Full listing here >> [url=http://www.managerstats.co.uk/clubs/grimsby-town/l]http://www.managerstats.co.uk/clubs/grimsby-town/[/url]
Roughly correct, Paul Hurst stats seem incorrect, but win % near enough correct anyway. Rob Scott's correct.

                                                                                                                                             I've just added these to Wiki, these are correct less FA Trophy games.
                                                                                                                                            
[img]http://i.imgur.com/IggZwsd.png[/img][img]http://i.imgur.com/oZCerK9.png[/img]

it should be broken down to joint manager - sole manager

The number of games informing the results ranges from 3 to 507. Assessing success or failure over only a few results is probably unfair. The more the games managed, the greater the accuracy of the win or loss percentages.  

Some managers also managed at a much higher level than we are now. There is no weighting for this.  Town were probably punching above our weight.

Bill Shankly is top of the table. There is one of his famous quotes about Grimsby "pound for pound, class for class, the best football team I ever managed".    I do not know if he inherited many of these good players or he bought them.  This makes a difference.  He will definitely have motivated them!

I think that Kenny Swain was managing Town when we went top of the Championship the day before England beat Germany 5-1.  He is shown 5th to bottom which is very harsh.  We were punching well above our weight that season.

Quoted from TownSNAFU5

I think that Kenny Swain was managing Town when we went top of the Championship the day before England beat Germany 5-1.  He is shown 5th to bottom which is very harsh.  We were punching well above our weight that season.

Wasn't it Lennie Lawrence managing then?

Quoted from mariner2000

it should be broken down to joint manager - sole manager

It's not going to make much difference though given one figure is 44% and the other 46%

Quoted from TownSNAFU5

I think that Kenny Swain was managing Town when we went top of the Championship the day before England beat Germany 5-1.  He is shown 5th to bottom which is very harsh.  We were punching well above our weight that season.

He wasn't, but you're only over 3 years out  ;D

This table isn't all that fair either, you have to consider the levels that some of these managers were managing at.

Quoted from Trawler

Wasn't it Lennie Lawrence managing then?

Yes it WAS

I did not add that Buckley and McMenemy also developed promotion winning teams that played good football.

I would like to say that about Hurst next season.    ;)

Quoted from TownSNAFU5

I did not add that Buckley and McMenemy also developed promotion winning teams that played good football.

I would like to say that about Hurst next season.    ;)

Didn't take them as long either to get us promoted. To be fair to Hurst though, with only 2 going up and 1 automatic, it's more of a task in this league.

A quick glance says Paul Hurst is just about our 5th longest serving manager

I get the argument about punching above our weight, but just playing devil's advocate you could say that we were able to attract Championship quality players when we competed in the Championship.

And that we've only been able to attract Conference standard players while in the Conference.

I agree it's not as simple as that (our budgets were small in the Championship and large in the Conference). Which makes statistics like these very difficult to prove anything - clinically - one way or another.

But they're useful to give a general indication of how our managers have performed. Generally, you'd say, Hurst has done well.

But if you're measuring performance on whether we win titles, then he's just as useless as most of the rest!

Quoted from RichMariner

I get the argument about punching above our weight, but just playing devil's advocate you could say that we were able to attract Championship quality players when we competed in the Championship.

And that we've only been able to attract Conference standard players while in the Conference.

I agree it's not as simple as that (our budgets were small in the Championship and large in the Conference). Which makes statistics like these very difficult to prove anything - clinically - one way or another.

But they're useful to give a general indication of how our managers have performed. Generally, you'd say, Hurst has done well.

But if you're measuring performance on whether we win titles, then he's just as useless as most of the rest!

I thought the same, but also came to the same conclusion. The lower down the pyramid we go, the bigger we get in respect of that league. We are one of the giants in the conference and even with a mediocre manager can easily compete, but doing that in league 1 and Championship is more difficult when you are competing against the likes of Derby and the Sheffield clubs for instance. What Buckley did was far more astonishing than what Hurst's achievements would be if he got us promoted.

Quoted from ginnywings

I thought the same, but also came to the same conclusion. The lower down the pyramid we go, the bigger we get in respect of that league. We are one of the giants in the conference and even with a mediocre manager can easily compete, but doing that in league 1 and Championship is more difficult when you are competing against the likes of Derby and the Sheffield clubs for instance. What Buckley did was far more astonishing than what Hurst's achievements would be if he got us promoted.

I agree the table only tells half the story. Whoever is manager in the Conference you'd expect to feature fairly highly in this table, and whoever is manager in the Championship fairly lowly. It really needs weighting according to our average gate relative to the divisional average, which is a fairly good reflection of spending power (though not perfect as the crowd goes up and down in accordance with league position). I'd like to see a chart with an x-axis of spending power (i.e. our crowd/divisional average) and a y-axis of win ratio, and a best-fit straight line drawn though the data. Anyone above the line would be a better than average manager and below the line worse than average.

Quoted from RichMariner

I get the argument about punching above our weight, but just playing devil's advocate you could say that we were able to attract Championship quality players when we competed in the Championship.

Championship-quality players and Knut Anders Fostervold.

More ganes than George Kerr - I just hope RH don't get him on commentary a few years down the line!