How does Pep's success rate compare?

[Big Swifty]

I have been looking at the success (and otherwise) rate of City's managers (excluding caretakers), based on their wins as a percentage of games played (all competitive matches included). Pep's record speaks for itself, but some others are interesting:

P W D L %wins

P Guardiola 113 77 19 17 68.14
S Cowan (1946-7) 30 20 6 4 66.67
M Pellegrini 167 100 28 39 59.88
T Maley (1902-06) 150 89 22 39 59.33
R Mancini 191 113 38 40 59.16
J Hart 22 11 5 6 50.00

Compare and contrast with:

A Ball 49 13 14 22 26.53
M Allison (1979-80) 60 15 20 25 25.00
J Frizzell 42 10 12 20 23.81
J Benson 17 3 2 12 17.65

Stuart Pearce wasn't much better (35.42), with 103 goals in 96 games in charge.
Even the much-maligned Mark Hughes had a respectable 46.75 (albeit with a stronger squad), and Mel Machin had a worthy 45.38 - better than Joe Mercer, surprisingly (43.82)
The worst two, Frizzell and Benson (plus Pearce, come to that), show the dangers of appointing your No 2.

Not that I care about United, but for information, Mourinho averages 61.67, Ferguson had 59.67 and Moyes & Van Gaal both came in at 52 each.
And the much-heralded Klopp averages 52.94 percent wins, not as good as Benitez, Dalglish, Paisley or even Fagan.

N.B. Stats are quoted from Wiki, so if anyone finds inaccuracies, blame them, not me.

Apologies - I drew up a nice table, but it has come out as not very clear.

 

[Fame Monster]

I wasn’t around for when Allison became manager but the stats definitely corroborate those who said he was a disastrous manager. What was the win percentage for Keegan and Royle?

 

[kaz7]

pep is the best we have ever or will ever have

centurians and every record under the sun holders

 

[Big Swifty]

In answer to Fame Monster's query, Keegan's %age win rate was 43.75, Royle's was similar at 43.27 - a bit like Mercer's at 43.82.

 

[Cobwebcat]

No offence but win rate is pretty meaningless and doesn’t even take into consideration the standard of the opponent which is the most basic of requirements.

 

[Big Swifty]

I agree, but it shows the guy's success at that time against that opposition. It is a measure of how much success a particular manager had.
There are all sorts of variables to consider, yes, but I think we all agree that Pep, Pellegrini and Mancini had more success that Ball, Frizzell, Benson and Pearce. There may be all sorts of reasons for that, e.g. Sam Cowan's reign from Dec 46 to June 47 had a very high success rate against Plymouth, Newport, Luton and the like, which was hardly high-class opposition. Our last three managers had some money to splash out. Whatever.

Still, they had success, which is what is being measured.

 

[hilts]

You can only determine success in relation to expectation. These stats literally mean nothing.

 

[Citizen Green]

I wasn’t around for when Allison became manager but the stats definitely corroborate those who said he was a disastrous manager. What was the win percentage for Keegan and Royle?

Around 42%

 

[Blue Elvis]

You can only determine success in relation to expectation. These stats literally mean nothing.

I read somewhere that statistically 99.99% of statistics are meaningless ;-)
CTID

 

[bluealf]

I read somewhere that statistically 99.99% of statistics are meaningless ;-)
CTID

Don't tell that to the Americans, you will end their lives, they love a stat or 10,000 in the NFL and the rest of their sports lol