Stuart McCall officially confirmed as new Rangers manager

[calscot 0]

current Stats for this season...

 

................Played...........Won(%).............Draw(%)...........Lose(%)

Hearts.......26................84.6....................11.5..................3.8

Hibs...........27................55.6....................25.9..................18.5

RFC............25................56.0....................20.0..................24

 

I take it that's the league record only. Haven't had time to do that myself.

 

However, the "all competitions" stats, Rangers currently have a 67.5% win rate, under Ally it was 81.5%. I personally think you have to take all competitions to look at a manager's overall record and with SPL teams played, those don't skew the results in his favour due to lesser opposition.

 

If you want to look specifically at performance in the league then that's different but you should at least qualify it.

 

For Ally in the league I make it 11/2/4 and 65%. It was up at 77% until 2 weeks after Llambias was appointed to the board and declined sharply thereafter.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Easy the rest of the teams in the spl don't have good enough managers for Rangers either. Have you looked at his record against us? The team of duds we have right now managed by the worst management team in our history still wiped the floor with motherwell . They where so bad we looked like world beaters. A 40% win record in the spl, means nothing.

 

That's not what you said, though - which was "McCall is not very good at getting an underdog to compete." Whether any other SPL manager is good enough for Rangers is not the issue.

 

McCall had one of the smallest and poorest clubs in the SPL yet still managed to get them to compete to such an extent that they did they best they possibly could have each of the seasons he was in charge - and by the way 58 victories from 114 games is a win record of over 50%

Edited March 13, 2015 by The Real PapaBear

[Darthter 542]

I take it that's the league record only. Haven't had time to do that myself.

 

However, the "all competitions" stats, Rangers currently have a 67.5% win rate, under Ally it was 81.5%. I personally think you have to take all competitions to look at a manager's overall record and with SPL teams played, those don't skew the results in his favour due to lesser opposition.

 

If you want to look specifically at performance in the league then that's different but you should at least qualify it.

 

For Ally in the league I make it 11/2/4 and 65%. It was up at 77% until 2 weeks after Llambias was appointed to the board and declined sharply thereafter.

 

You could also take the view that the league is the teams "bread & butter"....It gives an indication of team performance over a sustained period. We've all seen instances of minnows beating the "big boys" in cup competition. It also gives a more accurate (IMHO) comparison since it is all the same teams that are playing. During a cup run, one team could get the luck of the draw & breeze into the latter stages, another team could come up against SPL opposition and get knocked out immediately.

 

The bottom line is that both McCoist & McDowell performed below par - especially this season. McCall would find it difficult to do any worse.

[calscot 0]

Sorry for boring the rest of the forum, but there's some strange accusations and misrepresentations to deal with here.

 

Yes, clearly it's me who is the antagonist. Perhaps you might want to review your passive aggressive, hate filled post history.

 

I would be happy for both our histories reviewed and compared. I admit mine are more aggressive after I'm personally attacked - but not before. It would be quite something to see all your insults highlighted...

 

What's hilarious is I have been confirmed correct in my criticism of McCoist's tenure

 

You've been wrong every step of the way - in fact you backtrack so much that there's pretty much no logical way you can be right. For instance - just define the word, "worst".

 

, while you were one of his biggest supporters. You couldn't have been more wrong.

 

Despite my umpteen clarifications to help you, you still can't even get that right! You are priceless!

 

I've said tons of times that he's pretty average and given a lot of evidence for that. You've given only insults. About a year and a half ago, I said his time was up as he had shown he wasn't going to make the grade for Rangers.

 

I *have* argued against him being the "worst possible manager" - and proven to be right. All I've done is try to show some proportionality.

 

Your facts are wrong though. McCoist didn't have an 81.5% win record.

 

Well it's actually 81.48148148 to 10 significant figures but that's splitting hairs but to 3 sig fig you are completely wrong again. It is a fact for this season in all competitions which is what I stated. Please show evidence that I'm wrong as I admit I do sometimes make mistakes but my intention is to be accurate. I'll show you my working if you show me yours.

 

You also said he had the best win record in the league, well no he didn't, Hearts did and still do.

 

Again you wrong (do you get anything right?). I said he had the "best win record in all competitions than any team in our league". I was pretty specific. Hearts now do but that has happened since he left. So again you're just wrong.

 

I see. Perhaps next time you'll not make them up then.

 

Would you care to prove that my stats and graphs are not correct and just made up? Or are you scared of once again showing how wrong you are?

