Parkys previous League 1 promotions

  • Thread starter Deleted member 31333
  • Start date

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's only 11 years. 4 years before that:

07/08 - 92. 82
06/07 - 91, 85
05/06 - 82, 79 (The Colchester seasaon)
04/05 - 98, 86 (worse GD than Bolton year)

So in 15 seasons prior (excluding 19/20 cut short) Parkinson's Bolton team would have been promoted in 6 other seasons, so good enough in total for 7 out of 15 seasons. GD preventing that form being 8. In theory good enough to get promoted half of the time if he has a Bolton year. With a Colchester year, well it's the only sub 80 points total on there so very unlikely to get promoted with 79 again.

However it seems the points needed in increasing on average over time with the 6 90+ second point totals coming in the last 9 seasons, and 90 points would have bee enough to win the league in 2 of the 3 years second place didn't get 90 in those 9.
Yeah that’s why I stopped because it did look like the league started to progress from that point for whatever reason. I thought maybe because teams from the championship started to come down with more money. My point in general was to get used to it and not expect us to start putting teams away because it’s not his M O.
 
So you accept that fans were disappointed then? How was it ridiculous to expect Stendal to come to us?

I accept that some fans with ridiculous expectations might have been disappointed but they were always going to be - the 'nothing's ever good enough' type that we all know so well.

Stendel? Really? If they were disappointed with Parkinson then they'd have lynched SD for appointing a manager sacked by Barnsley with 3 points from his last 10 games. It's beyond belief how anyone can criticise Parkinson's track record but talk up Stendel.
 
I think SKP would have loved it but that would have been a massive gamble. Whilst I would like to see him given a chance here maybe in a few years time when we are established in the Championship or Premier league when he isn't expected to come and get promoted in his first season as a manager. I might be making this up but didn't Ainsworth turn us down along with someone else?

Out of those 3 I think there is only Pearson might have come and worked with our owner I think the other 2 would come under different ownership IMHO
Don’t think Ainsworth turned them down as they stated that Parkinson was the outstanding candidate. Could be wrong there though.
We don't need to hammer a division to get promoted? That's an odd way of interpreting the stats. We are not the club we used to be a few years ago and people are struggling with that adjustment.
You say that but with the financial advantage that the club has they really should be pushing to at least have the aim to do so. Surely you want to go up building something progressive?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I accept that some fans with ridiculous expectations might have been disappointed but they were always going to be - the 'nothing's ever good enough' type that we all know so well.

Stendel? Really? If they were disappointed with Parkinson then they'd have lynched SD for appointing a manager sacked by Barnsley with 3 points from his last 10 games. It's beyond belief how anyone can criticise Parkinson's track record but talk up Stendel.
I think people were attracted to Stendels style of play and the focus on developing players. I didn’t personally see the fit but you’re blatantly lying if you say you saw the fit for Parkinson at Sunderland.
 
I accept that some fans with ridiculous expectations might have been disappointed but they were always going to be - the 'nothing's ever good enough' type that we all know so well.

Stendel? Really? If they were disappointed with Parkinson then they'd have lynched SD for appointing a manager sacked by Barnsley with 3 points from his last 10 games. It's beyond belief how anyone can criticise Parkinson's track record but talk up Stendel.

You're pivoting off your rubbish argument to try and make another. Fans were disappointed with Parkinson which you said they weren't! Now you're trying to argue that it was only because "nothing is ever good enough" whilst at the same time making an argument that one of the front runners that fans would have been happy with at the time "wasn't good enough". You're all over the place.
 
Don’t think Ainsworth turned them down as they stated that Parkinson was the outstanding candidate. Could be wrong there though.

You say that but with the financial advantage that the club has they really should be pushing to at least have the aim to do so. Surely you want to go up building something progressive?

That's hugely overstated. Along with the highest revenue, we also have the highest overheads by roughly the same factor. Non-playing overheads were well over £20m when Donald arrived. We had some scope to offer higher wages, but even that is no longer there. The only new advantage may be that, once crowds are back, the wage cap will see us running at a trading surplus. That would allow a transfer budget, but would anyone with much more than a nominal transfer fee come for £2k/week or thereabouts?
 
