Burley sacked after just two games

[Thedelldays]

Soggy

 

Points per game ratio is all relative to the division, budget..

 

Are you seriously going to suggest Burley was better than wgs because he got more points being the biggest spender and playing against weaker opposition?

[Crazy Diamond]

It was amazing he ever took over, given he had lambasted Lowe for his actions only a few weeks or months before he was appointed. Given the candidates available at the time, I always thought he would be the best choice but we'd never get him.

 

I recall that he was labelled as a manager famous for his passing football, yet all I seem to remember is Davis lumping it up to Rasiak to head down for someone else. It was always a case of half good, half shocking with the results. 6 - 0 win at Wolves, 2 - 0 loss at Southend. The very bizarre S****horpe game at home where we did our best to try and lose but won 1 - 0 sticks in the memory, or the league cup defeat at Notts County.

 

Transfers too, mixed to say the least. Would bring in a proven goalscorer like Rasiak, but also sign Marcelo Sarmiento (I have a feeling that deal was never of his own making, however). He brought in Saganowski who was a revelation, even after Watford had said he wasn't much cop when on trial with them, yet dropped Rasiak who had a formidable record up until Christmas. Kevin Miller brought in to replace at one point a potential England keeper in Paul Smith, and when you think about it, as good as Kelvin has been for us, his stock was amazingly low after his nightmare at Sunderland. With Smith everyone said his confidence was low - bringing in Miller, a guy who was fat as a house wasn't ever likely to make things better for him.

[Katalinic]

With Smith everyone said his confidence was low - bringing in Miller, a guy who was fat as a house wasn't ever likely to make things better for him.

 

I agree about Burley but Miller's record wasn't that bad - in the 7 games he played - 5 wins and 1 draw with 3 clean sheets.

[The Kraken]

I agree about Burley but Miller's record wasn't that bad - in the 7 games he played - 5 wins and 1 draw with 3 clean sheets.

 

I had the "pleasure" of seeing him play for Saints at Eastleigh. Oh dear me.

[OldNick]

There has only been one manager for Saints in over 40 years of supporting us who deserves the hatred Burleys gets on here and that is Branfoot.

Has Burley ever been sacked for his drinking? Has there been photos of him drunk in a public place? In this age of camera phones it is quite surprising that such a prolific drunk has not been captured on camera. The Loch Ness monster has been pictured more often.

Very few managers would have coped with the politics and unrest going on at the club at that time.

[Crazy Diamond]

I agree about Burley but Miller's record wasn't that bad - in the 7 games he played - 5 wins and 1 draw with 3 clean sheets.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not having a go at Miller and that record is, as you say, not bad, but really I think that's a poor bit of man management. Smith was a very good goalkeeper, and I remember a lot of us were surprised he was left out of the England squad for the USA tour in 2005 when Crouch got a call up.

[The Kraken]

There has only been one manager for Saints in over 40 years of supporting us who deserves the hatred Burleys gets on here and that is Branfoot.

Has Burley ever been sacked for his drinking? Has there been photos of him drunk in a public place? In this age of camera phones it is quite surprising that such a prolific drunk has not been captured on camera. The Loch Ness monster has been pictured more often.

Very few managers would have coped with the politics and unrest going on at the club at that time.

 

Ha ha ha; please tell me you're not still denying it?!!

 

Ha ha ha!!

[OldNick]

Ha ha ha; please tell me you're not still denying it?!!

 

Ha ha ha!!

No Im not denying that he likes a drink, but it is distasteful that many spout about it on hearsay only.

[CB Fry]

There has only been one manager for Saints in over 40 years of supporting us who deserves the hatred Burleys gets on here and that is Branfoot.

Has Burley ever been sacked for his drinking? Has there been photos of him drunk in a public place? In this age of camera phones it is quite surprising that such a prolific drunk has not been captured on camera. The Loch Ness monster has been pictured more often.

Very few managers would have coped with the politics and unrest going on at the club at that time.

 

Burley had the benefit of the Saints go Wilde euphoria in his full season. And pots and pots of cash. And six months "bedding in" before that season started. Everything, everything, everything that experts on here like to say a manager needs. Burley had it all. He blew it. We dribbled into the play offs when we should have strolled in.

