City's worst manager of all time

[poyntonblueboy]

been a city fan over 55 yrs, george poyser was the worse by a country mile.

 

[bluemc1]

whats odd is that he bought half title winning team and bellamy and people say he worst manager in clubs history, dont get it, he hes not the best but he certainly not the worst

Because he had a lot more money than anyone else in the club's history and could only advance us three places. From 9th to 6th for £200m. Not exactly value for money. I sincerely believe any of the managers we've had whilst I have been alive could have spent £200m or the then equivalent of say £50m in the nineties and moved us more than three places up the table. He bought some good players but couldn't do anything with them. He bought one of the best defenders in the world in Kompany and then barely played him. He also bought some utter shite - so-called proven (old and/or injury prone) Premier League players like Bridge, Bellamy and Santa-Cruz for ridiculous fees and wages which made them impossible to get rid of. He had the same defence as Mancini and conceded three goals five times in just seventeen Premier League games of the 2009-10 season whereas Mancini has only conceded three goals in four Premier League games in the one-hundred and four games since. Just to make that statistic live for you. 30% of his games in his final season, he conceded

three goals. Mancini, less than 4%. Same bloody players available...[/quote

ok you seem to like your stats, can you tell me this, how long was hughes in charge to get us 3 places better off than when sven left, then how long was mancini in charge and how much had he spent b4 we finished 3rd, 3 places better off than when hughes left,

 

[bluemc1]

whats odd is that he bought half title winning team and bellamy and people say he worst manager in clubs history, dont get it, he hes not the best but he certainly not the worst

Because he had a lot more money than anyone else in the club's history and could only advance us three places. From 9th to 6th for £200m. Not exactly value for money. I sincerely believe any of the managers we've had whilst I have been alive could have spent £200m or the then equivalent of say £50m in the nineties and moved us more than three places up the table. He bought some good players but couldn't do anything with them. He bought one of the best defenders in the world in Kompany and then barely played him. He also bought some utter shite - so-called proven (old and/or injury prone) Premier League players like Bridge, Bellamy and Santa-Cruz for ridiculous fees and wages which made them impossible to get rid of. He had the same defence as Mancini and conceded three goals five times in just seventeen Premier League games of the 2009-10 season whereas Mancini has only conceded three goals in four Premier League games in the one-hundred and four games since. Just to make that statistic live for you. 30% of his games in his final season, he conceded



three goals. Mancini, less than 4%. Same bloody players available...[/quote

ok you seem to like your stats, can you tell me this, how long was hughes in charge to get us 3 places better off than when sven left, then how long was mancini in charge and how much had he spent b4 we finished 3rd, 3 places better off than when hughes left,

you then mention value for money, who do you think been better value for money, bellamy or nasri ? zabaletta or boetang, de jing or garcia/rodwell, dont call hughes for buying some shite when mancini done the same, dont forget savic, and tell me honestly min for min on the pitch would you say ballotelli really done more than adebayor, im not talking about cult status and having funny songs im talking about what they give the team when there on the pitch ? do you think ballotelli will ever become a first choice in a big game ? would he be yours ? if not 26million is a lot of money and for me another bad signing, hope to here from you soon

 

[Skashion]

ok you seem to like your stats, can you tell me this, how long was hughes in charge to get us 3 places better off than when sven left, then how long was mancini in charge and how much had he spent b4 we finished 3rd, 3 places better off than when hughes left,

Yes, it took the same amount of time to move up three places but moving from 6th to 3rd and 3rd to 1st is even a big ask at the moment. The difference between 6th and 9th can be a mere few points. When Sven finished 9th, the gap between 9th and 6th was five points only, whereas between 6th and 1st, the gap was twenty-seven points. There's absolutely huge difference in terms of points gained.

Difference between 6th and 9th past ten years:
2003 - 9 points
2004 - 4 points
2005 - 6 points
2006 - 8 points
2007 - 4 points
2008 - 5 points
2009 - 11 points
2010 - 14 points
2011 - 10 points
2012 - 12 points

Average: 8.3 points

Difference between 6th and 1st past ten years:
2003 - 23 points
2004 - 34 points
2005 - 37 points
2006 - 28 points
2007 - 31 points
2008 - 27 points
2009 - 28 points
2010 - 22 points
2911 - 22 points
2012 - 25 points.