 

To help you, all the results are here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/results

 

To help you some more: Ally stopped being manager on 21 December.

 

I have never argued that.

 

Eh, then what ARE you arguing about? You also agreed with posts that argued that. Flip-flopping again are we?

 

The weird bit is that the worse you think Ally is, the more you'd think you'd agree with my whole point in this thread. Funnily enough - can't see your agreement anywhere...

 

What about the effect of the regression?

 

Can you explain? If you mean that he is responsible for the current slump as he created it, I think the "silly graphs" you don't like for obvious reasons, are too extreme for that.

 

What about the fact that he is to blame for signing poor players?

 

Again you're arguing against yourself. He seemed to get these crap players to do ok results-wise while he was a manager - so are you saying he's a good manager? You're flip-flopping again.

 

You just said you weren't arguing that - but caught out being wrong again even about what you're arguing about.

 

You also ignore the fact that Ally had very little choice in the transfer market. It's like going to the dump and picking up the best free stuff you can. But I'll bet you find that irrelevant as it doesn't fit your view.

 

I'm going to stop responding to you now as you just don't seem to be able to keep it real. When you have to explain to someone dozens of times about your view and they still continuously argue and insult you about stuff you didn't say, there's just nowhere to go.

[calscot 0]

I've been accused of unbelievable opinions plenty in the past, but that there's still a defence out there of McCoist and McDowall as managers/coaches is incredible to me.

 

Can I ask whom you're referring to? I don't think I know anyone on here who thinks either is a very good manager.

[pmu 0]

obviously a lover of the graph and the lengthy presentation. if you had any savvy you would know that if you want to make a point it's best to make it with a degree of brevity as most folks don't trawl through reams of shite in hope of a golden nugget.

[calscot 0]

Having the squad that we have, earning the wages that they do, playing in the league that we do....an 81% win rate is terrible!!!!

 

I think that's a bit extreme. Somethink like 91 odd points from 36 games while not as much as you'd expect from Rangers in this league, it's hardly terrible. As has been pointed out, you can't talk about the high wages on one hand while ignoring how they were brought in, and the off-field influences. It's a bit one sided. Again I'll say it's about average what you'd expect considering the circumstances.

 

I think a better manager WOULD do better although I think it will take a new manager time to turn the ship fully around, I expect McCall to eventuall do better than Ally. However, it will be hard to compare like for like as he will have full backing of the board and hopefully, bugger all off-field issues. With that in mind, and considering the views on Ally, he really should be a LOT better.

 

One thing I think McCall has in his favour is that he can setup a TEAM. He took a group of middle to decent players at Motherwell and turned them into a well functioning unit - something we have been lacking for FAR too long.

 

We do seem to have a collection of mercenaries rather than a team, but a lot of that has been to do with how we were able to recruit and the strategy of least risk, which seems to have backfired.

[calscot 0]

Is there any point in this sorry saga the imposters on the park haven't been paid? Even in the admin period the wage cuts were agreed by them so that doesn't count either

 

I think you're missing the point. No matter how overpaid you are, the possibility of not being paid is hardly going to motivate you to play out your skin. It didn't help our results in administration so it's not just the current players.

[calscot 0]

laugh out loud funny.

 

backroom staff earning tuppence have been getting paid off right left and centre while theses imposters have earned millions to beat part timers

 

mccoist's getting 2K a day to sit in the house.

 

As said, it doesn't matter how much you're paid, the uncertainty of not being paid doesn't motivate anyone. I would expect that would count double if you're an impostor.

 

I have all respect for the lesser paid staff and their worries - which must have been stressful for them - which also contributes to a bad atmosphere at the club - which could also affect the motivation of the players.

 

I'm not condoning it, only describing the possibilities. I don't think anyone can rationally argue that something hasn't changed dramatically in the last 10 games.

 

I also don't condone McCoist taking the money for nothing but there could be other reasons behind it - it means he's still employed by Rangers and could have been hoping to be brought back, which obviously didn't happen, or it could have been two fingers to board and to put them under further duress - which did actually happen as they were unable and/or unwilling to spend the money to replace him.

 

I'm hoping he'll go now without a pay-off. I would also like him to either never sell his shares and uses them for good, or donates them to the supporters groups.

[pmu 0]

this is starting to look like slightly obsessive behaviour Calscot. most of what you are saying is probably technically correct but it's coming over as a load of drivel...