 

Don't make out he was hard done by. He was one of the luckiest managers we've ever had.

[Crazy Diamond]

Burley had the benefit of the Saints go Wilde euphoria in his full season. And pots and pots of cash. And six months "bedding in" before that season started. Everything, everything, everything that experts on here like to say a manager needs. Burley had it all. He blew it. We dribbled into the play offs when we should have strolled in.

 

Don't make out he was hard done by. He was one of the luckiest managers we've ever had.

 

Yep. Pretty much summed up here. What was it, £7 million spent in that summer window? To scrape a play-off place on the last day is poor.

[OldNick]

Burley had the benefit of the Saints go Wilde euphoria in his full season. And pots and pots of cash. And six months "bedding in" before that season started. Everything, everything, everything that experts on here like to say a manager needs. Burley had it all. He blew it. We dribbled into the play offs when we should have strolled in.

 

Don't make out he was hard done by. He was one of the luckiest managers we've ever had.

All fair comments if the club had been on an even keel. We as a club were in a civil war. I dont wish to go over the old ground as it achieves nothing. Opinions are polarised and so it will just become another bun fight.....good fun but

[JackFrost]

There has only been one manager for Saints in over 40 years of supporting us who deserves the hatred Burleys gets on here and that is Branfoot.

Has Burley ever been sacked for his drinking? Has there been photos of him drunk in a public place? In this age of camera phones it is quite surprising that such a prolific drunk has not been captured on camera. The Loch Ness monster has been pictured more often.

Very few managers would have coped with the politics and unrest going on at the club at that time.

 

True,

 

but it appears it's far from being the only job he hasn't been able to cope with

[mack rill]

In George we trust. feckin classic

[sadoldgit]

Soggy

 

Points per game ratio is all relative to the division, budget..

 

Are you seriously going to suggest Burley was better than wgs because he got more points being the biggest spender and playing against weaker opposition?

 

It is relative to lots of things - for example if you only count Adkins Prem games he would be our wosrt manager even. Managers can only manage in the divisions they are in with the players they have. I raise the point because Burley is being lambasted as being rubbish when he didn't do a bad job of winning football matches for us in the league he was in.

 

As for the drinking, it is still heresay. He should be judged on his merits as a manager and until after leaving us he wasn't that bad. He was also a very good full back in his playing days.

[CB Fry]

All fair comments if the club had been on an even keel. We as a club were in a civil war. I dont wish to go over the old ground as it achieves nothing. Opinions are polarised and so it will just become another bun fight.....good fun but

 

 

 

Civil war? Not really in that play off season.

[Colinjb]

Oh god, Kevin Miller. I remember his debut well.

 

Away to Burnley, received word of someone new starting in goal, I believe Bart was injured and Paul Smith was in poor form or something. Received the team sheet in the directors area and had no idea who the guy was. Thanks to the atmosphere behind the scenes we lost all track of time and missed the first few minutes.... and our goal.

 

He looked ok, the game finished 1-1.

 

The abiding memory of the night, sitting directly behind the dugouts and hearing Burley repeatedly scream "Kenwyne!! Pull your f**king finger out!!!!"

[Crazy Diamond]

It is relative to lots of things - for example if you only count Adkins Prem games he would be our wosrt manager even. Managers can only manage in the divisions they are in with the players they have. I raise the point because Burley is being lambasted as being rubbish when he didn't do a bad job of winning football matches for us in the league he was in.

 

As for the drinking, it is still heresay. He should be judged on his merits as a manager and until after leaving us he wasn't that bad. He was also a very good full back in his playing days.

 

£7 million to finish sixth. Stoke, who we beat to the last play-off spot, with an inferior side and inferior funds went up automatically the next year.

 

Judge him on his merits. He woefully underachieved.

[kpturner]

Oh dear - George Burley has parted company with Apollon FC of Cyprus after just two games because - according to Sky - the Scot had "lost the dressing room".

