Gartside's Worst Manager - Megson v Coyle

JAH wrote:RT can you not remember where we were in the league when we sacked Megson and how Coyle steered us to safety that year? FFS people have short memories.

People do indeed have short memories.

The facts - 2009/10 League Season

Megson P18, W4, D6, L8, Pts 18, Ave 1 per game
Coyle, P20 W6, D3, L11 Pts 21, Ave 1.05 per game.


If those detailS were extrapolated over a whole season, Megson would have had 38 points to Coyle's 39.9 points - hardly a significant difference.

That year 40 points would have placed us in 14th position (where we actually finished) and 38 points in 14th equal (with Wolves) - no significant difference at all!

That season the team that finished in 18th and 19th places (and thus relegated - Burnley and Hull) had 30 points.

In reality then Megson would have to have picked up only 13 points from the last 20 games from when he was sacked - or 0.65 per game.

His managerial record with Bolton is P97, W27, D45, L26 Pts126,  Pts Average 1.29 per game -

Which is twice as much as what was required to stay up.

It is quite obvious that the opinion some people have of Megson as a person clearly clouds their judgement of how effective (albeit soul destroying) his management was.

There was no way Coyle saved us from relegation with just a 0.05 difference in performance from Megson, so the opposite must be true - namely that we would not have been relegated under Megson that season.

QED.

...and that's what swings it for me.

If you've got two managers, both returning the same number of points per game, but one is a nasty, sneering tool whose tenure saw the fans actually fighting with each other on the terraces and the other one is a former hero who smiles a lot and doesn't alienate the fans.......I make him the better manager.

Very simplistic, I know, and Coyle is a useless manager who should never have allowed us to get relegated, but I will always view Megson's time at Bolton as the darkest I have known because it took all the pleasure out of being a fan and he orchestrated it.

But Bread, that was only for the season in question.

If you look at Coyle's career record at Bolton, he lost nearly HALF the games we played (60 out of 126 - or 48%).

Personal choice and all that I know but how anybody thinks a manager who loses 1 game in every two over three seasons, who gave us our worst home record in our entire history, signed some of the worst players in decades and tied them to the club with fabulous wages and long contacts (Pratley for 5 years ffs!!!) and then got us relegated when we really should not have been, which in turn cost us absolute millions in lost Sky monies, which again as probably seen us cast out into the football wilderness for the rest of my lifetime - is better than some twat you may very well not like but in fact can effectively manage, then imo people are voting with their hearts and not with their heads.

Breadman doesn't like facts.

I know what you're saying, Sluff and I agree with a lot of it but an open ended question like "Who do you think is Bolton's worst ever manager?" is always going to attract responses which are formulated using a mix of statistical evidence and human emotion.

Yes, Coyle was (and remains) a shit manager but Megson was (in my opinion) a shit manager and a fucking horrible human being.

And that sways it for me.

Breadman wrote:I know what you're saying, Sluff and I agree with a lot of it but an open ended question like "Who do you think is Bolton's worst ever manager?" is always going to attract responses which are formulated using a mix of statistical evidence and human emotion.

Yes, Coyle was (and remains) a shit manager but Megson was (in my opinion) a shit manager and a fucking horrible human being.

And that sways it for me.

 

Sluffy wrote:

JAH wrote:RT can you not remember where we were in the league when we sacked Megson and how Coyle steered us to safety that year? FFS people have short memories.

People do indeed have short memories.

The facts - 2009/10 League Season

Megson P18, W4, D6, L8, Pts 18, Ave 1 per game
Coyle, P20 W6, D3, L11 Pts 21, Ave 1.05 per game.


If those detailS were extrapolated over a whole season, Megson would have had 38 points to Coyle's 39.9 points - hardly a significant difference.

That year 40 points would have placed us in 14th position (where we actually finished) and 38 points in 14th equal (with Wolves) - no significant difference at all!

That season the team that finished in 18th and 19th places (and thus relegated - Burnley and Hull) had 30 points.

In reality then Megson would have to have picked up only 13 points from the last 20 games from when he was sacked - or 0.65 per game.

His managerial record with Bolton is P97, W27, D45, L26 Pts126,  Pts Average 1.29 per game -

Which is twice as much as what was required to stay up.

It is quite obvious that the opinion some people have of Megson as a person clearly clouds their judgement of how effective (albeit soul destroying) his management was.

There was no way Coyle saved us from relegation with just a 0.05 difference in performance from Megson, so the opposite must be true - namely that we would not have been relegated under Megson that season.

QED.

Completely agree. There is no way Coyle "steered us to safety".

Sluffy wrote:But Bread, that was only for the season in question.

If you look at Coyle's career record at Bolton, he lost nearly HALF the games we played (60 out of 126 - or 48%).

