Bob Manc 100 games

[BlueinBosnia]

...So based on what Tokyo is saying, what was Taggart's record in his first 100 games for the rags?

45%
45 wins
34 draws
21 losses

What is that compared to Hughes with us? I'm reckoning kind of similar...

[Slim]

...So based on what Tokyo is saying, what was Taggart's record in his first 100 games for the rags?

45%
45 wins
34 draws
21 losses

What is that compared to Hughes with us?

Hughes didn't have 100 games with us, any comparison would be misleading at best.

[BlueinBosnia]

...So based on what Tokyo is saying, what was Taggart's record in his first 100 games for the rags?

45%
45 wins
34 draws
21 losses

What is that compared to Hughes with us?

Hughes didn't have 100 games with us, any comparison would be misleading at best.

Guess so. But at least it would get the Soccs and NQDP party started...

[Pretty Boy Lee]

Hughes didn't have 100 games with us, any comparison would be misleading at best.

I was gonna go for 25 wins, 25 losses, 50 draws.

[Slim]

...So based on what Tokyo is saying, what was Taggart's record in his first 100 games for the rags?

45%
45 wins
34 draws
21 losses

What is that compared to Hughes with us?

Hughes didn't have 100 games with us, any comparison would be misleading at best.

Guess so. But at least it would get the Soccs and NQDP party started...

Won't be popular, but I think anyone with a level head can admit that bacon is the greatest manager in the game, probably ever. Comparisons can give you a little "yay" moment, but it's lasting 25 years in a job that is as unforgiving as his face that makes him great, not a 61% win ratio in your first 100 games.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

Beautiful.

Not to sound too apathetic but we are in a similar position to Taggart when he started out, just better.

Good find mate.

What??????
They were pretty average for years when he first started. Mancini is league and FA cup winner. Million miles better.

[Swales4ever]

Hart was offloaded at Birmingham because without potential.

The biggest piece of historical revisionism since Slobodan Milosevic grasped power. Fact.

In fact. and agreed.
that You have excerpted from context was, and clearly was deemed along with the following lines, to recall the former incumbent's assessment of Joe Hart. Not mine.
I cannot see any revisionism there, just the history of the wasting of Joe Hart talent under the previous tenure.


and, obviously, as a FACT, this:

Won't be popular, but I think anyone with a level head can admit that bacon is the greatest manager in the game, probably ever. Comparisons can give you a little "yay" moment, but it's lasting 25 years in a job that is as unforgiving as his face that makes him great, not a 61% win ratio in your first 100 games.

[Chinners]

Interesting, especially as the Rags were pretty turd when he first took over.

Says a lot about Ferguson's ability rather than Mancini's

Funny.
I was under the impression that what Mancini got was little different than the wreck left by King Kenny at Anfield, just with plenty of anarchy in the changing room for makeweight, and that include our beloved skipper already listed as defensive midfielder, then.

In all honesty this is a top notch record, not only because it level on with the best (and most bastard) manager of the English Game, but just because they equally built a superb platform for long lasting success.
For accuracy, it's the second best record just after Mourinho, although incomparably more significant (for both) because the Clown - as usual - only refined an adjusted a very solid team already build by others.

But I can sense that the comparison of today 1st half football must have been a real pain in the arse for every Nostalgic.

Bloody hell mate, Mancini walked into a team in the semi final of a cup and a couple of points away from 4th place.

He inherited a team with Hart, Zabaleta, Richards, Kompany, Lescott, De Jong, Barry, Tevez, Adebayor, Robinho - he hardly walked into training to find the likes of Andy Carroll and Charlie Adam as his star men

My surprise is that in his 100 games he has won a cup and a league title, yet Ferguson was nowhere near either.

Hart was offloaded at Birmingham because without potential.
Zabaleta, Richards, Kompany, Lescott, Barry all have been reshaped, refined, improved into completely different players.
Nigel was, is and will always be a top bloke, a big positive influence in any dressing room who, sadly, can't pass forward nor jump up to PL requirements and who will always slow the tempo of any midfield line he will play in. I m curious to see if the Serie A slow tempo shall suit him better, though.
I can concede Tevez, just because I like You and everyone is entitled to steam off on a football forum, but if my memory serves well You didn't need more than 2 hands to count the goals Carlos had scored for City, then.
Adebayor and Robinho: really have I to start? because actually I quite don't like to slag any players who served at the Club.

Sorry mate, you are talking bollocks. Whilst Zabaleta, Richards, Kompany, Lescott, Barry have all improved - I would expect them to have improved over time, but how on earth can you say they weren't quality players to start with? As was De Jong, who despite his shortcomings, has been a pivotal player for us. Hart going to Birmingham was the making of him - he was Birmingham's player of the year and returned to Manchester ready to be a number one at a big club.

Mancini didn't like Adebayor, Robinho, Bellamy, and bombed them out for his own personal reasons. That does not mean they are poor players, it means Mancini didn't get on with them or didn't like them for one reason or another. Adebayor, was consistently amongst the premier league top scorer prior to joining City, Robinho was the 3rd top scorer in the league in his first season in England. As for Tevez, he had just scored 6 in 6 games when Mancini took over - hardly struggling was he?

By all means, praise where its due for Mancini, but don't start making shit up.

Whatever way you want to paint the picture, Mancini took over an excellent squad, and arguably failed with them in his first 6 months so has added to it. Ferguson took over an utter shambles, a bunch off pissheads, and sold them all within his first two or three years - yet had the same win ratio as Mancini in that duration.

THIS

[PeterParker]

There were some times when Bobby almost gave us a free pass to check ourselves in a health clinic, just to rest there, before we went totally insane.

