Potted at Boro

A pity, nice guy but after a good 1st year Boro’s results just not good enough.

Been getting worse each season 4th,8th and then this season 10th

He was under threat earlier in the season but was backed, against the fans' wishes, by Steve Gibson. This one always looked likely.

His Boro teams played some great football and always had excellent underlying statistics, but for some reason, couldn't fully convert them into points on the board.

He will be a success at the right club, probably fair enough for Boro to go in a different direction.

CoolClaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 2:16 pm

His Boro teams played some great football and always had excellent underlying statistics, but for some reason, couldn't fully convert them into points on the board.

He will be a success at the right club, probably fair enough for Boro to go in a different direction.

Had almost three years at a club, most than most managers get these days, and took them backwards.

I'd love to see these excellent underlying statistics (obviously lying a long way under the important one: points won) that make you think he'll be a success elsewhere.

Another great player ex Man U who made a crap manager

Woodleyclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 2:39 pm

Another great player ex Man U who made a crap manager

Middlesbrough slightly ahead of Hartlepool ?

TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 2:32 pm

Had almost three years at a club, most than most managers get these days, and took them backwards.

I'd love to see these excellent underlying statistics (obviously lying a long way under the important one: points won) that make you think he'll be a success elsewhere.

xG differential (xG for - xG against) has always been positive throughout his tenure, ranking third best this season, after Leeds (1st) and the mighty clarets (2nd).

Again, converting that to points is the tricky bit, and of course, it isn't the be-all and end-all.

CoolClaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 2:48 pm

xG differential (xG for - xG against) has always been positive throughout his tenure, ranking third best this season, after Leeds (1st) and the mighty clarets (2nd).

Again, converting that to points is the tricky bit, and of course, it isn't the be-all and end-all.

Not sure that there is any stat in football that helps when you have been well backed and manage to get 64 points from 46 games. I hope for his chance of employment down the line he doesn't use any XG stats when he comes to talk about his success at Boro.

Sorry to interrupt your discussion but are you actually suggesting that 'points ' aren't the be all and end all' regarding a manager's success?

Don’t follow Boro news at all but didn’t he have horrendous injuries last season?

Silkyskills1 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 2:52 pm

Sorry to interrupt your discussion but are you actually suggesting that 'points ' aren't the be all and end all' regarding a manager's success?

No, and I don't know how you could interpret what I wrote to mean that.

Of course, points and results are paramount.

Steve Cooper fav to replace him

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 2:54 pm

Steve Cooper fav to replace him

Wouldn't be surprised if they went for Danny Rohl, seems to be the latest buzz manager and clearly wants out of Sheff Weds

Would be a good job for SD

Tricky Trevor wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 2:54 pm

Don’t follow Boro news at all but didn’t he have horrendous injuries last season?

The manager being injured, no matter how serious, shouldn't effect how the team performs.

claretonthecoast1882 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 2:51 pm

Not sure that there is any stat in football that helps when you have been well backed and manage to get 64 points from 46 games. I hope for his chance of employment down the line he doesn't use any XG stats when he comes to talk about his success at Boro.

Most clubs are using xG (along with other underlying data metrics) to assess manager performance now (along with other analytics). We definitely had Lee Mooney heavily involved in appointing a manager this last time. Arguably, the better performing clubs (Brentford and Brighton) set the pace for that years ago, with others now playing catch up - I’m not sure why it’s spoken down on by fans so often.

Depends what ‘well backed’ means, I think some of the business they did was really poor and the squad last season wasn’t play off worthy (eg there were some on here who saw Iheanacho & Whittaker sign for them and think wow what amazing signings, when in fact the former was completely unfit and couldn’t run, while the latter offers nothing off the ball too).

My personal opinion is that he is a good manager, give him the right environment and he’d deliver.

What a moment when he missed that pen.

Good experienced 6 with lots of premier league experience, sign him up!

RVclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 3:34 pm

Most clubs are using xG (along with other underlying data metrics) to assess manager performance now (along with other analytics). We definitely had Lee Mooney heavily involved in appointing a manager this last time. Arguably, the better performing clubs (Brentford and Brighton) set the pace for that years ago, with others now playing catch up - I’m not sure why it’s spoken down on by fans so often.

Depends what ‘well backed’ means, I think some of the business they did was really poor and the squad last season wasn’t play off worthy (eg there were some on here who saw Iheanacho & Whittaker sign for them and think wow what amazing signings, when in fact the former was completely unfit and couldn’t run, while the latter offers nothing off the ball too).

My personal opinion is that he is a good manager, give him the right environment and he’d deliver.

