you think that's a better achievement than Sam saving us from relegation and taking us to the top half with no investment whatsoever?

Even Mark Hughes - now it's fair to say he was a better manager than Sam, but even he didn't manage in a league which was as tough. Man City were down in the lower leagues, Spurs were rubbish for half his reign and Villa only got rich halfway through his reign. He also never got outspent by the likes of Birmingham, Sunderland and Stoke.

To compare this lot with Uncle Jack is, quite frankly, an insult to the great man.

[LeftWinger]

Want to explain how you can compare Allardyce's record, to say - Kenny Dalglish's?

Compare Hughes' record to Allardyce.

[tony gale's mic]

Compare Hughes' record to Allardyce.

Firstly, as I detailed above, Allardyce managed in considerably tougher conditions than Hughes, not having nearly as many teams massively outspending us.

Secondly, whilst Hughes was a better manager for Rovers, that's still no reason to sack Sam. And at least Sam has been successful at more than one club.

[slough_rover]

Total rubbish.

Kendall's stats were largely achieved when the team was in the 3rd division. How can that possibly be compared with Sam managing in the Premier League against the best in the country?

Graeme Souness again, half of his reign was spent down in what is now the Championship and he was blessed with having the likes of David Dunn, Matt Jansen and Damien Duff in the team. I'm sure if Sam inherited that team in a division below his win stats would have been fantastic too.

Ray Harford inherited the title winning side including Shearer and took them down to 6th. Do you think that's a better achievement than Sam saving us from relegation and taking us to the top half with no investment whatsoever?

Even Mark Hughes - now it's fair to say he was a better manager than Sam, but even he didn't manage in a league which was as tough. Man City were down in the lower leagues, Spurs were rubbish for half his reign and Villa only got rich halfway through his reign. He also never got outspent by the likes of Birmingham, Sunderland and Stoke.

To compare this lot with Uncle Jack is, quite frankly, an insult to the great man.

Before you get your knickers into a complete twist I put down all the managers who had guided Rovers in recent times just so that people can have a look at the whole picture. People can use those stats as they wish and make their own conclusions. Also you've interpreted me to comparing Venky's to Jack whereas I have just compared the situation. Totally different.

[slough_rover]

Firstly, as I detailed above, Allardyce managed in considerably tougher conditions than Hughes, not having nearly as many teams massively outspending us.

Secondly, whilst Hughes was a better manager for Rovers, that's still no reason to sack Sam. And at least Sam has been successful at more than one club.

I dont care what people have done elsewhere. All that matters is their performance for Rovers.

[tony gale's mic]

Before you get your knickers into a complete twist I put down all the managers who had guided Rovers in recent times just so that people can have a look at the whole picture. People can use those stats as they wish and make their own conclusions. Also you've interpreted me to comparing Venky's to Jack whereas I have just compared the situation. Totally different.

That's not the whole picture though, that's a tiny amount of the whole picture. The whole picture would take into account division managed in, finances, players available etc.

If anyone bases their opinion on Sam on that bunch of statistics then their opinion is basically worth nothing.

[imy9]

Total rubbish.

Kendall's stats were largely achieved when the team was in the 3rd division. How can that possibly be compared with Sam managing in the Premier League against the best in the country?

Graeme Souness again, half of his reign was spent down in what is now the Championship and he was blessed with having the likes of David Dunn, Matt Jansen and Damien Duff in the team. I'm sure if Sam inherited that team in a division below his win stats would have been fantastic too.

Ray Harford inherited the title winning side including Shearer and took them down to 6th. Do you think that's a better achievement than Sam saving us from relegation and taking us to the top half with no investment whatsoever?

Even Mark Hughes - now it's fair to say he was a better manager than Sam, but even he didn't manage in a league which was as tough. Man City were down in the lower leagues, Spurs were rubbish for half his reign and Villa only got rich halfway through his reign. He also never got outspent by the likes of Birmingham, Sunderland and Stoke.

To compare this lot with Uncle Jack is, quite frankly, an insult to the great man.

Venkys have only been here for 4 weeks!

Stats are interesting. I think you can compare the records of Hughes and Allardyce, what the stats dont show is how much money Hughes made for the club in the time he was here, a master at purchasing cheap talent and selling at high prices whilst also playing some decent football:

Warnock- £1.5 million- sold £8 million

RSC- £3.3 million- sold £18 million

Bentley- £1 million?- sold £17 million

[Exiled in Toronto]

Total rubbish.

