On Saturday, Michael Skubala took charge of his 73rd game as Lincoln City manager.
That is the same number of games as Mark Kennedy managed. Both had their 73rd game against Burton Albion. Both lost 1-0. I hate the quirkiness of football, I really do.
I have seen on social media a couple of people believing that we’re no better now than we were under Mark Kennedy. I’m sure that’s not true, but as I have a rare Sunday with a little time on my hands, I thought I’d crunch some numbers and find out. As usual, I hadn’t actually got the numbers before I started, so I had a little leap of faith in hoping things are better now.
I have gone onto Wyscout, taken the attacking and defensive metrics for all of the games the two have managed, and then started breaking them down so we can do a comparison. I have removed cup games, so we’re only dealing with league fixtures. I think that is fair – numbers for games against West Ham, Southampton, Manchester City U21s and Chesham would only serve to skew the real figures.
I have then done some proper crunching, working out totals for a number of metrics. It turns out this isn’t entirely fair, as Michael Skubala has managed more league games than Kennedy did – 58 to 63. So, I’ve also changed it to stats per 90 minutes, to get a fairer reflection of what, if anything, has changed, and if we are better off.
Win Percentage
It’s worth pointing out that in terms of overall win percentage, including cup matches for this, Michael Skubala is at 41.1%, compared to 34.2% for Mark Kennedy. Skubala’s numbers have only been bested by Danny Cowley, John Schofield and Graham Taylor in the last 50-odd years, while Kennedy is behind the likes of Michael Appleton, Gary Simpson, Chris Moyses and Peter Jackson.
If we’re looking at just league matches, then Kennedy’s win percentage is actually 32.7%, lower than John Reames and almost on a par with Phil Stant’s overall records. Michael Skubala’s is 39.6%, still stronger than Colin Murphy and Keith Alexander’s overall records.
Of course, the level of opposition matters a lot here, but in real terms, Michael and Mark probably have similar numbers. I did a quick tot up, and in the games Michael Skubala has managed I think he faced former Premier League opposition 20 times, with Kennedy squaring off against former big boys around 17 times. That’s just to underline the level of opposition has been largely the same.
Attacking Metrics
It’s pertinent here to remember the numbers are per 90 minutes, so there may not seem a huge difference. However, if one manage has 1.5 goals per game, and another one goal per game, it means we’re scoring 50% more goals under one than the other.
It’s not quite that many, but it is more for Michael Skubala’s side. We average 1.38 goals per game now, whereas under Mark Kennedy, we averaged 1.07 per League One game. Mark Kennedy’s side did underperform xG a little, with 1.15 expected goals per game. Michael Skubala’s side outperformed the xG numbers overall, 1.36 expected to 1.38 scored.
We take more shots under Skubala as well – 10.13 per game compared to 9.56 under Kennedy. Accuracy is almost the same, Skubala’s side with 37%, Kennedy’s with 36%. As expected, we do less counterattacking currently, 0.97 counterattacks per game, with 1.54 under Mark Kennedy. It amuses me to see such a big difference, and then for people to say we play exactly the same style.
Under Kennedy we were definitely a counterattacking team, but under Skubala we get down the sides much more. His side has 14.63 crosses per 90, whereas under Kennedy that figure was just 11.96. Accuracy is better as well – Skubala’s men have 35% crossing accuracy, Kennedy’s just 28%.
Duels
Wyscout uses duels as a metric, offensive, defensive and aerial. As a perceived long ball side, you’d expect us to have far more aerial duels now, but that isn’t the case. Kennedy’s side contests 64.84 aerial duels per game, winning 43%. Skubala’s side contest fewer – 62.56, with a slightly better success rate of 44%. Odd, isn’t it, how perception skews reality? Interceptions and clearances are more or less the same – Kennedy’s side had 47.88 interceptions per game and 21.65 clearances, with Skubala’s achieving 48.06 and 21.16, respectively.
Offensive duels are almost identical – 61.81 v 61.84, ever so slightly in Skubala’s favour, but close enough to be judged as level. Success rate is virtually identical as well, 22.79 v 22.29 in Kennedy’s favour, but again, almost identical. Defensive duels are almost the same as well – 71.95 v 70.67 in Kennedy’s favour, with success rates of 46.25 v 45.79 in our former bosses’ favour. Those numbers suggest that perhaps some aspects of our approach is very similar.
Opposition
Of course, the game isn’t all about us, there’s 11 men standing opposite looking to put us off what we’re doing. With that in mind, how do we do in terms of stopping them?
We conceded more under Mark Kennedy, 1.04 goals per game compared to 0.98 under Skubala. We concede less xG now as well, with Kennedy’s side giving up 1.28 per game, but Skubala’s just 1.05. We also concede fewer shots now as well, 9.79 per game for Skubala, down from 11.60 under Mark Kennedy.
Incidentally, one of our issues this season is the opposite to Skubala’s overall numbers. In League One this season, we’ve conceded 1.18 goals per game, from an xG of just 0.99. In real terms, that means we concede a goal more than we should every five or six matches. In Mark Kennedy’s full season, it was the opposite, conceding 1.02 from 1.33, meaning we stopped a goal we should have conceded every four or so matches.
There’s a stat called positional attacks, which is an open-play attack which is not a counterattack. We concede far fewer of those per game as well – just 28.57 per game, compared to 32.95 under Kennedy. Under Kennedy, 22% of those attacks resulted in a shot, 7.14 per game. Under Skubala, 5.67 result in a shot, down to 20%. However, counterattacks are more or less the same – we are hit on the break 0.90 times per game now, compared to 0.88 under Kennedy, with 51% resulting in a shot.
Under Skubala we concede fewer corners (5.30 v 4.79) and fewer penalties (0.11 v 0.06). We have fewer crosses coming into the box (18.02 v 15.05), underlining my belief that we are a better overall unit. However, under Kennedy we got fewer yellow cards per game (1.79 v 2.21) and conceded fewer fouls (10.54 v 12.60) although we are fouled marginally more as well (11.76 v 10.96).
Conclusion
Here’s the agenda bit, right? No, seriously, the numbers do suggest that we are in a better place than we were under Mark Kennedy. When the former boss took over, it was summer, so he didn’t have to pick up the pieces of another man’s work. We finished 11th in that season, and when he left us in October 2023, we were 16th in the table. Under Michael Skubala, we finished 7th, and we’re currently 13th. Our final finish was four places better, and our current place is three places better. I appreciate that’s a rudimentary approach, but how else are we to define success? I could start talking about budget tables, but I know that would get groans.
In all honesty, both managers did decent jobs. Mark Kennedy outperformed our budget in his full season, Michael Skubala did last season and he is doing again this season. The reality we have to face is that while we argue about which managers were better (maybe I should do Michael Appleton’s first 73 games), outside forces have more of a say in where we finish. The man in the dugout is only a factor in a much bigger picture.
You must be logged in to post a comment.