When we appointed Chris Powell as manager the New York Addick (who seems to have gone into purdah for the summer) argued that we should have appointed an 'experienced' manager.
So what is the evidence for the benefits of experience? I have been looking at the book on Football Management by my colleague Sue Bridgewater who runs courses for the PFA and the LMA. She argues that experience should be considered as a factor in football success, but the evidence on its importance appears to be a little mixed.
There is certainly a significant difference between the number of years experience and the win percentage of managers. Those with no previous experience have a ratio of 33 per cent wins, but this goes up to 45 per cent for those with ten years or more experience.
Sue notes, 'Experienced managers have learned lessons through time, perhaps through making and learning from mistakes. They are also the survivors, those who through natural ability and learning over time have a proven ability to do the job.'
However, experience matters much more in the Premier League is far more important than for managers in lower leagues. Not surprisingly Premiership managers have more experience:
Premier League 9.6 years
Championship 6.5 years
League 1 4.8 years
League 2 3.6 years
Sue suggests, 'Managing star players in the full glare of the media spotlight is not easy and it may be for this reasons that managers who have been there and seen it are better able to manage at this level. There is something distinctive about managing these strong egos and management experience does help with this.'