Kendall's stats were largely achieved when the team was in the 3rd division. How can that possibly be compared with Sam managing in the Premier League against the best in the country?

Graeme Souness again, half of his reign was spent down in what is now the Championship and he was blessed with having the likes of David Dunn, Matt Jansen and Damien Duff in the team. I'm sure if Sam inherited that team in a division below his win stats would have been fantastic too.

Your grasp of statisics and our history is amazing.

Actually, Kendall inherited a just relegated team that was awful. 50% of his games were in the 3rd leading us to promotion and 50% were in the 2nd, leading us to within a point of promotion whilst having absolutely nothing to spend. Your right - how hopeless was that?

Souness spent slightly over 1 season in the 2nd, leading a mid-table, dispirited team to promotion; Over 2/3rds of his reign was in the Prem, 6th, Worthy Cup etc. Sheesh - awful.

And none of the other managers bar Dalglish/Harford had 11 internationals in the team and a salary budget of 50 million quid, so it's not quite as one-sided as you like to make out.

[tony gale's mic]

Venkys have only been here for 4 weeks!

Stats are interesting. I think you can compare the records of Hughes and Allardyce, what the stats dont show is how much money Hughes made for the club in the time he was here, a master at purchasing cheap talent and selling at high prices whilst also playing some decent football:

Warnock- £1.5 million- sold £8 million

RSC- £3.3 million- sold £18 million

Bentley- £1 million?- sold £17 million

Of course, Hughes was a better manager for Rovers than Allardyce. Sam still leads overall since he's done the business at two clubs while Hughes is struggling at Fulham, but he's got time to mend that.

But fact remains Hughes still did have more money to spend on players in the first place than Sam did, since little of the money that Hughes spent was profit from his own sales - Ince spent the Bentley profit, and half of the Warnock/RSC money disappeared down a black hole and the other half went to Sam. There's also the matter of other clubs around spending much more as I mentioned earlier.

There is no way Venky's nonsenical actions this week can be compared to Uncle Jack's masterstroke in getting Mackay out and Dalglish in unless two things happen:

(1) They hire someone who has succeeded at the top of the Premier League (or, failing that, one of the other two major European Leagues)

(2) They spend £50-60 million plus on this squad, since that's the absolute minimum amount of money it will take for us to compete with the top five (of course Jack's aim was to win the title, and that he did).

[magicalmortensleftpeg]

Those stats are only valid if you include how much each manager had spent in relative terms plus the division they were playing in. In his last year in charge Sam spent nothing. And this was whilst the teams around us in the league were ploughing tens of millions into their sides.

Sam did a very very good job with a very very average side. The team we have now is still revolving around the skeleton of the team he inherited, with Samba, Nelsen, Pedersen, Dunn, Emerton, Roberts all still proving to be our most effective players. In the 2/3 years since Hughes left, the team got weaker and weaker because Sam was not allowed to spend any money.

Id even say that this is one of the weakest prem teams we have had since 04/05 and yet we finished 10th last season and without any investment, sit 13th now. I do not need stats to know that Sam did a very efficient and decent job here.

[Paul Mellelieu]

Number of times I've been bored to death under Sam. Every game.

Number of games I've missed under Sam. Most in years.

[RovertheHill]

Well you could look at his record for Bolton and Newcastle which is 41.35% and 33.33% . A better measure though is points per game.

Overall though, you have to say that Sam did a good job with the resources at his disposal. It doesn't mean he would do the same good job with more resources (Newcastle for example, and Hughes at Man City). Clearly that's what the new owners thought. Let's hope they prove correct

[tony gale's mic]

Your grasp of statisics and our history is amazing.

Actually, Kendall inherited a just relegated team that was awful. 50% of his games were in the 3rd leading us to promotion and 50% were in the 2nd, leading us to within a point of promotion whilst having absolutely nothing to spend. Your right - how hopeless was that?

Souness spent slightly over 1 season in the 2nd, leading a mid-table, dispirited team to promotion; Over 2/3rds of his reign was in the Prem, 6th, Worthy Cup etc. Sheesh - awful.

