I've noticed this line of argument from the Allardyce critics and it distorts the full picture. We appointed Allardyce on the day of the West Ham game (before the match was played) after just being taken apart by a mid table Atalanta side 5-1 at home, and being humiliated 4-1 by a poor Southampton. After the Southampton game when the club decided to act we had won just one in 7 under Unsworth, having lost 5 in 7:
"The growing sense of crisis surrounding Everton intensified as caretaker-manager David Unsworth experienced a fifth defeat in seven games since taking temporary charge of the Goodison Park club following the dismissal of Ronald Koeman."
At the time of the appointment (before the West Ham game) , i'm fairly sure we had one of, if not the worst defences in the league for goals conceded and were only 2 points above the drop.
"The Toffees are now winless in 15 Premier League away games - their second longest run in the competition having reached 19 between December 1996 and December 1997."
"Everton have now conceded 28 goals in the Premier League this season - their worst tally after 13 games since 1958-59."
Before the club made their decision, the situation was not improving and we were in crisis. That is the absolute reality of the situation which has been proven with the above quotes.
After Allardyce came in, we then won 3 in 4 before going unbeaten in 6 with tough games against Liverpool and Chelsea, keeping clean sheets in 4 of them. Something we had failed to do in the league from Stoke on the opening day, to the West Ham game.
Things weren't improving under Unsworth and they had to act and make a sensible decision for the short term and they did exactly that by appointing Allardyce who has pretty much secured survival in 4 or 5 games. It's also strange how people ignore that Unsworth had a very favourable set of fixtures in his short time in charge. Leicester, Watford, Palace, Southampton and West Ham whilst Allardyce has already had to play Liverpool, Chelsea and Man United.
Not quite telling the whole story though are you mate, did Allardyce take any training sessions with the team before West Ham - no, did he choose the team or make any in game decisions - no, did he give the team talk and decide on tactis - no, did he in fact have anything to do with that game besides for maybe a 5 min chat with players prior to the game - no.
that game was the effect of removing the uncertainty around the manager position - and would have been the result of hiring almost any permanent manager, because he had zero influence on anything in the game.
Unsworth had a favourable set of fixtures to Allardyce - errm really did he?
First games in charge - Chelsea (AWAY) Leicester (AWAY), Lyon (AWAY) an in form Watford (HOME), Palace (AWAY) Atalanta (home - dead rubber game for us) Saints (AWAY)
so lets remove a meaningless result in Atalanta - before West Ham he had 6 games, five of them away from home, 3 of those against teams who had recently changed manager, the only home game he had was against Watford who where in good form
Allardyce - 'tough' set of fixtures also included at the time we played them 4 teams in the bottom 2 on form at time of our game, Newcastle, Huddersfield, Swansea and West Brom
Trying to make out Unsworth had it easy though with 5 of his first 6 games being away when we hadn't won since i think February away from home is a bit off though