Tweet
Originally posted by qprmarc
View Post
-
Now i remember something about Mac trying to find a club to buy, with a consortium ......very interesting, but surely we are not a good candidate -
I think this piece of ITK needs a little more clarification.
Does ' a consortium' equate to a buy out attempt? Because that would be the most significant development to date in this saga, by a long long way.
It raises big questions: whose shares, how many, what %s are involved, who stays in the boardroom and who goes......
Could be Steve is fronting a buy out, Ollie's head being the first condition......
Comment
-
Soooooo.......... If it's as Marc says and what we're all thinking........Could McClaren coming in be a part of a consortium/buyout. Is McClaren going to be in the boardroom as a decision maker or on the pitch as a coach. Aaand if he is on the pitch but still part of a group of investors/owners would this make him unsackable if he was doing a bad job?!?!?
Comment
-
Why don't we look at some facts to drive our opinions?
Not pretty reading I'm afraid. Unless I am mistaken, the graph looks fairly depressing and poses the question as to why The Board would actually want to appoint a man with that record? With every successive managerial post, without exception, his win rate has got worse.
Do you think we should print this off and post it snail mail to The Board as part of their 'due diligence'?
We've seen this so many times with managers and players. Either they or The Board believe it will be better this time at QPR. In this instance, history suggests it will probably not be so.
First post on here, btw, but posted plenty on Not606.Comment
-
His win rate has not got worse. The table is not in date order. Look at his most recent spell at Derby.Comment
-
Can you post Holloway’s record too pleaseOriginally posted by RTID View PostWhy don't we look at some facts to drive our opinions?
Not pretty reading I'm afraid. Unless I am mistaken, the graph looks fairly depressing and poses the question as to why The Board would actually want to appoint a man with that record? With every successive managerial post, without exception, his win rate has got worse.
Do you think we should print this off and post it snail mail to The Board as part of their 'due diligence'?
We've seen this so many times with managers and players. Either they or The Board believe it will be better this time at QPR. In this instance, history suggests it will probably not be so.
First post on here, btw, but posted plenty on Not606.Comment
-
http://www.managerstats.co.uk/clubs/...-park-rangers/
if stats are anything to go by it has to be Ian Dowie.......Last edited by cross it Dave; 12-05-2018, 08:14 AM.I have supported Rangers for 55 seasons, since March 1969.
Comment
-
Just to echo my point above, RTID’s post is very misleading. It DOES NOT show a successive reduction in win rates for SMComment
-
Holloways record is not up to date on that siteComment
-
Just looked at Holloway good god awful % win rate over his career. Why are people even questioning his exit or trying defend him. He is what he is slightly below average managerOriginally posted by qprjeff1882 View PostComment
-
It’s not in order you plumOriginally posted by RTID View PostWhy don't we look at some facts to drive our opinions?
Not pretty reading I'm afraid. Unless I am mistaken, the graph looks fairly depressing and poses the question as to why The Board would actually want to appoint a man with that record? With every successive managerial post, without exception, his win rate has got worse.
Do you think we should print this off and post it snail mail to The Board as part of their 'due diligence'?
We've seen this so many times with managers and players. Either they or The Board believe it will be better this time at QPR. In this instance, history suggests it will probably not be so.
First post on here, btw, but posted plenty on Not606.Comment
-
It is the SM/LC and CR(U-23) combination I look forward to see how will work. Lee Carsley and Chris Ramsey are from what I have heard got at developing young players.QPR
Best team in the world
Sort ofComment
-
With Holloway out and McClaren on the way in, many QPR fans have been raising questions about the new boss and what it could mean for others at Loftus Road.
Is McClaren definitely taking over?
As of Friday evening, there was no formal agreement in place yet, but every expectation that McClaren will replace Holloway.
There are currently no other candidates for the job, although several out-of-work managers have made contact to express a strong interest since the news broke that Holloway was being sacked.