Well backed as in look at the standard of player he has had as his disposal over his time there and compare it to a large % of opposition. Regarding Ihenacho & Whittaker maybe they used their xG score to decide. I don't think he is a bad manager he just hasn't done a good job at Boro and no stat used can change that.

As for why it is spoken down by fans I won't speak for others but when I go to a game I know if we have deserved to win or not, had the better chances or played well. I have never wondered what our xG was at any point.

It is like the time when some xG fan was criticising Ally McCoist for saying someone had to score and the xG fanboy mocked him due to the xG rating being about 0.25.

Someone replied Ally McCoist back to back European golden boot winner v kid sat his bedroom with his excel spreadsheet. Recruitment people looking at a whole host of stats makes sense. Football fans using them to back up a point is meaningless.

claretonthecoast1882 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 3:57 pm

Well backed as in look at the standard of player he has had as his disposal over his time there and compare it to a large % of opposition. Regarding Ihenacho & Whittaker maybe they used their xG score to decide. I don't think he is a bad manager he just hasn't done a good job at Boro and no stat used can change that.

As for why it is spoken down by fans I won't speak for others but when I go to a game I know if we have deserved to win or not, had the better chances or played well. I have never wondered what our xG was at any point.

It is like the time when some xG fan was criticising Ally McCoist for saying someone had to score and the xG fanboy mocked him due to the xG rating being about 0.25.

Someone replied Ally McCoist back to back European golden boot winner v kid sat his bedroom with his excel spreadsheet. Recruitment people looking at a whole host of stats makes sense. Football fans using them to back up a point is meaningless.

When they had their most balanced squad, he finished 3rd. I also think he develops players which is important for clubs at this level, and should be another ‘metric’ for manager performance.

I take your point regarding how xG is used incorrectly by some in your example provided, I recall that one myself. But still that doesn’t alter the fact that most of the top performing clubs leverage data & analytics (xG and other), including for manager recruitment, and that is because it’s useful to better assess performance over time (though shouldn’t be the only assessment method). I don’t feel it is meaningless, if used correctly (which in itself is a challenge because the average fan isn’t skilled in data analysis).

RVclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 4:04 pm

When they had their most balanced squad, he finished 3rd. I also think he develops players which is important for clubs at this level, and should be another ‘metric’ for manager performance.

I take your point regarding how xG is used incorrectly by some in your example provided, I recall that one myself. But still that doesn’t alter the fact that most of the top performing clubs leverage data & analytics (xG and other), including for manager recruitment, and that is because it’s useful to better assess performance over time (though shouldn’t be the only assessment method). I don’t feel it is meaningless, if used correctly (which in itself is a challenge because the average fan isn’t skilled in data analysis).

I thought 4th was his best finish before producing a tame surrender against Coventry in the play offs, bit like season just gone where 1 win in the last 5 saw them miss out on the play offs again including the weak last day showing at Coventry again.

RVclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 4:04 pm

When they had their most balanced squad, he finished 3rd. I also think he develops players which is important for clubs at this level, and should be another ‘metric’ for manager performance.

I take your point regarding how xG is used incorrectly by some in your example provided, I recall that one myself. But still that doesn’t alter the fact that most of the top performing clubs leverage data & analytics (xG and other), including for manager recruitment, and that is because it’s useful to better assess performance over time (though shouldn’t be the only assessment method). I don’t feel it is meaningless, if used correctly (which in itself is a challenge because the average fan isn’t skilled in data analysis).

So in his tenure he knackered the balance of his squad and develops players to the point they finish lower each season??

Not selling him right well.

Underperformed versus the resources he’s had.

They performed in fits and starts lacking any real consistency. I recall in November 2024 they scored 18 goals in registering 4 victories whilst losing the other 2 matches to Nil.

Wonder if United might try and get him back in the backroom staff

Shows how well we continue to do.

Boro are well backed. And tend to be pretty patient with managers. Yet it’s a decade since they last won promotion.

Shows what can happen if you don’t go up when you get the chance. Luckily we have consistently done that since Dyche came in.

Talking of Dyche you don’t see him short listed for many of the vacancies in the Championship. Owners seem to prefer a left field overseas appointment.

RVclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 4:04 pm

When they had their most balanced squad, he finished 3rd. I also think he develops players which is important for clubs at this level, and should be another ‘metric’ for manager performance.

I take your point regarding how xG is used incorrectly by some in your example provided, I recall that one myself. But still that doesn’t alter the fact that most of the top performing clubs leverage data & analytics (xG and other), including for manager recruitment, and that is because it’s useful to better assess performance over time (though shouldn’t be the only assessment method). I don’t feel it is meaningless, if used correctly (which in itself is a challenge because the average fan isn’t skilled in data analysis).

There's a difference between leveraging data and using xG as the sole data point (which many seem to want to do).