Personal choice and all that I know but how anybody thinks a manager who loses 1 game in every two over three seasons, who gave us our worst home record in our entire history, signed some of the worst players in decades and tied them to the club with fabulous wages and long contacts (Pratley for 5 years ffs!!!) and then got us relegated when we really should not have been, which in turn cost us absolute millions in lost Sky monies, which again as probably seen us cast out into the football wilderness for the rest of my lifetime - is better than some twat you may very well not like but in fact can effectively manage, then imo people are voting with their hearts and not with their heads.

  

I've cut and copied this over from the 'urban myths' thread as I believe it to be even more germane to this discussion than the one taking place there. I don't expect it will change any minds but I do think it's something worth considering for those yet to vote.
==================================================================================================
In Coyle's first FULL season in charge we never even looked like we were in trouble. In fact prior to the semi-final against Stoke we were eighth in the table and still in with a shout of european qualification as well as through to the FA Cup semi-final and we did it playing some of the most entertaining football I'd ever seen at the 'Bok. 

In fact we were all a bit disappointed to finish 14th in the end after what had been an otherwise excellent season. Some people say it was the Stoke game that started the slide. They may be right but I still maintain that the horror show of pre-season where we lost CYL, Stu Holden and others to long term injuries coupled with playing five of the previous season's top 6 in the first seven games really clobbered us as well. In the second half of that season we gained 27 points from 19 games. Had we done that in BOTH halves of the season we'd have finished eighth. I backed Owen to bring us straight back up based on that. Yes I was wrong and he should have gone as soon as we went down but I stand by the fact I held that opinion based on what I knew at the time. 

For all the low points Owen brought there were also a huge number of high points that I think we tend to forget in hindsight. 

Beating liverpool 3-1, the comeback against everton after tim howard scored the freakiest goal I ever saw, the 5-0 demolition of stoke at the 'bok, the INCREDIBLE team goal against blackpool and a lot of other good memories are part of owen's time here and ones I continue to cherish.

With megson we had a manager who was taking us down with horribly dire football, who was also a complete and utter tool as a human being and created the worst divide between club and fans in my lifetime if not ever. 

To me the emphasis on who the worst manager was should take into account not just the league position but how we as fans felt during his tenure and on his release. When Megson went there was almost universal rejoicing. When Coyle went there was a sense of sadness and regret that it hadn't worked out for him or us even as we admitted it was the right thing to do.

For me being a trotter with megson at the helm was a chore bordering on masochism, under coyle for a lot of his time it was a hell of a lot of fun. That's why I rate Megson as the worse manager of the two.

sluffy you cannot say we would have definitely stayed up with Megson. In fact I don't think we would have. The football was dire, the players had no confidence or self belief and the situation was getting worse with every game. I think he'd never have maintained a 1pt per game average had he stayed. In fact I am sure he wouldn't have. Of course no one is able to say for sure now but based on what we saw at the time I have to say I believe we were nailed on for relegation with Megson in charge. 

Coyle's points per game average may have been only marginally better but he first had to overcome the dreadful situation in terms of player confidence and the lack of anything resembling team spirit and cohesion before he could really make improvements. 

In my opinion his first FULL season in charge proved he was miles better than Megson. With largely the same players he kept us in the top eight for most of that season, repaired the bond between club and fans, entertained us royally and took us to an FA Cup semi final while he was at it. 

Sadly it went pear shaped but I have to say I much prefer Coyle's way of failing than Megson's version of "success" any day.

luckyPeterpiper wrote:I've cut and copied this over from the 'urban myths' thread as I believe it to be even more germane to this discussion than the one taking place there. I don't expect it will change any minds but I do think it's something worth considering for those yet to vote.
==================================================================================================
In Coyle's first FULL season in charge we never even looked like we were in trouble. In fact prior to the semi-final against Stoke we were eighth in the table and still in with a shout of european qualification as well as through to the FA Cup semi-final and we did it playing some of the most entertaining football I'd ever seen at the 'Bok. 

In fact we were all a bit disappointed to finish 14th in the end after what had been an otherwise excellent season. Some people say it was the Stoke game that started the slide. They may be right but I still maintain that the horror show of pre-season where we lost CYL, Stu Holden and others to long term injuries coupled with playing five of the previous season's top 6 in the first seven games really clobbered us as well. In the second half of that season we gained 27 points from 19 games. Had we done that in BOTH halves of the season we'd have finished eighth. I backed Owen to bring us straight back up based on that. Yes I was wrong and he should have gone as soon as we went down but I stand by the fact I held that opinion based on what I knew at the time. 

For all the low points Owen brought there were also a huge number of high points that I think we tend to forget in hindsight. 

