Which surely must beg the question, is he actually any good as a manager?
His first managerial job was at Swindon, where he had a win rate of less than 27% and took them down to League Two.
If, as you say, his success at Notts County was mostly because their players were better than the opposition, then what does he bring to the table?
He's lost almost half of his 34 games as Swansea manager and the football we play is awful. A good manager/coach would get the best out of the players in the squad, even if it means playing a different style of football.
Again on Saturday, we're hearing "we controlled the game and were unlucky". That's the same thing we heard after Boro, West Brom, Sheffield United and now Blackburn, all of which we lost without scoring a single goal.
That means it's not unlucky and if we are "controlling" games that we are losing and not scoring in then how does the manager not realise that he needs to mix it up and try something different?
There's a difference between "controlling" a game and the opposition allowing us to have the ball, then waiting for a mistake and punishing us. It's exactly what we watched for two years under Martin. Just look at how Leicester won the Premier League, they would sit deep then nick the ball back, play it over the top to Vardy and he'd score. Probably had less than 30% possession in most games but it was by design because they didn't want the ball until the counter attack option was on. I'd say they had more "control" over the games than the opposition did, it doesn't always equate to who has the ball the most