atypical_boro
Well-known member
TBF to him the line 'the role of the manager is, at best, overstated' was actually his own line. Never fully caught on though.
Is Warnock is a better manager than karnaka?
- Thread starter Redlips
- Start date
Marvanelli
Well-known member
Warnock is clearly the better manager. Especially in this division. No one comes remotely close to Warnock in The Championship.
During time as manager of 'Boro, obviously Karanka has been more successful, but that is purely because he had a lot more time. Aitor had a lot more money to spend also.
Lets compare them both once Warnock's time as 'Boro manager has come to an end.
As for the squads they both inherited.....I'd personally say Aitor inherited a far better squad than Warnock has.
Mogga left behind a strong spine in which Aitor used to gain promotion (Friend/Gibson/Leadbitter/Adomah/Ayala) (yes Ayala wasn't techically signed under Mogga, but that deal was pretty much done and dusted during Mogga's spell).
Those 5 players were huge and instrumental at us gaining promotion. Nearly all of them were massive leaders both on and off the field.
Whereas Woodgate/Pulis left a complete mess for Warnock.
During time as manager of 'Boro, obviously Karanka has been more successful, but that is purely because he had a lot more time. Aitor had a lot more money to spend also.
Lets compare them both once Warnock's time as 'Boro manager has come to an end.
As for the squads they both inherited.....I'd personally say Aitor inherited a far better squad than Warnock has.
Mogga left behind a strong spine in which Aitor used to gain promotion (Friend/Gibson/Leadbitter/Adomah/Ayala) (yes Ayala wasn't techically signed under Mogga, but that deal was pretty much done and dusted during Mogga's spell).
Those 5 players were huge and instrumental at us gaining promotion. Nearly all of them were massive leaders both on and off the field.
Whereas Woodgate/Pulis left a complete mess for Warnock.
JM14
Well-known member
He really didnt leave Karanka a strong spine, the club was a complete mess when Mowbray left, yes Karanka used these players but he transformed them in the same way that Warnock has transformed Mcnair, Dijkstee, Bola, Saville, Tav etc.
Marvanelli
Well-known member
Totally agree Karanka had a lot to do. Aitor definitely got more out of those players than Mowbray ever did.
But the simple fact is, Aitor had those players readily available to him instantly.
No doubting that Aitor done more with those players than what Mowbray done. Aitor used those players as the platform and the backbone of his success.
IMO Mogga left a strong spine (in which himself couldn't get the best out of) for Aitor. And Aitor got the maximum out of them.
The squad of players Mogga left for Aitor, were far better and stronger than those that have been left for Warnock.
JM14
Well-known member
Thats just like saying that Woodgate left a strong spine for Warnock though
Marvanelli
Well-known member
In what way is that like saying Warnock was left a strong spine by Woodgate?
Has Warnock achieved promotion with these players?
JM14
Well-known member
You say that Woodgate left a mess for Warnock, but he has used pretty much the same players and turned them into a good side
Exactly the same as Karanka inherited a mess and turned them into a good side
Marvanelli
Well-known member
Nearly every single manager when they first walk into a club will end up walking into a dressing room that need picking up. The levels of 'mess' can differ.
The mess Mogga left behind compared to that of Woodgate/Pulis had more leaders and a good core of that squad was used to gain promotion.
The squad left behind for Warnock is worse IMO. Even Warnock himself stated the squad lacked leaders,
Talk about nitpicking.
Don't know how anyone can say the squad Aitor inherited wasn't greater than the squad Warnock inherited.
JM14
Well-known member
Lets not think that Karanka walked into a solid team. That side was shocking under Mowbray and would have likely been in a relegation fight if he had stayed for the season.