Beating liverpool 3-1, the comeback against everton after tim howard scored the freakiest goal I ever saw, the 5-0 demolition of stoke at the 'bok, the INCREDIBLE team goal against blackpool and a lot of other good memories are part of owen's time here and ones I continue to cherish.

With megson we had a manager who was taking us down with horribly dire football, who was also a complete and utter tool as a human being and created the worst divide between club and fans in my lifetime if not ever. 

To me the emphasis on who the worst manager was should take into account not just the league position but how we as fans felt during his tenure and on his release. When Megson went there was almost universal rejoicing. When Coyle went there was a sense of sadness and regret that it hadn't worked out for him or us even as we admitted it was the right thing to do.

For me being a trotter with megson at the helm was a chore bordering on masochism, under coyle for a lot of his time it was a hell of a lot of fun. That's why I rate Megson as the worse manager of the two.

All good points but for me Coyle is still the worst manager for the reasons summed up by Sluffy at post 23.

And for what it's worth I was really pleased at the time when Coyle replaced Megson, so maybe I am so pissed off with Coyle because I feel let down by him.

the football under Coyle was abysmal. In my opinion of course.

luckyPeterpiper wrote:sluffy you cannot say we would have definitely stayed up with Megson. In fact I don't think we would have. The football was dire, the players had no confidence or self belief and the situation was getting worse with every game. I think he'd never have maintained a 1pt per game average had he stayed. In fact I am sure he wouldn't have. Of course no one is able to say for sure now but based on what we saw at the time I have to say I believe we were nailed on for relegation with Megson in charge. 

Coyle's points per game average may have been only marginally better but he first had to overcome the dreadful situation in terms of player confidence and the lack of anything resembling team spirit and cohesion before he could really make improvements. 

In my opinion his first FULL season in charge proved he was miles better than Megson. With largely the same players he kept us in the top eight for most of that season, repaired the bond between club and fans, entertained us royally and took us to an FA Cup semi final while he was at it. 

Sadly it went pear shaped but I have to say I much prefer Coyle's way of failing than Megson's version of "success" any day.

You're quite right Peter I can't say for certain that Megson would not have got us relegated that season he was sacked but equally - and here is the point that people seem to be in some sort of denial about - neither can you or anyone else say with certainty that Coyle saved us.

I can say though that based on the facts - not only of that season but his whole managerial tenure at Bolton, that projecting his career stats (both based on that season and his those of his Bolton career) that he would have easily have amassed the 13 points required to stay up that season.

In fact not to achieve the target - ie 12 points or less from 20 games would have resulted in an average points per game of 0.6 which would have been the worst Bolton managerial performance in the last 50 years I've checked back on, with the only manager falling below a point a game being Charlie Wright with a match average of 0.93 points per game.

Let me attempt to put the 0.6 point per game into some perspective.

Last season as you know we had the worst start in the clubs history but even including that as part of the first 20 league games we played - under a manager that you and many others don't rate, the record was this -

P20, W5, D7, L8, Pts 22, Ave Pts per game 1.1 per game.

So on that comparison do you (and others) really believe that Megson would have achieved something half as bad as that again?

He would have had to lose 16 out of 20 of the remaining games to have got relegated (winning the other 4).

It's simply unlikely to have happened.

Yes it possible that it could but it is also equally as possible for Lord Lucan to win next years Derby riding Sheergar.

Football is about having opinions and being pasionate but even them there is a need for realism.

As a final point, again there is this huge misconception from many that somehow Megson could not get the team playing for him and that he could not manage to maintain a point a game.

The facts again say otherwise.

In his last 6 games we only lost once!

(I also doubt many others would agree Coyle's sides were entertaining but let's leave that one for now).

...so his record on the pitch was no worse than any other manager we've had over the last thirty years and compared well to some others. (Charlie Wright, as you point out, Sluff.) 


And yet, he still managed to get himself sacked!


So I would argue that it must have been a combination of his record on the pitch and his awful relationship with the fans that caused this to happen.


If it was considered that he was good enough to keep us up that season, there's no way on Earth that Gartside would have potted him just because the fans hated him.


So, in my view at least, he's still worse than Columba.

Breadman wrote:...so his record on the pitch was no worse than any other manager we've had over the last thirty years and compared well to some others. (Charlie Wright, as you point out, Sluff.) 


And yet, he still managed to get himself sacked!


So I would argue that it must have been a combination of his record on the pitch and his awful relationship with the fans that caused this to happen.


If it was considered that he was good enough to keep us up that season, there's no way on Earth that Gartside would have potted him just because the fans hated him.


So, in my view at least, he's still worse than Columba.

In my opinion he job had become untenable due to the relationship with the vast majority of the fans. It had become poisonous.