And none of the other managers bar Dalglish/Harford had 11 internationals in the team and a salary budget of 50 million quid, so it's not quite as one-sided as you like to make out.

I didn't say Kendall's achievements were "hopeless". But success in the lower tiers is totally different to success at the top level. That's why Paul Ince's achievements down in the lower leagues didn't translate whatsoever to the Premier League, because he was up against much better tactical minds, couldnt handle the big players etc.

Of course Kendall went on to much greater things, but there's plenty of managers with top lower division records who never hack it at the top level. So yes, counting win percentage when including the lower divisions can't be compared to ones in the Premier League.

That team might have been dispirited but it still had huge talent in it. Far too much quality for the second tier. He did do a great job for us early on though and signed some quality players, but he also signed some total dross and when he was managing in the Premier League we were still one of the higher spenders in the league, unlike under Sam when we were one of the lowest spenders.

And the last comment - how is that even relevant? We might have 11 internationals (mostly of minor footballing nations), but so do the vast majority of teams in this league and then some. We're competing against teams who spend 7-8 million a season just for one players' wages. None of the managers excluding Mark Hughes and possibly Souness had that either.

[jim mk2]

. People can use those stats as they wish and make their own conclusions.

The conclusion must be that those statistics are pretty meaningless really. Different times, different circumstances.

[slough_rover]

The conclusion must be that those statistics are pretty meaningless really. Different times, different circumstances.

In any circumstances a win percentage of 35 percent isnt good enough for progression.

[DaveyB]

At times this week I feel like I've stumbled onto the wrong board - I'm looking for the Blackburn Rovers fans board, but it appears instead I've found the Sam Allardyce fans messageboard.

At the end of the day he has gone. I'm not going to pretend that I'm upset about that, but I do understand why others are. Having said that some of the reactions are, imo, way, way over the top - it is almost like some people would prefer to see BFS succeed and Rovers fail just so that they say 'I told you so' down the line.

I think that in the long-run history will remember Allardyce (at Rovers) pretty much the way those stats show him - not a disaster like Kidd or Ince, but equally not a great success like Dalglish or Hughes. Just an average manager who did a decent job for a while.

[Gav]

The conclusion must be that those statistics are pretty meaningless really. Different times, different circumstances.

......and Allardyce has gone, so move on

[tony gale's mic]

At times this week I feel like I've stumbled onto the wrong board - I'm looking for the Blackburn Rovers fans board, but it appears instead I've found the Sam Allardyce fans messageboard.

At the end of the day he has gone. I'm not going to pretend that I'm upset about that, but I do understand why others are. Having said that some of the reactions are, imo, way, way over the top - it is almost like some people would prefer to see BFS succeed and Rovers fail just so that they say 'I told you so' down the line.

I think you'll find it wasn't people who supported Sam who started this thread...

[DaveyB]

I think you'll find it wasn't people who supported Sam who started this thread...

I wasn't aware that I had said it was.

[Mattyblue]

The majority of the pro-Sam brigade held no particular candle for the bloke but we respected the stability and results he brought the club. I wouldn't have been against a new manager in the summer if that was the route they wanted to take.

However, a competent manager is sacked midseason and replaced with a complete novice by owners that seem utterly clueless and you lot are all crowing, so shortsighted.

[tony gale's mic]

I wasn't aware that I had said it was.

True but if someone starts a thread which a table with highly misleading statistics, and claims this proves why they were right to get rid of our manager who was performing well and appoint a rookie, then obviously people are going to respond.

What do you think would be a better response? "Why yes, that table's right, I do think Ray Harford did a better job than Sam Allardyce!"

[DaveyB]

The majority of the pro-Sam brigade held no particular candle for the bloke but we respected the stability and results he brought the club. I wouldn't have been against a new manager in the summer if that was the route they wanted to take.

However, a competent manager is sacked midseason and replaced with a complete novice by owners that seem utterly clueless and you lot are all crowing, so shortsighted.

I'm not crowing, can't say I'm overly upset that he's gone and I think in the long run it is for the best, but I personally wouldn't have sacked him at the present time.

What I (and I think others) are trying to do is provide a bit of balance to the seemingly endless posts declaring that we're doomed, and point out that life (and more importantly Blackburn Rovers) goes on without Sam