I remember going to Doncaster away a few seasons ago and being treated to corporate hospitality by Leon Crouch. This was the season after Leon as our then chairman had persuaded the Scottish FA that George was the right man to be their national manager by a bit of reverse psychology in insisting we were desperate to hold on to him. Anyway sharing our table were four or five Scots and they were unaware who Leon was. One of them went into a long rant about how the Saints chairman had stitched them up by foisting Burley on to them. This guy ranted on and on still oblivious to the fact the man he was slagging was sat next to him while meanwhile Leon said nothing, keeping a poker face.

 

The day got even more interesting when we were joined by Johnathan Fulthorpe (remember him?) - who persuaded us to join him in a 125 to 1 bet that Saints would win 2-0 and Surman would score first. We all had a tenner on it and each of us went home £1250 the richer but only after Saints missed a pen towards the end. Away days don't get much better than that.

 

Burley was a busted flush by the time Lowe got him and his arrival was the beginning of our final leap into oblivion.

 

I was in Leon's box yesterday with Mr & Mrs Lawrie Mac and Dennis Roach (among others) when the story of that bet came up in conversation. Interesting that Surman did not actually score the first goal in that game - he scored the second. The first was an OG, so nobody thought that they had actually had won anything, until the bookmaker's rep came in to reveal that OG's don't count for first scorer. Didn't he also reveal that they didn't have enough cash on the premises to pay up?

[trousers]

I was in Leon's box yesterday

 

Too much detail

[kpturner]

Too much detail

 

:lol:

[fos1]

I was in Leon's box yesterday with Mr & Mrs Lawrie Mac and Dennis Roach (among others) when the story of that bet came up in conversation. Interesting that Surman did not actually score the first goal in that game - he scored the second. The first was an OG, so nobody thought that they had actually had won anything, until the bookmaker's rep came in to reveal that OG's don't count for first scorer. Didn't he also reveal that they didn't have enough cash on the premises to pay up?

 

Great day yesterday in box , shame our bets didn't come off yesterday , funny how we were talking about this bet before the game !!

[Badger]

I was in Leon's box yesterday with Mr & Mrs Lawrie Mac and Dennis Roach (among others) when the story of that bet came up in conversation. Interesting that Surman did not actually score the first goal in that game - he scored the second. The first was an OG, so nobody thought that they had actually had won anything, until the bookmaker's rep came in to reveal that OG's don't count for first scorer. Didn't he also reveal that they didn't have enough cash on the premises to pay up?

 

How is Lawrie these days ?

 

Is he 'warming' to the new regime ?

[kpturner]

How is Lawrie these days ?

 

Is he 'warming' to the new regime ?

 

No comment

[stardustonmyfeet]

As one or two others have mentioned earlier, Glynn Snodin arrived in the spring of 2006, and left in summer 2007. Before and after those dates, we were awful. During his stay as assistant manager, we were ok - we did manage to get 6th place. I rest my case.

[VectisSaint]

As one or two others have mentioned earlier, Glynn Snodin arrived in the spring of 2006, and left in summer 2007. Before and after those dates, we were awful. During his stay as assistant manager, we were ok - we did manage to get 6th place. I rest my case.

I recall a couple of years back when Whisky George was being discussed before I put together stats for games played with and without Snodin. Without Snodin GB's stats were poor to say the least. Don't know now where the numbers are. But anyone who tries to put a good spin on GB's time at Saints is seeing his time through rose tinted spectacles, he was awful, and in the end completely embarrassing.

[Legod Third Coming]

When it says "lost the dressing room" does that mean he didn't get on with players or does it mean he literally couldn't find his way back from Ye Olde Nicosia Inn?

 

Brilliant.

[Legod Third Coming]

Burley had the benefit of the Saints go Wilde euphoria in his full season. And pots and pots of cash. And six months "bedding in" before that season started. Everything, everything, everything that experts on here like to say a manager needs. Burley had it all. He blew it. We dribbled into the play offs when we should have strolled in.

 

Don't make out he was hard done by. He was one of the luckiest managers we've ever had.

 

I lasted 30 minutes against Palace at home before walking out on us for the one and only time in my life (that's some going given that my supporting goes back to 82).

