Sousa/De Canio Debate

[sirpiechucker]

There seems to be a Sousa/De Canio divide with half of the board believing that Sousa should have been given more time and the other half thinking that he didn't live up to De Canio. Putting the performances to one side for a moment because even the Sousa fans would say the football was better under De Canio what were their records like?

To be fair in this assessment I have taken De Canio from January 1st rather than the start of his tenure and Sousa for the whole of his career at QPR. Picking 2 random matches from both managers lets compare the teams:

QPR 3-0 Stoke - 02/03/08 & Derby 0-2 QPR - 17/01/09

Camp---------------Cerny
Mancienne---------------Gorkss
Connolly---------------Connolly
Hall---------------Stewart
Delaney---------------Delaney
Buzsaky---------------Routledge
Leigertwood---------------Leigertwood
Rowlands---------------Rowlands
Ephraim---------------Mahon
Agyemang---------------Helguson
Vine---------------Cook

I think most will agree that there is very little difference between the two sides with 4 players playing in both matches. Gorkss and Mancienne have both had good and bad performances for QPR as have Camp/Cerny & Stewart/Hall so for argument sake they are all as good as each other. The only difference between the sides here is that Mahon is more defensive than Ephraim and Cook, until yesterday, was out of form at the time.

Overall there isn't much to split the two sides so how did the two managers fare. Remember this is a comparison using just De Canio's matches from January 1st when he didn't have Sahar, Nygaard, Moore etc:

Luigi De Canio - January 1st 2008 - to end of season
Played: 21
Won: 8
Drawn: 7
Lost: 6
Goals For: 33
Goals Against: 29
Points 31
Points Per Match Average (PPMA): 1.48
PPMA x 46 match season = 68 (2007/08 season: 9th)

Paulo Sousa - November 25th 2008 - April 4th 2009
Played: 25
Won: 8
Drawn: 11
Lost: 6
Goals For: 25
Goals Against: 22
Points 35
Points Per Match Average: 1.40
PPMA x 46 match season = 64 (2007/08 season: 10th)

De Canio had a better win ratio but he also had a worse loss ratio. Using the points per match average the two managers over a 46 match season would be split by 4 points which isn't enough to give De Canio legendary status which some after throwing at him. It also wouldn't be enough points for either manager to make the top 6 for the table last year nor this year.

So can we please once and for all put it to bed that Sousa was a failure and that De Canio was a world beater because if these stats show us anything it is that neither were either.

[Sirsupahoopsa]

4 players meaning their were 7 different meaning that there was a big diffenence. other than that i kind of agree :D

[sirpiechucker]

4 players meaning their were 7 different meaning that there was a big diffenence. other than that i kind of agree :D

Yup but some will say one team had Routledge and the other didn't while some will say one had Buzsaky and the other didn't. Is there a major difference between the two sides? Not really.

My point is that even if you think Sousa had the weaker team you'll see that his record isn't as bad as some make out. If you think he had the stronger team remember after this match Rowlands was injured.

[qblockpete]

I'm sure if I looked closely, I could a stat that favoured De Canio.

Why are we not doing the same time from January, for both managers?

[haqpr1963]

I'm sure if I looked closely, I could a stat that favoured De Canio.

Why are we not doing the same time from January?

But, Pete you never take any notice of stats if they don't agree with your opinion....

Have you read Blackstocks interview on the Forest Offy, very interesting....

[QPR1234]

dont want either!

[qblockpete]

I've read it.. Not going to bite "didn't want me to go" means to me he did know then !!

you don't like it when I reverse it, so it works both ways.

15 games

Sousa Jan 9 Won 4, Drew 7, Lost 4= 19 points

De canio Jan 12 Won 6, Drew 5, Lost 4 =23 points

(we played Chelsea in cup before)

I'd take those extra 4 points now, wouldn't you.

Anyway its a debate, that could get tedious.

no matter what I say, another poster will be along to get a reply from me and it escalulates. Above is also fact, regards the 15 games.

[Neo]

Thanks SPC, I always like your factual posts, even though footballing life is never that simple to be able to hammer down a fact.

It would appear there wasn't much between them but I personally, liked the style of which LDC's team played and your facts back that. He was much more attacking minded, as we can see.

[qblockpete]

Think that part of the problem also.

We wanted better than DC and we paid extra for season tickets and got Sousa.

Whatever you say it was hardly entertaining.;D

[writtler]

I've got this theory that after the dire hoofball Ollie period we had the dire Gregory period so LDC came in was backed in terms of loans (Vine & Buz were here long before the January signsings) and then the influx of players in the window - they went on a great run scoring (and conceding) for fun but that all came undone towards the end of the season - ie when he lost a couple of the better performing players he actually got found out a bit.

The bottom line is he seemed far better than he actually was - this is a results business and his nowhere near stacked up or justified the reputation he has attained. In fact IMO he was a very poor tactition who did not know how to change a game - an accusation that has been thrown at Sousa on many an occasion.

His record has been good at keeping teams up but very few promotions. Would definately be a major step backwards and further proof that this board have sweet fa idea on how to run a football club.

LDC - thanks for the memories but no thanks.

[qprjim]

I've got this theory that after the dire hoofball Ollie period we had the dire Gregory period so LDC came in was backed in terms of loans (Vine & Buz were here long before the January signsings) and then the influx of players in the window - they went on a great run scoring (and conceding) for fun but that all came undone towards the end of the season - ie when he lost a couple of the better performing players he actually got found out a bit.

The bottom line is he seemed far better than he actually was - this is a results business and his nowhere near stacked up or justified the reputation he has attained. In fact IMO he was a very poor tactition who did not know how to change a game - an accusation that has been thrown at Sousa on many an occasion.

His record has been good at keeping teams up but very few promotions. Would definately be a major step backwards and further proof that this board have sweet fa idea on how to run a football club.

LDC - thanks for the memories but no thanks.

pretty much my feelings on the possible return of LDC.

[qblockpete]

##who would you like jimboy?

[TheBlackMafia]

Please not LDC.

Proved nothing, done nothing, is nothing.

:byebye:

[NewCrossHoop]

Got to agree with No to bringing back Di Canio, severely lacking tactically which is why we conceded so many late goals. Didn't know how to close out games.

Great going forward but lacked any discipline at the back,

[haqpr1963]

Think that part of the problem also.

We wanted better than DC and we paid extra for season tickets and got Sousa.

Whatever you say it was hardly entertaining.;D

In fact we paid extra for season tickets and we got Dowie