Average: 27.7 points

So Mancini had nearly four times the points gap and only took a year longer to do it. Or should I do it by trajectory. Hughesy, trajectory of 64 points. So that's one a half years and £200m for 9 points or two and half years and £200m for Mancini's 25 points plus an FA Cup as a bonus, which works out better? On the Hughes trajectory we wouldn't have won the title until 2015 and another £600m. ;-) Mancini is a bargain compared to Hughes.<br /><br />-- Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:57 pm --<br /><br />

you then mention value for money, who do you think been better value for money, bellamy or nasri ? zabaletta or boetang, de jing or garcia/rodwell, dont call hughes for buying some shite when mancini done the same, dont forget savic, and tell me honestly min for min on the pitch would you say ballotelli really done more than adebayor, im not talking about cult status and having funny songs im talking about what they give the team when there on the pitch ? do you think ballotelli will ever become a first choice in a big game ? would he be yours ? if not 26million is a lot of money and for me another bad signing, hope to here from you soon

Hughes made some fantastic value for money signings, I don't disagree. It's just he didn't know what to do with them. Mancini spent the same amount of money but has a lot more to show for it, as analysed above.

 

[baildon blue]

I thought Citys sacking of Hughes was poor but when you look back it was good move.Hughes was very poor 4 Manchester City

 

[bluemc1]

ok you seem to like your stats, can you tell me this, how long was hughes in charge to get us 3 places better off than when sven left, then how long was mancini in charge and how much had he spent b4 we finished 3rd, 3 places better off than when hughes left,

Yes, it took the same amount of time to move up three places but moving from 6th to 3rd and 3rd to 1st is even a big ask at the moment. The difference between 6th and 9th can be a mere few points. When Sven finished 9th, the gap between 9th and 6th was five points only, whereas between 6th and 1st, the gap was twenty-seven points. There's absolutely huge difference in terms of points gained.

Difference between 6th and 9th past ten years:
2003 - 9 points
2004 - 4 points
2005 - 6 points
2006 - 8 points
2007 - 4 points
2008 - 5 points
2009 - 11 points
2010 - 14 points
2011 - 10 points
2012 - 12 points

Average: 8.3 point


Difference between 6th and 1st past ten years:
2003 - 23 points
2004 - 34 points
2005 - 37 points
2006 - 28 points
2007 - 31 points
2008 - 27 points
2009 - 28 points
2010 - 22 points
2911 - 22 points
2012 - 25 points.

Average: 27.7 points

So Mancini had nearly four times the points gap and only took a year longer to do it. Or should I do it by trajectory. Hughesy, trajectory of 64 points. So that's one a half years and £200m for 9

points or two and half years and £200m for Mancini's 25 points plus an FA Cup as a bonus, which works out better? On the Hughes trajectory we wouldn't have won the title until 2015 and another £600m. ;-) Mancini is a bargain compared to Hughes.

-- Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:57 pm --

you then mention value for money, who do you think been better value for money, bellamy or
nasri ? zabaletta or boetang, de jing or garcia/rodwell, dont call hughes for buying some shite
when mancini done the same, dont forget savic, and tell me honestly min for min on the pitch would you say ballotelli really done more than adebayor, im not talking about cult status and having funny songs im talking about what they give the team when there on the pitch ? do you think ballotelli will ever become a first choice in a big game ? would he be yours ? if not 26million is a lot of money and for me another bad signing, hope to here from you soon

Hughes made some fantastic value for money signings, I don't disagree. It's just he didn't know what to do with them. Mancini spent the same amount of money but has a lot more to show for it, as analysed above.

ok you can show me stats that say mancini did better than hughes and i can't argue with that, but you said he only had a year longer, ONLY redknapp took spurs from bottom of the prem to champions league in a year, stats dont tell it all, anyway i think we just going to have to accept that what hughes did for man city i dont think makes him the worst manager in our clubs history and you do, hope to speak to you again its been interesting, come on city

 

[thenabster]

There is absolutely no way Hughes is the worse city manager. I wouldn't even but him in the bad city managers section.

 

[bluwes]

been a city fan over 55 yrs, george poyser was the worse by a country mile.

yep that 1962-63 season was terrible.

 

[bumbleblue]

There is absolutely no way Hughes is the worse city manager. I wouldn't even but him in the bad city managers section.

This , haha we have had some bloody purlers. Frank Clark, Bally, and twatting Howard Kendall. God i have spent decades trying to forget half the managers teams and games.

 

[billfromthehill]

There is absolutely no way Hughes is the worse city manager. I wouldn't even but him in the bad city managers section.

This , haha we have had some bloody purlers. Frank Clark, Bally, and twatting Howard Kendall. God i have spent decades trying to forget half the managers teams and games.

ball deffo the worst