All summer it was obvious we needed defenders. But Burley bought midfielders - at one stage I counted something like 18 midfielders in our squad...

[St Lej]

Anyone know what the great speech slurrer is up to these days?

[Batman]

he was not very good for us, was he

[9-3]

Is all this true about George Burley??

Surely the homework would have been in place?

I can't believe a club of our statue would employ, was there history at Ipswich?

[Saint Charlie]

He is a good football man.

[Badger]

Is all this true about George Burley??

Surely the homework would have been in place?

I can't believe a club of our statue would employ, was there history at Ipswich?

 

The "homework" at the time though might have been down to Rupert & Sir Clive.

 

That said, I think most supporters, me included, thought the Burley appointment a bit of a coup at the time. I remember a Wolves fan telling me how envious he was of us getting Burley.

[OldNick]

CB is correct in that Burley had quite a lot of resources but he was not the luckiest manager as he had a very dispirited fan base , that were divided as the politics of the Lowe and Wilde situation making the whole match experience not as the managers have the had in the last 5 or so seasons

[The9]

CB is correct in that Burley had quite a lot of resources but he was not the luckiest manager as he had a very dispirited fan base , that were divided as the politics of the Lowe and Wilde situation making the whole match experience not as the managers have the had in the last 5 or so seasons

 

Yeah, if you just ignore the overseeing of us replacing 17 players immediately when he took over (presumably all his choices for replacements even if he had nothing to do with the players leaving) and then the season after some daft spending for the Championship under Wilde, and a team which included Gareth Bale running matches from left back and scoring with every other free-kick for the first month or so, which should have got us FAR better than a play-off defeat eventually forced us into administration a couple of years later, he was "unlucky".

[Mattio]

Don't know if it's the same person but a George Burley is the chairman of the Sky Bet manager of the month award, I'm assuming coincendence?

[Bad Wolf]

"Well yeah' mean..."

 

I liked Burley, he was my first (of many) managerial appointment I experienced as a Saints fan. We had some rotten luck while he was in charge but with the money he had to spend, which was speculated to be something like £8 Million (a lot of money at Championship level in those days) we should have really won the league comfortably.

 

Still, gave Bale, Surman and Lallana their debuts and got the absolute best out of Chris Baird so he wasn't all bad.

[sadoldgit]

Anyone know what the great speech slurrer is up to these days?

 

Alex Ferguson is doing fine I believe.

[sadoldgit]

CB is correct in that Burley had quite a lot of resources but he was not the luckiest manager as he had a very dispirited fan base , that were divided as the politics of the Lowe and Wilde situation making the whole match experience not as the managers have the had in the last 5 or so seasons

 

We actually started to win a lot of away matches under Burley, something we had struggled with previously (including putting 6 past a decent Wolves side at their place). I love the comments about how we should have been successful because of the money we spent. As Manchester City have demonstrated, the millions and millions they have spent have not bought them the required glory they seek in Europe and Leicester have shown what can be achieved with the right chemistry and with spending a fortune. When we appointed Burley he was one of the most sought after young managers in the game. We made the play offs in his only full season with us and were unlucky not to make it but hey, that is football. He had good players sold from underneath him in his second season and it all went downhill from there, including his career it would seem. Not our best manager by a long way but also there were a lot worse. As I kept saying at the time, when he was with us he had the best win ratio of any manager since the war for us so not that shabby. Cleary there are many fans who didn't rate him and no doubt I will get a kicking for being supportive, but I enjoyed the football while he was with us more than I had for a while before and that is the main thing for me. I have been a Saints fan since 1966 and if it had just been about winning things I would see the whole period as a waste of time. As for his being an alcoholic, who knows? A lot of people in football liked a drink back in the day, including the great Brian Clough. For me the bile should be kept for the likes of Redknapp and Branfoot, now those two are worthy targets.

