What difference does that make!!? Comparing apples to oranges proves nothing, the fact is he has been proven correct with what he said! Iif Swansea had hired Allardyce instead of Bradley (for example) they wouldn't be in the mess they're in! Anybody with any clue about football can see for themselves what hiring Bradley did for the team, they went 'backwards', I am just amazed that 'some' people can't see the 'bleedin' obvious'!
So Bradley knows more than Alan Shearer, a man who has lived and breathed English football for his whole life, a man that has played at the highest level, a man that knows what it takes to score 30+ goals a season in Premier League football? Yeah right! The FACT is he said what he thought about hiring a man with no experience of English football and HE WAS PROVED RIGHT. We all knew it was a mistake and we were all PROVED RIGHT. Let me ask you something, imagine if it was 6 months ago and Swansea needed a manager to 'steer them' out of a relegation dogfight and they had a choice of Bradley or Allardyce who would you choose? Who would be the 'right choice'? Who would be 'most likely' to get you out of trouble? A man with a proven record who has done it many times IN the Premier League before or a man who coached the Egyptian national team?
Alan Shearer feared he'd KILLED teammate in 'drunken fight' and would be sent to jail http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/alan-shearer-feared-hed-killed-9426231 When asked if footballers are sometimes scrutinised and judged too harshly in the media for their antics, Shearer accepted that few would feel sorry for highly paid stars - but he did say times had changed.
is managing in the PL more difficult than say managing in La Liga or Bundesliga? I imagine more pressure in the PL but other than that. It's not as if the league has superior tactics. Maybe the game is played with more physicality, but I wouldn't buy into the whole English notion that managing is so more difficult in England.
Except that's not true at all, is it? Guidolin took over a team in the relegation zone and took them up to 12th in half a season. Yes he started the season poorly but the team were putting in some good performances and coming up just short against some very good teams. Clement has the highest win ratio of any Swansea manager in the PL and is averaging almost double the PPG that Bradley did. He's inherited the same problems Bradley had with a weak squad but has actually managed to at least get them organised and competitive, which is more than you can say for Bradley, who was looking increasingly clueless and his sides were being thrashed every week by the end. Even if we lose the remaining four games, Clement's record will be better than Bradley's. Bradley's side conceded three or more goals in EIGHT of his eleven games in charge. That's an absolutely abysmal record and anyone would be rightly sacked for overseeing it. His side were dismantled at Tottenham in one of the most one-sided games in Premier League history, and his last three games were all abject thrashings against mid-table or relegation-threatened sides (even Middlesbrough, who've barely scored all season scored three against us). We get it, you want Bradley to succeed because you're American football fans and you want to see fellow Americans do well in the PL, but anyone who suggests that Bradley was anything other than utterly out of his depth isn't looking at this objectively. We want what's best for our club, we don't care where the manager or players or owners come from or what they sound like or look like. There was absolutely nothing in Bradley's 35-year coaching career that suggested that he could keep a week PL team up, that's why we didn't agree with the appointment. Clement's record since taking over is 1.26 PPG, enough to be comfortable away from the bottom three if repeated over a whole season. So yes, if we go down a large part of that will be due to Bradley's incompetence.
I don't think anybody is claiming that its 'more difficult' but managing Shalke (as an example) would certainly be a better 'preperation' for English club management than managing the Tunisian national team (as an example). I'm sorry but it was obvious to everybody that knows anything about club football (and that includes Alan Shearer) that hiring Bradley was a mistake even 'before' he was hired. Everybody that thought that seem to have been accused of 'xenophobia' which is bollox, after everybody was proved right by his quite frankly disastrous tenure are we seriously supposed to believe that the only reason he was sacked was because he is an American man!!??? Like everybody has something against Americans?? Its not a 'dig' at Bradleys ability, he is obviously a man capable of coaching football at a high level, probably the highest (given time) he was simply woefully under-prepared for the job at hand, like I said previously to think you can just 'breeze' into a Premier League club with no experience and expect immediate success is arrogance (and that goes for 'other' Euro leagues too). Bradley needed to 'cut his teeth' before embarking on a journey that has simply damaged his reputation, he shouldn't have accepted the approaching 'train wreck' in the first place. Swansea's best option was to stick with Guadialin (scuse spelling), the only alternative would have been to hire somebody like Alladyce (a better coach than Bradley? Not necessarily but experienced with struggling Premier League teams? OH YES). Swansea made the 'wrong choice' and may suffer the consequences, Palace made the sensible choice and are now reaping the awards. Of course hiring somebody with experience isn't a guarantee of success either but it certainly shortens the odds of failure. The man Swansea has now has worked as a number two alongside 'giants' of European football, but does that make him the best man for the job at the 'other' end of the table? At least he is VERY experienced but all said and done no coach Swansea have hired since Guadilin has been an 'improvement' and yes hiring Alan Shearer would have been as equally 'daft' as hiring Bradley.