If a manager is underperforming against xG consistently then maybe he isn't a good manager who is unlucky but an average manager who is holding the team back.

CyrilEbokiPoh wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 4:42 pm

Shows how well we continue to do.

Boro are well backed. And tend to be pretty patient with managers. Yet it’s a decade since they last won promotion.

Shows what can happen if you don’t go up when you get the chance. Luckily we have consistently done that since Dyche came in.

From time to time I live & work in the north east the teesiders & support they draw from the surrounding areas are hungry for success & by & large felt underwhelmed with carrick the job remit had to be promotion or in the very least playoffs but they even felt short with that. Aside of Newcastle & Sunderland the area isn't saturated with much else.

kentonclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 5:35 pm

Talking of Dyche you don’t see him short listed for many of the vacancies in the Championship. Owners seem to prefer a left field overseas appointment.

Would Sean lower himself to championship level?

RVclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 3:34 pm

Most clubs are using xG (along with other underlying data metrics) to assess manager performance now (along with other analytics). We definitely had Lee Mooney heavily involved in appointing a manager this last time. Arguably, the better performing clubs (Brentford and Brighton) set the pace for that years ago, with others now playing catch up - I’m not sure why it’s spoken down on by fans so often.

Depends what ‘well backed’ means, I think some of the business they did was really poor and the squad last season wasn’t play off worthy (eg there were some on here who saw Iheanacho & Whittaker sign for them and think wow what amazing signings, when in fact the former was completely unfit and couldn’t run, while the latter offers nothing off the ball too).

My personal opinion is that he is a good manager, give him the right environment and he’d deliver.

So he's **** at recruitment as well.

RVclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 4:04 pm

I take your point regarding how xG is used incorrectly by some in your example provided, I recall that one myself. But still that doesn’t alter the fact that most of the top performing clubs leverage data & analytics (xG and other), including for manager recruitment, and that is because it’s useful to better assess performance over time (though shouldn’t be the only assessment method). I don’t feel it is meaningless, if used correctly (which in itself is a challenge because the average fan isn’t skilled in data analysis).

I don't want to sound like a luddite here, as there must be something in it. Genuinely curious.

Aren't points over time as good an indicator as xG over time? If xG is literally 'expected goals' I'm not really clear yet why that's a better barometer than simply 'goals'. If you can't get your strikers scoring, surely that's part of the coach's remit too? Is your xG over performing a sign you're a good, yet unlucky manager, or are you just a bad coach who can't spot a good striker?

As for Carrick, a fair assessment would be, where did Boro finish in the league in comparison to their wage bill ranking? Hard to know (although Gibson may well), but I doubt there were many below them with bigger wage bills.

It's a brave chairman who announces an underwhelming new manager with "he may have failed in his previous job, but his xg was outstanding".

NottsClaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 5:57 pm

I don't want to sound like a luddite here, as there must be something in it. Genuinely curious.

Aren't points over time as good an indicator as xG over time? If xG is literally 'expected goals' I'm not really clear yet why that's a better barometer than simply 'goals'. If you can't get your strikers scoring, surely that's part of the coach's remit too? Is your xG over performing a sign you're a good, yet unlucky manager, or are you just a bad coach who can't spot a good striker?

As for Carrick, a fair assessment would be, where did Boro finish in the league in comparison to their wage bill ranking? Hard to know (although Gibson may well), but I doubt there were many below them with bigger wage bills.

xG rates the quality of chances - it simply means your team are getting into good areas and as RV says, over time is a general good indicaator of performance.

Does it directly mirror the league standings? No, of course not, nothing works quite like that.

It's not as simple as 'you can't get your strikers scoring, surely that's part of the coach's remit too' - it.... depends!

There are so many ways to answer that, and a simple paragraph on a football message board isn't enough. There can be a whole host of reasons from genuinely having strikers that underperform in their finishing relative to the rest of the league to 'variance' (aka bad luck).

https://www.thepokerbank.com/strategy/other/variance/

^ For me, it can be likened to this concept, which I think can be applied to many scenarios, including people's lives as a whole.

In essence, the underlying positive xG differential suggests that his coaching does roughly enough to finish in the top 5-25% in the Champ. Nothing to do with 'not being able to spot a good striker' - managers don't tend to be the ones responsible for that anyway!

Basically, if you can combine a 6, an 8, a false line, a double pivot and low block with a good xg you'll win the galactic super league.

Corway wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 5:53 pm

Would Sean lower himself to championship level?

I don't think he's getting a Premier league job.

jrgbfc wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 7:45 pm

I don't think he's getting a Premier league job.

Aye. I just dont see where he gets in currently. A struggling Sunderland? If he gambles and waits?

ŽižkovClaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 04, 2025 7:50 pm

Aye. I just dont see where he gets in currently. A struggling Sunderland? If he gambles and waits?

Potentially.

The likes of palace have gone. Villa is way beyond his reputation now.

Perhaps forest if they have a mare.

Bournemouth, Brighton and Brentford along with the likes of wolves and co. would all have ideas above him. Fulham would never have been in for him.

Everton’s been done.

Very little else for him at the top level realistically. (That doesn’t mean I don’t think he’s capable. I genuinely thought he may have a shot at England at one point. Just the reality now).

Where does that leave him?

Boro. Maybe Leicester. Although that’s a gamble he doesn’t need to take right now. Sheff Utd?

Wrexham if they have a bad season? Weird one for Dyche really. Don’t see what’s out there for him other than underperforming championship sides, Rangers or tv work.

What pundits miss about the marginal gains concept is that it works in reverse, that is a manager can be a little bit crapper than others in minor areas and it makes a real difference to league position.

Carrick always seems Ok, we could let him off injuries like Doak and sales like Latte, but when push comes to shove he doesn't seem good enough.

Well given Russell Martin has just got the Rangers job there’s hope for all out of work managers out there.
Owen Coyle is dusting off his tracksuit as we speak and even Stan Ternant is checking whether his trainers still fit him.

Maybe these days all you have to do to get a job is get your teams to p-iss about with the ball at the back.

I assume Rangers offered him the job but he didnt fancy it

I can’t believe so many people on this message board (or maybe I can) take XG as seriously. It’s a dreadful ‘stat’. It’s someone’s opinion!

No of corners. Fact.
Amount of possession. Fact.
Yellow cards and red cards. Fact.
Headed duals won. Fact.
XG. Opinion.

It’s complete BS.

Jakubs Tash wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 05, 2025 10:19 am

I can’t believe so many people on this message board (or maybe I can) take XG as seriously. It’s a dreadful ‘stat’. It’s someone’s opinion!

No of corners. Fact.
Amount of possession. Fact.
Yellow cards and red cards. Fact.
Headed duals won. Fact.
XG. Opinion.

It’s complete BS.

I mean, yeah, can’t believe the worlds best performing football clubs use xG in their analytics, how dumb, they should just listen to clueless fans instead who say it’s BS, most of whom can’t even understand what tactics / shape their team plays in.

Oh and it’s not ‘opinion’ at all.

RVclaret wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 05, 2025 11:11 am

I mean, yeah, can’t believe the worlds best performing football clubs use xG in their analytics, how dumb, they should just listen to clueless fans instead who say it’s BS, most of whom can’t even understand what tactics / shape their team plays in.

Oh and it’s not ‘opinion’ at all.

But no professional person at a club anywhere in the world uses xG as a single stat which is what most fans who defend do.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/li ... MatchStats

I wonder if Palace said after the above match ahhh but our xG

Can't follow the logic of thinking fans are clueless, and most can't even understand tactics, just because they don't value xG.

claretonthecoast1882 wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 05, 2025 11:29 am

But no professional person at a club anywhere in the world uses xG as a single stat which is what most fans who defend do.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/li ... MatchStats

I wonder if Palace said after the above match ahhh but our xG

I am agreeing with you - used on a single incident, or without context, it’s useless! And of course no sane Palace fan would say that. Though Pep, post game, was adamant his team had enough chances to win.

Earlier this season I was debating with another fan on here, who stated our xG was consistently low, and used it as a mini stick to beat Parker with, by saying it wouldn’t get better and this is Parker. My argument was two fold:

- it lacked context of blending a new side together, and how we were focusing on defensive framework first, and missed some real creative sparks
- Parker had shown he can have chance creating teams at this level, I used Bournemouth’s xG per 90 over a season and said it was higher than Kompany’s Burnley, in the end time and a better balance in the squad saw performances improve (something we all agree on), which was also reflected in a significantly better xG p/90 as the season went on

In the end I was right, and my use of the data was correct.

taio wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 05, 2025 11:39 am

Can't follow the logic of thinking fans are clueless, and most can't even understand tactics, just because they don't value xG.

Never used that specific logic.

RVclaret wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 05, 2025 11:49 am

Never used that specific logic.

How do you know most fans can’t even understand what tactics / shape their team plays in?

Said it before but as someone who isn't particularly bothered by xG there is an aggressive and willful misunderstanding of it by almost everyone who argues against it on here.

taio wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 05, 2025 11:53 am

How do you know most fans can’t even understand what tactics / shape their team plays in?

Well, going off what I see on here and X from our fans, an example would be most thought we played a ‘number 10’ all season - same happened last season too, and the season before when JBG was apparently a number 10. A fairly basic and clear misunderstanding of the tactics and shape.