Personally I still think Warnock inherited a decent squad that had just been managed terribly. Karanka certainly didnt have the quality of Roberts or Mcnair when he took over that team. Could even argue that Britt and Fletcher are much better options than Kamara/Emnes/Juke
Erimus74
Well-known member
Personally I think Karanka inherited a decent squad that was not been managed very good at that time
Erimus74
Well-known member
NW everyday of the week
JM14
Well-known member
Exactly like Warnock did
Marvanelli
Well-known member
Who said Karanka walked into a solid team?
Who said that side Karanka walked into wasn't shocking?
We were going one way under Mogga at that time, and it wasn't up. Aitor came in, sorted the defence out and used the spine of those players to build a promotion team.
Warnock has come in, and rescued us from what seemed like certain relegation.
Both Aitor and Warnock's first main aim was safety. Both achieved that.
Still IMO that squad Aitor inherited was better and stronger than that what Warnock inherited.
JM14
Well-known member
I still think we have a good squad and have done for the last few years. On paper at least we have some top players for this league, they have just been badly let down by the management since relegation
atypical_boro
Well-known member
I agree with a lot of what Marv said but I also agree with JM that we shouldn't credit or blame previous managers for current managers' performance, I'm not sure where this has become so prevalent but I suspect it is partly to try and protect Mogga's legacy a little. He was a great player for us, no doubt, no great shakes as manager frankly. Southgate was a great player for us and a terrible manager, that wasn't McClaren's fault and however well he does with England now is irrelevant.
Karanka did well, no one expected promotion from him as such and he achieved that, it was nothing to do with Tony Mowbray who had been gone nearly 3 years by the time it happened.
Monk did pretty poor, it was nothing to do with the squad he inherited as he had a load of money to spend and underperformed against those expectations. It wasn't Karanka or Agnew's fault that he couldn't keep us at least in the top 6.
Pulis did ok but not well enough. No one before him shoulders the blame for that, we should have been in the play-offs at least (as were the year before) and probably expect to win them.
Woodgate did terribly. Yes there was no money left but consensus view on here was that mid-table would be ok, as long as we didn't flirt with relegation. He'd inherited a team that finished 7th, lost a few and had little money to spend, but mid-table/top 16 would have been fine in his first season. He almost took us down. Far too big a fall and Pulis takes no blame for that.
Warnock has to get us top 10 to be considered a 'success' I'd say, top 6 would be fantastic. I won't be making excuses about Woodgate for him if he fails to do that. But I've no doubt that he will achieve it. At absolute worst we'll be in mid-table, where Woodgate should have had us.
Karanka did well, no one expected promotion from him as such and he achieved that, it was nothing to do with Tony Mowbray who had been gone nearly 3 years by the time it happened.
Monk did pretty poor, it was nothing to do with the squad he inherited as he had a load of money to spend and underperformed against those expectations. It wasn't Karanka or Agnew's fault that he couldn't keep us at least in the top 6.
Pulis did ok but not well enough. No one before him shoulders the blame for that, we should have been in the play-offs at least (as were the year before) and probably expect to win them.
Woodgate did terribly. Yes there was no money left but consensus view on here was that mid-table would be ok, as long as we didn't flirt with relegation. He'd inherited a team that finished 7th, lost a few and had little money to spend, but mid-table/top 16 would have been fine in his first season. He almost took us down. Far too big a fall and Pulis takes no blame for that.
Warnock has to get us top 10 to be considered a 'success' I'd say, top 6 would be fantastic. I won't be making excuses about Woodgate for him if he fails to do that. But I've no doubt that he will achieve it. At absolute worst we'll be in mid-table, where Woodgate should have had us.
Frozen Horse
Well-known member
Warnock.
AK was good for us, but he failed at Forest (for all that was a poisoned chalice), and is arguably doing slightly below par in Brum.
NW has been promoted 4 times from this division.
I don't want to be dismissive of AK, but he has a long way to go to be comparable to NW.
AK was good for us, but he failed at Forest (for all that was a poisoned chalice), and is arguably doing slightly below par in Brum.
NW has been promoted 4 times from this division.
I don't want to be dismissive of AK, but he has a long way to go to be comparable to NW.