It mostly does not matter how many goals you lose by (unless there is a tie, that's what us BB/USA fans are hoping for now). A loss is a loss. If you lose the remaining 4 games, Clements record will be barely better then Bradley's. Bradley's and Clement's sample size is to small to mean much... Clement also has the added benefit of bringing in new players. What's important in the EPL is where you sit in the table. Bradley left the Swans in 18th place a few points from 17th. Bradley - 11 Games – 2 wins, 2 draws, and 7 losses, for 8 points. = .727 PPG Clement - 14 Games – 5 wins, 1 draw, and 8 losses, for 16 points. = 1.14 PPG If Clement losses the last 4 games the points per game will be.... Clement - 18 Games – 5 wins, 1 draw, and 12 losses, for 16 points. = .88 PPG Neither manager has done well to this point. If Clement can keep the Swans from relegation it's obviously a success, but he is not in a good spot at the moment. Clement is actually in the same spot Bradley left the Swans, and somehow Bradley is a failure and Clement isn't?
Bradley and the previous coach both did poorly, but maybe you should look at the lineups that they had to work with compared to clement. Players returning from injury plus the transfers changed the ballgame ccompletely. Maybe you should compare the lineups and look at the changes... Bradley is not an inexperienced coach by any means having coached the usmnt undefeated thru the group stage of the World Cup and having a win over Spain in the concacaf. He has had success at every level that he has coached. Swansea was a losing proposition to begin with. He inherited a lousy team and had no chance to make changes. The Swansea fans are to ignorant to accept the facts.
Your numbers show that statistically Clement has done much better than Bradley to this point and that even in the worst case scenario for the rest of the season he will still have performed better statistically than Bradley. And somehow they are the same?
18th place is 18th place. And no Clement has not done "much" better. If Bradley won 1 more game he would be at 1 PPG Average (really close to Clements 1.14) or if Clement lost 2 more of his games he would be at .71 PPG Average. We are talking about a 1 or 2 game shift in points. If Clement did "much" better then he would not be in the position that he is in.
1 or 2 game shift in points is not "much" better. It's better, but barely better. You used the wrong word. Barely does not equal "much".
This is what happened soon after Bob left . . . and during the transfer window But let's ignore this because some folks are determined to revise some history . . Bob needs to be the villain, here, when Swansea goes down.
Life is full of grays - or is it greys? - but I feel this situation is binary black and white. Deservedly or not, rationally or not, if Swansea goes down I will be pleased. Pathetic, perhaps, but genuine. Bob Bradley failed at Swansea, but it was an honest failure from a man who deserved better - greater support and more of a chance - from Swansea's ownership, players and fans alike.
This is a ridiculous argument. We were already four points from safety when he was sacked, and if we'd kept gaining points at the rate that we were under Bradley we'd now be on 24 - nine points from safety with four games left - almost certainly relegated. And even that ratio is being generous because the team was falling apart under him and not looking likely to be able to maintain even that poor haul. Also, if your team is conceding an average of three goals a game, how are you ever going to win? Have ridiculous games like the 5-4 against Palace every week? We've gone from an average of 2.7 under Bradley to an average of 1.6 under Clement, by the way. I don't deny that Olsson and to a lesser extent Carroll have made a difference, but Ayew hasn't done a whole lot and Narsingh is dreadful. However the biggest change isn't the personnel, it's how they've been set up and organised. Take a look at the games against Man Utd (home) and Spurs (away) for two examples of how he was completely incapable of setting up a team to compete at this level. League One sides would have been embarrassed to set up and perform like we did in those games. Will Clement have failed if we go down? Probably yes, however by any objective measure he's improved performances and results. If you can't accept that you're just being disingenuous and there's not much point in continuing this discussion.
Nobody as far as I can see, has denied that he's a honest person who tries his best. That doesn't mean he's anywhere near a good enough manager to come into a struggling Premier League club and keep them up.