[Batman]

We actually started to win a lot of away matches under Burley, something we had struggled with previously (including putting 6 past a decent Wolves side at their place). I love the comments about how we should have been successful because of the money we spent. As Manchester City have demonstrated, the millions and millions they have spent have not bought them the required glory they seek in Europe and Leicester have shown what can be achieved with the right chemistry and with spending a fortune. When we appointed Burley he was one of the most sought after young managers in the game. We made the play offs in his only full season with us and were unlucky not to make it but hey, that is football. He had good players sold from underneath him in his second season and it all went downhill from there, including his career it would seem. Not our best manager by a long way but also there were a lot worse. As I kept saying at the time, when he was with us he had the best win ratio of any manager since the war for us so not that shabby. Cleary there are many fans who didn't rate him and no doubt I will get a kicking for being supportive, but I enjoyed the football while he was with us more than I had for a while before and that is the main thing for me. I have been a Saints fan since 1966 and if it had just been about winning things I would see the whole period as a waste of time. As for his being an alcoholic, who knows? A lot of people in football liked a drink back in the day, including the great Brian Clough. For me the bile should be kept for the likes of Redknapp and Branfoot, now those two are worthy targets.

 

anyway, he just was not very good for us at the end of the day.

[VectisSaint]

anyway, he just was not very good for us at the end of the day.

He was OK when assisted by Glynn Snodin, but poor before and after. Not really a major criticism, some managers have to have good backup staff to do well. Burley needed Snodin, just like Hoddle needed Gorman.

[Super_Uwe]

The main issue I had with Burley at the time is that he came across as pretty insipid and care-free whenever he was interviewed. Now that isn't ordinarily a problem in itself, but in Saints case they seemed to concede far too many "soft" goals during his time in charge. Rightly or wrongly, I was never able to separate the two to be honest.

 

Likewise, the fact we just about scraped into the play-offs in 06/07; as a fan, that seemed to me to be the limit of his ambition that year.

 

But he joined us at a time when our expectations were very high, and so I accept he did an OK job for us.

[Fan The Flames]

CB is correct in that Burley had quite a lot of resources but he was not the luckiest manager as he had a very dispirited fan base , that were divided as the politics of the Lowe and Wilde situation making the whole match experience not as the managers have the had in the last 5 or so seasons

 

 

Thats up there with 'the wrong kind of leaves' type of ******** excuse. As if fans having different opinions would affect the managers performance.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

We actually started to win a lot of away matches under Burley, something we had struggled with previously (including putting 6 past a decent Wolves side at their place). I love the comments about how we should have been successful because of the money we spent. As Manchester City have demonstrated, the millions and millions they have spent have not bought them the required glory they seek in Europe and Leicester have shown what can be achieved with the right chemistry and with spending a fortune. When we appointed Burley he was one of the most sought after young managers in the game. We made the play offs in his only full season with us and were unlucky not to make it but hey, that is football. He had good players sold from underneath him in his second season and it all went downhill from there, including his career it would seem. Not our best manager by a long way but also there were a lot worse. As I kept saying at the time, when he was with us he had the best win ratio of any manager since the war for us so not that shabby. Cleary there are many fans who didn't rate him and no doubt I will get a kicking for being supportive, but I enjoyed the football while he was with us more than I had for a while before and that is the main thing for me. I have been a Saints fan since 1966 and if it had just been about winning things I would see the whole period as a waste of time. As for his being an alcoholic, who knows? A lot of people in football liked a drink back in the day, including the great Brian Clough. For me the bile should be kept for the likes of Redknapp and Branfoot, now those two are worthy targets.

 

Redknapp yes but Branfoot no. He was a crap manager agreed but a decent man out of his depth. Burley was a decent man but personal issues with the booze (you'll have to take my word for it) meant he lost the plot a bit and the players knew it. Recipe for disaster. Neither man was as duplicitous as Redknapp though.

[The9]

We actually started to win a lot of away matches under Burley, something we had struggled with previously (including putting 6 past a decent Wolves side at their place).

 

Because we'd been a mostly poor Premier League side and then a Redknapp-managed Championship side. Hardly an achievement.

 

I love the comments about how we should have been successful because of the money we spent. As Manchester City have demonstrated, the millions and millions they have spent have not bought them the required glory they seek in Europe and Leicester have shown what can be achieved with the right chemistry and with spending a fortune.

