The fact is that we have been very consistent over this and the previous season. That is, we have gathered an average of approximately 1, 26 points average a game. If this is good or bad, well, that depends on the goals the club has set. Obviously, we should not forget Roberto Martinez first season, but by not ignoring that fact, we can also see a big decline. Moreover, that decline has now stabilize itself, in other words we have become a team who consistent perform an average of 1.26 points per game. The obvious question is why the drop in our performance, and furthermore why have this decline stabilize itself?
Have we lost any significant players? Has the squad undergone major changes? If not, the theory states that the longer the time, the more the manager can influence and change the contingencies or in other words develop the players and the team. If we accept that the performance has declined, and has stabilized itself slightly below average, then we also should accept that the players are not responding to the influence of the manager. To be concrete, his training methods, tactics, strategies, motivating skills, and so on. Because the only way we can evaluate the manager is the performance the players give on the pitch, the only way we can evaluate the teacher is bye the scores the students get on a test.
The manger and the teacher can say that they are doing progress, but as long we cannot observe it, it`s fiction. We can escape, and say that the cause lies in the future, but the future cannot influence on the present. So my guess, are as good as yours. Except i can say, on the basis of a consistent data sample that the probability of a change is very small. Obviously, you can reply and say that stranger things have occurred. For God`s sake, Leicester are winning the league. However, Leicester are not winning the league with Nigel Pearson as a manager, they are winning the league with Claudio Ranieri. The variables has changed.