Other managers were previously sounded out by QPR officials but did not see the job as attractive, largely because of budgetary constraints.
Whose decision is it to appoint him?
As with past Rangers appointments, including that of Holloway, this is very much the brainchild of QPR’s owners, who believe they know who the right man is without the need to go through any kind of formal process.
This has been the case for many of Rangers’ managerial appointments – not just by the current owners, but since Holloway was first given the job, in 2001.
The exceptions are Jim Magilton, who was among a small number of candidates formally interviewed in 2009, Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink – selected by the current owners from a choice of two after an initial hunt by director of football Les Ferdinand and CEO Lee Hoos – and Chris Ramsey, who had been in interim charge.
Holloway came in the second time around after Rangers were unable to prise Gary Rowett away from Birmingham City.
Why McClaren?
Installing McClaren seems like something QPR’s owners need to get out of their system. He impressed hugely during a short spell on the coaching staff, in 2013, when the then manager Harry Redknapp had a knee replacement and McClaren oversaw pre-season training during a difficult, frankly poisonous, time at the club after relegation from the Premier League.
Since then there has been a feeling that he could be an ideal Rangers manager, and he has been sounded out about the job previously.
Another factor is that, for all the former England manager’s ups and downs in the game, his passion is coaching – a field he is very respected in.
And QPR feel they are primarily looking for a coach who will develop players, given the budgetary constraints and an emphasis on bringing through youngsters.
Who will be McClaren’s assistant? What about Marc Bircham?
The Times has reported that former Brentford coach Lee Carsley will be joining McClaren at QPR. At present though, the issue of his backroom team has not been resolved.
On Friday evening talks were being arranged with Bircham to discuss his future. Co-chairman Tony Fernandes has previously indicated that he wants Bircham to stay at the club long term.
But the same was true of the likes of Steve Gallen, who left after a managerial change, and to some extent Holloway too before he was axed.
What about Ramsey?
Ramsey’s contract expires in November and his long-term future has looked unclear for some time.
He currently has a mixed role, serving as technical director and head of coaching as well as recently helping out with first-team coaching following the departure of Curtis Fleming to Middlesbrough.
At present, there is an expectation that Ramsey will continue in that mixed role for the time being at least, but it has not been decided for certain yet.
Is Gary Penrice staying?
Apparently so. While discussions with the likes of Bircham and Ramsey are being arranged, they have already taken place with Penrice, who has indicated that he fully intends to keep working for the club despite his long-standing friendship and working relationship with Holloway.
Ferdinand was already in the process of trying to recruit Penrice when Holloway’s appointment inevitably moved things along quickly.
It is worth bearing in mind that Penrice is technically freelance and not formally a QPR staff member, although he is the club’s chief scout in all but name.
He has been, and seemingly intends to remain, heavily involved in the process of identifying transfers targets for this summer.
Comment
-
Exactly stats should be used but you’re missing the next crucial step.....engage brain.Originally posted by RTID View PostWhy don't we look at some facts to drive our opinions?
Not pretty reading I'm afraid. Unless I am mistaken, the graph looks fairly depressing and poses the question as to why The Board would actually want to appoint a man with that record? With every successive managerial post, without exception, his win rate has got worse.
Do you think we should print this off and post it snail mail to The Board as part of their 'due diligence'?
We've seen this so many times with managers and players. Either they or The Board believe it will be better this time at QPR. In this instance, history suggests it will probably not be so.
First post on here, btw, but posted plenty on Not606.
of the bottom 3 win %s, he managed an average of 23 games. 1 of those is managing a premiership struggle of a club at that time. We want a manger who can do a job for us in the championship. The most relevant is derby with a win rate of 54%. Holloway’s winnrate is 32.5%.
Comment
-
And it’s also ranked in order of his win rate from top to bottom. So, that’s why your other statement does not make sense and of course his if ranked in order of win rate.....the next one down will be lower win rate %.Comment
Comment