 

This season is the exception, but for the best part of 20 years now, most money = most success. Until this season there's been an enormously strong correlation between wages and success in the Premier League - lower down where all of the players have more evident weaknesses it should be even easier to win things just by having more money and spending it relatively well because the players you can afford should make fewer basic mistakes. We somehow managed to avoid this inbuilt success despite also having Bale.

 

When we appointed Burley he was one of the most sought after young managers in the game.

 

No he wasn't, or we wouldn't have been able to appoint him as a mid-table Championship side. He left Ipswich in 2002 with a relatively good reputation despite getting them relegated. Went to Derby and did almost exactly what he ended up doing at Saints, taking a rebuilding Championship team from mid/bottom half to play-off failures. He was then Hearts manager for a bit and due to chairman Romanov's quirks got sacked when top of the league after 8 matches having not played either Celtic nor Rangers.

 

He was by no means still a much-sought after manager by 2006, he was one who'd had a good season 5 years ago and might have been about to have a good season 6 months previously (and btw Hearts still came second without him).

 

We made the play offs in his only full season with us and were unlucky not to make it but hey, that is football.

 

Critics would say he made a pile of weird substitutions, ignored glaring deficiencies in the starting line-up, had his favourites who weren't the best players, didn't react quickly enough to teams doubling up on Bale, spent all season underplaying our chances of success and meeting those projections, and with the hindsight of what Adkins did, most Saints fans must still be wondering how we failed to get in the top 2.

 

He had good players sold from underneath him in his second season and it all went downhill from there, including his career it would seem.

 

He had the entire team sold in the January when he first arrived which he definitely would have known about. We then dropped to just above the relegation zone and recovered into mid-table just in time. His second season was the playoff tilt, and the most successful one due to buying players we couldn't afford, and he didn't stick around when it became obvious that we weren't planning on paying them to play for us any more in his third season.

 

Not our best manager by a long way but also there were a lot worse.

As I kept saying at the time, when he was with us he had the best win ratio of any manager since the war for us so not that shabby.

 

At a time when we'd spent most of that time in the bottom half of a better division.

 

Cleary there are many fans who didn't rate him and no doubt I will get a kicking for being supportive, but I enjoyed the football while he was with us more than I had for a while before and that is the main thing for me.

 

Going on about win ratios, yet weirdly you don't seem as keen to ascribe that as one of the reasons you liked his tenure? Strange. I thought the football was an improvement, but only because we were dire other than Walcott in the first half of the first Championship season, it wasn't difficult to improve from there.

 

Incidentally, Burley's Saints win ratio ended up below (Adkins, Pardew and Koeman who followed, as well as) Hoddle and McMenemy. He was 3% better than Sturrock, and ahead of every other manager we had in the Premier League though - to no surprise.

 

I have been a Saints fan since 1966 and if it had just been about winning things I would see the whole period as a waste of time. As for his being an alcoholic, who knows? A lot of people in football liked a drink back in the day, including the great Brian Clough. For me the bile should be kept for the likes of Redknapp and Branfoot, now those two are worthy targets.

 

Clough's drinking ruined him. Can't argue about Redknapp or Branfoot.

[sadoldgit]

Cloughs drinking did ruin him but drinking was widespread in football, especially amongst the players.

 

When he was signed by us he was seen as a really good appointment. You ignored to mention that he also got Ipswich into Europe. Anyway, we all have different views and I think you will find that there are some Saints fans who didn't have a problem with Burley although I accept that there are plenty who do.

 

I shouldn't have said win ratio, I should have said points average per game, in which he came higher that Lawrie Mac and Hoddle.

Edited 8 April, 2016 by sadoldgit

[Horley CTFC Saint]

Out of interest how many clubs relegated from the Premier League since 2005 have managed to get into the play offs or better within two years of relegation. Can't be arsed to do the research but it seems that despite the parachute payments a hell of a lot of them went into free fall - a bit like Saints eventually did.

[Batman]

Out of interest how many clubs relegated from the Premier League since 2005 have managed to get into the play offs or better within two years of relegation. Can't be arsed to do the research but it seems that despite the parachute payments a hell of a lot of them went into free fall - a bit like Saints eventually did.