Pearson went to the Premier League a month later, Cook was successfully managing in the Championship and Stendel went on to relegate one of the biggest clubs in Scotland, winning 15% of his league games.

You're always going to be disappointed if your expectations are totally ridiculous.
Totally ridiculous expectations for people wanting stendal as manager? Haway man. He went to a side that was already going down

As an aside, jack ross got sacked and joined one of the biggest clubs in scotland
 
Don’t think Ainsworth turned them down as they stated that Parkinson was the outstanding candidate. Could be wrong there though.
Don't think even our owner is enough of a f**kwit to say the top three candidates turned us down but Phil here said he would give it a go.
I'm sure we had at least one manager turn us down
 
You're pivoting off your rubbish argument to try and make another. Fans were disappointed with Parkinson which you said they weren't! Now you're trying to argue that it was only because "nothing is ever good enough" whilst at the same time making an argument that one of the front runners that fans would have been happy with at the time "wasn't good enough". You're all over the place.

People are talking about points total here. If we finished third with 95 points but behind two teams that got 99 and 101 - I'd be asking well how did they make it look so easy? If we finish 1st with 83 points then people will just complain that it wouldn't have got us promoted in another season. You can't win.
 
Don’t think Ainsworth turned them down as they stated that Parkinson was the outstanding candidate. Could be wrong there though.

You say that but with the financial advantage that the club has they really should be pushing to at least have the aim to do so. Surely you want to go up building something progressive?
Goes without saying that I, like any other fan, wants us to win every single game. But how often does it happen that a team completely pisses the league? Have realistic expectations with the squad we have.

I also don’t think we have that much of a financial advantage as you suggest.
 
Fans just weren't aware of him, which is why he wasn't 'wanted.' The reaction was largely surprise, not disappointment.

As soon as he was linked, he gained 2% in a preferred new manager poll on here. I’ve yet to speak to someone off here who wanted him or wants him now.

You are rewriting history and telling bare faced lies, which is hardly a surprise given your links to our liar of an owner.
 
That's hugely overstated. Along with the highest revenue, we also have the highest overheads by roughly the same factor. Non-playing overheads were well over £20m when Donald arrived. We had some scope to offer higher wages, but even that is no longer there. The only new advantage may be that, once crowds are back, the wage cap will see us running at a trading surplus. That would allow a transfer budget, but would anyone with much more than a nominal transfer fee come for £2k/week or thereabouts?
How is it overstated? How much do we invest in our academy per year for example compared to what other teams are spending on their squad? The amount we invest in our infrastructure should give us an automatic advantage straight away.
Goes without saying that I, like any other fan, wants us to win every single game. But how often does it happen that a team completely pisses the league? Have realistic expectations with the squad we have.

I also don’t think we have that much of a financial advantage as you suggest.

Quite afew there is the 90s if you look below. 3 teams breaking 100 in the last decade. The think the advantage comes when you look at our infrastructure compared to the rest of the league.


18/19 - 94,91
17/18 - 98,96
16/17 - 100, 86 (Parkys Bolton)
15/16 - 87, 85
14/15 - 99, 91
13/14 - 103, 94
12/13 - 84, 83
11/12 - 101, 93
10/11 - 95, 92
09/10 - 95, 86
08/09 - 96, 89
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It’s not though and we should. We have had a massive financial advantage on the rest of the league. We’re also in a year where the majority of the clubs are struggling due to Covid.
It’s as if Ipswich, Hull, Charlton and Peterborough don’t exist. We do not have a massive financial advanrage over all of the rest of the league at all. We did in our first year and blew it,
 
It’s as if Ipswich, Hull, Charlton and Peterborough don’t exist. We do not have a massive financial advanrage over all of the rest of the league at all. We did in our first year and blew it,
I’d say we’re in another league compared to those 3 teams for infrastructure and a good 3 ahead of Peterborough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top