However as I state above we had only lost once on his last six games, which seems to indicate that things were not as bad on the pitch (results wise) as people want to believe they were.

Someone coming in a achieving an almost identical average points per game record shows no improvement whatsoever on Megson - which if Megson was SO bad a manager surely people must have expected a significant improvement, otherwise why sack him on his record alone?

Megson was an effective manager but very unpopular with the crowd and even a master tactician such as Coyle didn't have to do anything other than do what Megson had been doing on the pitch to keep us up by NINE clear points that season.

That's my whole point - He wasn't sacked on his record on the pitch alone.

Gartside also factored in the fact that he had made himself the enemy of the fans.

So you've got two shit managers, both with almost identical results records but one has gone out of his way to take on the fans in a pissing contest.

Very unprofessional and, in my opinion, makes him even worse than Coyle.

I would have thought a multi-million pound business such as BWFC would have noticed his weakness in PR and done something about it.

I therefore don't blame Megson entirely for his relationship with the crowd.

I leave it up to how individuals want to interprit 'the worst manager' to me that is about the football side and not the PR image people portray.

I much rather have someone I hate keeping us in the Premier with sould destroying football than some nice, friendly, happy clappy chap plunging us into terminal decline for decades to come.

But that is my criteria, which is clearly not shared by yourself.

PS - I don't hate either Megson or Coyle - I do however think one of them is entirely clueless.

sluffy I of course concede there is no way to know if Coyle DEFINITELY saved us from the drop but I'll ask a question. 

In the 2008/09 season under Megson we finished 14th. In 2010/11 under Coyle we finished 14th. Both men were manager for the whole season. Which man's 'brand' of football did you prefer watching? Which one made you personally happier about going and spending money to watch the game? 

In short I would put it to you that while we've played some dire football even under Big Sam no manger was EVER so CONSISTENTLY negative in his tactics and team selections or put such dross out week in week out as Megson did. And in this day and age a manager's inter-personal skills with the press and fans are a very important part of the job, especially at Premiership level and that a man who lacks them as spectacularly as Megson did is incompetent to manage a club even without adding in the junk we saw ON the field. 

In fact I would say that neither man should really have been given the job albeit for different reasons. Megson was already known as a nasty piece of work and also for insanely boring football (a direct quote from a West Brom supporting friend of mine is they played Megson matches in hospital to insomniacs after drugs failed to induce sleep) and for his blind insistence that he was ALWAYS right about everything. Coyle shouldn't have got it because at that time he had no real top flight management experience, not even as a coach and so simply didn't understand the need to adapt to the opposition in the way a more experienced man would. 

In some ways we've been spoiled in the 21st century because Big Sam pulled off miracles and brought in players we'd never dreamed of as playing for us. While of course he's now been gone for several years we do still tend to compare current managers to those days and it's not realistic. 

With that said I do believe that most of us understand that and allow for it when we state our opinions. In my opinion Megson is the worse of the two because he failed both on AND off the pitch. 

Owen got us very close to success but ultimately failed on the pitch. However I think he succeeded for most of his tenure off it and whether it's fair or not managers have to be good at PR in today's world. It's not enough to keep them employed if they fail on the pitch and nor should it be but without that skill no manager is going to survive in his job long unless he really produces beyond expectations on the field. 

I appreciate why you rate Coyle as lower than Megson and we could bat statistics and finances back and forth all day to "prove" our points but for me it boils down to this. I preferred watching BWFC under Owen Coyle far more than Gary Megson. I felt better about being a fan and enjoyed what was going on a lot more until we came down but even then I felt we'd been unlucky and still had some faith and belief. Under Megson (and now Freedman) being a trotter was a soul sucking joyless experience even when we won.

I think you are judging on a different criteria than me Peter.

I think you would judge a bad team playing attractive football much higher than a successful team but which plays boringly. Similarly it matters to you more the PR side than what is achieved on the pitch.

It would then follow that you would think Coyle, who on nearly any managerial criteria you can think of - games lost percentage, worst home record in our history, lower points per game average, abysmal signings, etc, etc - a better manager than Megson.

There's no right and wrong answers on this poll, people are free to vote how they feel.

I just think an inept manager which Coyle clearly was is worse than a manager who does get results, even though you may not like him or how he achieves them.

I also think Coyle with his needless relegation as done more damage financially to the club than Megson ever did.

The damage is permanant - maybe ultimately will bring the club as we know it down.

"I just think an inept manager which Coyle clearly was is worse than a manager who does get results, even though you may not like him or how he achieves them."


Sorry Sluff, but you can't have it both ways, mate.


By your own figures, you can't get a fag paper between their respective "success" records, so to describe Megson as a manager "who gets results" and imply that Coyle doesn't is a bit misleading in my book.