 

In 2004/2005 Saints, Palace and Norwich were relegated.

palace hit the playoffs in season 1, saints in the 2nd season down (11th 1st season down). Both finished 6th in the playoffs

 

in 2005/6 Birmingham, WBA, Sunderland were relegated

sunderland and birminhgam both went straight back up as the top 2. WBA got straight into the playoffs in 4th

WBA went up as champions 2nd year down

 

2006/7 Sheff U, Watford and Charlton were relegated

Watford made the playoffs 1st season down

Sheff united made the playoffs (3rd) 2nd season down

 

2007/8 Reading, Birmingham, Derby were relegated

Birmingham made an immediate return in 2nd place in the champ, Reading made the playoffs in season 1 down.

 

2008/9 Boro, Newcastle and WBA were relegated

Newcastle and WBA finished 1st and 2nd in their first season down

 

2009/10 Burnley, Hull, Pompey were relegated

None of them made the top 6 within 2 seasons - We all know what happened to pompey

 

2010/11 Birmingham, Blackpool, west ham were relegated

All three made the playoffs 1st season down, west ham won the playoffs

 

2011/12 Bolton, Blackburn, Wolves were relegated

None of them made the top 6 within 2 seasons down

 

2012/13 Wigan, Reading, QPR were relegated

Wigan made the playoffs 1st season down

 

2013/14 Norwich, Fulham, Cardiff were relegated

Norwich made the playoffs and were promoted first shout

 

2014/15 Hull Burnley and QPR were relegated

Burnley look set for a top 2 finish and hull almost certainly in the playoffs. Both first shout

 

 

To answer your question. Nearly all of them did with many doing better than we did within 2 season relegated

[The9]

Cloughs drinking did ruin him but drinking was widespread in football, especially amongst the players.

 

When he was signed by us he was seen as a really good appointment. You ignored to mention that he also got Ipswich into Europe. Anyway, we all have different views and I think you will find that there are some Saints fans who didn't have a problem with Burley although I accept that there are plenty who do.

 

I shouldn't have said win ratio, I should have said points average per game, in which he came higher that Lawrie Mac and Hoddle.

 

I didn't mention that he got Ipswich into Europe because he also got them relegated the season after - I'd love to see what Ipswich's injury and suspension rate was like in 2001, they could have been the template for Leicester this season.

 

I thought he was fine at the time for a while - probably an unwillingness to accept that Alpine might be right about something! As you mentioned, his early tenure was a general improvement on the awful first season in the Championship when for 4 months it was only Walcott that made Saints worth seeing.

 

It was only when I realised how much money we'd thrown at failing to go up when it became obvious that we had no financial Plan B, could never have afforded what was needed for Plan A unless it was a success, and how low Burley seemed to be setting expectations, that I had a problem with his understatement.

[The9]

To answer your question. Nearly all of them did with many doing better than we did within 2 season relegated

 

Using your stats, and not including this season, the actual figure for teams who made the playoffs or better within 2 seasons of being relegated is 16 out of 30.

 

"Nearly all" that is not. Plus of those only 8 of the 30 relegated sides were re-promoted within 2 seasons.

 

Not sure what this says about Burley, but it's an interesting bunch of stats - I'd like to know how many were relegated into League One within 5 years as well... I make it 8 of them also (2005 Saints, Norwich, 2007 Sheff U and Charlton, 2010 Portsmouth, 2011 Blackpool, 2012 Wolves, 2013 Wigan).

 

So it appears that you're as likely to go back up within 2 years as you are to end up in League One within 5.

 

You can add Bolton and maybe Fulham to the down list and maybe Hull and/or Cardiff and probably Burnley to the up/playoffs one this season.

[Batman]

5 teams in that time were relegated to league 1 within FIVE YEARS of being relegated from the premier league

 

but 5 years is significantly longer (in footballing terms) than the 2 years originally discussed

 

Burley hitting 6th spot, 2nd season down is about halfway on the scale of being good at getting promoted with a team very recently relegated from the premier league . (didnt make wembley)

 

'meh' would be the correct word I reckon.

Edited 8 April, 2016 by Batman