And if we change like you want then it would be 5 in 5.

Can you name a club with a similar budget to ours, that changes manager all the time and has been successful?

It depends on how specific you want to be rgarding manger changes becasue the article creator states 5 years and only 3 managers in that time, but does that include also caretaker mangers which if you look at the second part of that title it states manger. so if we look at the stats from 2008-2013 which is five years we have actually had 7 mangers stretching from Dennis Wise thru our current manager Brian McDermott, but again I make this clear it depends on how specific you are trying to be.

We not had a Caretaker manger that's got the sack, we have had only 3 in all most 5 years.

since 2009-2013 all most 14.It's not bad by today's game.

Chelsea have had about 9 different managers since 2004.

And they have won every trophy there is to win and one of the most successful teams in England.

Arsenal keepr there and won nothing since 2005.

Blackpool had way lower budget lost there manager and went up the next year. It is not about changing manager all the time, it's about getting the right one and not a comedy one.

You should read what you write you opening article does not say anything about mangers getting the sack. Again go and check and actually read the stats!!

And 2009-2013 is only four years yet you state 5 years! wow you change like the wind.

Manchester United (as much as I hate to say it) are one of the most successful clubs in recent times, tegu changed their manager and look where they are now

Can you name a club with a similar budget to ours, that changes manager all the time and has been successful?
..........................................................................................

QPR - 16 managers since 2006
Crystal Palace - 12 managers since 2003
Hull City - 5 Managers since 2010
Southampton - 9 managers since 2008
Norwich City - 9 managers since 2006
Newcastle - 13 managers since 2004
Sunderland - 10 managers since 2006

Chelsea have employed some top managers since the initial Jose departure, but in the main their consistency in the league has suffered, and when you combine the money they spend and squad they possess they have been well off of a title challenge on 2 or 3 occasions.

We have one goal, achieve promotion, but not a lot of money to achieve this, so allowing a proven manager time is a prudent approach!

Your the one that should read it, not me.

It does not state 5 years at al,l all most 5 years and that is what it said.

And of course it's about getting the sack and you don't call a Caretaker manger a manager unless they get put in charge ti the end of the season.

Man united happend in the dark ages and wlli never happen again. Football has changed.

Well done TC good states, what I like to see.

Obvioulsy you don't understand english.

"We only had 3 different managers in all most 5 years."

That is a statment look up the word statement in fact it might help with you learning process.

If it is about getting the sack did you specify that in your original posting? plain and simply NO!

Again look at the title of a Caretaker Manger does it contain the word manger hmmm yes it does. Again you are not specific in your original posting.

It would be 4 surely?

Mcallister, Grayson, Warnock, McDermott

4 In 5 years is quite a lot.

Speaks volumes about the idiot running the club.

One way or another and what ever reason, got the wrong man in charge more often than not. Grayson you would even argue was the wrong man, as we scrapped it second time of asking with him.

No excuses having loads of managers, get the right one in first time.

My statement is right, and it is clear it is about sackeda magers. Your just addi g things for the sake of it.

Grayson, was in charge in 2009 at the start Warnock, McDermott up to 2013 oct

And that's in all most 5 years.

Not bad by today game at all. Derby had there's for 4 years go no where near prem.

TC stats back my point up nicely if there right.

You're using one example.

The two longest serving manager at the beginning of last season were the two most successful

Who where they?

What about Watford? Changed and in the playoffs, Huddersfield had to change to stop up, burnley are not top with a new manager, forest look better, I could go on.

All successful in there own right up to this point by change of manager.

Forests manager wasn't new though as he already knew their team.

Wenger and Ferguson were the two longest serving managers. David Moyes did very well with Everton. Same with Pulis at Stoke

Wenger and Ferguson will not happen again.

And is only 2 clubs out of 92 Not good odds is it?

And Moyes won nothing at Everton.

Pulis did well, maybe we should put him in charge?

Moyes only got a mid table club that were struggling to survive to perennial European candidates. That's nothing, is it?

Never said it was nothing, but they won nothing in all them years. And where are Man U now? Worst start in years.

It is still a small list, most clubs sack to win things.

And more have done so and that's my point.

Why you gotta act like you know when you don't know?

But it didn't work when we did it last time...

That's because he had to make a new team from pennys and had sell his best player.

And we was not as worse off then as we are now.

And It worked when we was in L1.

But the entire squad we have now were signed by your precious Warnock

Had to sign some one to put a team out, where would we be this time last year with BM in charge? He filled the team up with hunt and co.

We been down. And Warnock was sacked for far less then what bm done.