There had been numerous burst with players like Tevez, Mario, Adebayor, Boateng, Robinho, Edin, etc, many weird decisions tactically in and outside the pitch, many weird starting line-ups in important games and so on.

But, eeeezz normal.

In Bobby we trust, no?

Sure there will be again "Mancini out" threads, infinite discussions about how he didn't do this and that, but at the end of the day, Bobby will still be our manager, the same person who delivered us the FA Cup, The Title and brought us every year a new style, a new level where we are. As Tyler said, it's the begining of a dinasty, but he forgot that the dinasty started a year earlier.

He may be a knobhead sometimes, but we must keep him here for life. Keep him here to take us higher and higher.

[Slim]

I was appalled with some of his decisions, but he won us trophies. I wonder how many baconchops out threads those lot have started over the years. I know whenever things go badly they all think he's lost it and needs to retire. Not sure we'll change in that respect either, but if we get out of our group, finish top 2 and maybe a cup final again, we don't even have to win anything this year for me to be happy.

[Beefymcfc]

Beautiful.

Not to sound too apathetic but we are in a similar position to Taggart when he started out, just better.

Good find mate.

What??????
They were pretty average for years when he first started. Mancini is league and FA cup winner. Million miles better.

Did you actually read what I said?

To clarify, you've just said United were average for years when Taggart took over, could you not say the same about Hughes?

To clarify '..just better.., does that not mean that in the first few years of our takeover that we are doing a lot better than United did?

I know you want to protect your liege, mate, but you can't do it if he's not even mentioned. I was talking about City.

[Blue Since 76]

Won't be popular, but I think anyone with a level head can admit that bacon is the greatest manager in the game, probably ever. Comparisons can give you a little "yay" moment, but it's lasting 25 years in a job that is as unforgiving as his face that makes him great, not a 61% win ratio in your first 100 games.

It's 61% in his first 100 games during the premier league ie missing out the initial rebuilding. His 1000th game is today and his win percentage over that time is about 65%.

Mourinho's win percentage at Chelsea was 70% over 185 games, but he took over a better side than Taggart or Mancini when he came in.

The only thing you can say from the above is that Mancini is on track. His win percentage has increased since he first took over (78% last season compared to 55% the previous), so by the time he gets to 185 games, he could easily be on a par with Mourinho.

More to the point, hopefully his win percentage is still in the high 60s when he reaches 1000 games

[Slim]

Won't be popular, but I think anyone with a level head can admit that bacon is the greatest manager in the game, probably ever. Comparisons can give you a little "yay" moment, but it's lasting 25 years in a job that is as unforgiving as his face that makes him great, not a 61% win ratio in your first 100 games.

It's 61% in his first 100 games during the premier league ie missing out the initial rebuilding. His 1000th game is today and his win percentage over that time is about 65%.

Mourinho's win percentage at Chelsea was 70% over 185 games, but he took over a better side than Taggart or Mancini when he came in.

The only thing you can say from the above is that Mancini is on track. His win percentage has increased since he first took over (78% last season compared to 55% the previous), so by the time he gets to 185 games, he could easily be on a par with Mourinho.

More to the point, hopefully his win percentage is still in the high 60s when he reaches 1000 games

Wait, his 1000th premier league game or 1000th overall? Because his win percentage overall is 57% I think, it was stated earlier in the thread.

[Im_Spartacus]

Fair enough if its comparing bacons first 100 prem games to mancinis. That makes mancini look comparable to the great whiskey sodden cunt.

Like i said, it wouldnt have added up if it was both managers actual first 100 games as united were fucking wank when fergie took over. As for those saying it was expensively assembled, yes, it was, but fergusons rebuilding went much further than mancinis, as the core of hughes squad are still here wheras everyone except robson was thrown out of united by the time 3 years had passed

[Blue Since 76]

Wait, his 1000th premier league game or 1000th overall? Because his win percentage overall is 57% I think, it was stated earlier in the thread.

Just checked and it's league games. 43% win rate in old division 1 and 65% in the premier league.

[Slim]

Wait, his 1000th premier league game or 1000th overall? Because his win percentage overall is 57% I think, it was stated earlier in the thread.

Just checked and it's league games. 43% win rate in old division 1 and 65% in the premier league.

I'm not arguing his achievements, mainly because it makes my skin crawl. All I was saying is first 100 games means very little(unless you're Hughes, in which case...good luck making 100), the fact he has been a manager at one club for what, 25? 26? years is the impressive stat here.

[Beefymcfc]

Since Taggart has been in charge, how many managers have we had who've made 100 games?

[Mark Garrett]

Since Taggart has been in charge, how many managers have we had who've made 100 games?

Just to point out, Mancini has been in charge for nearer 150 games as my signature indicates, however yesterday was his 100th league game in charge.

In answer to your question I would reckon only Reid, Royle and Keegan as well as Mancini obviously.

[Swales4ever]

Whatever way you want to paint the picture, Mancini took over an excellent squad, and arguably failed with them in his first 6 months so has added to it. Ferguson took over an utter shambles, a bunch off pissheads, and sold them all within his first two or three years - yet had the same win ratio as Mancini in that duration.

THIS

btw, Chins, I forgot to ask You: what's the point of that this?
Would You rather fancy Bacon in or Sparky back?

[Tokyo Blue]

I'm not arguing his achievements, mainly because it makes my skin crawl. All I was saying is first 100 games means very little(unless you're Hughes, in which case...good luck making 100), the fact he has been a manager at one club for what, 25? 26? years is the impressive stat here.

Has he? Really? I would never have known. After all, it is never mentioned in the media or anywhere else.

If you want to nosh him off, do it somewhere else.