um pahars

He was a Saints fan though.

The years go by and I must have seen every mock up of these, but they still never fail to make me p1ss myself. Can still remember a 30 minute phone conversation with Exit2 on the night of the unveiling when we only managed to get about 5 words in between the fits of giggles. These pics are instant pick me ups!!!

Go back on the search function and you'll refresh your memory. Lowe had the pair lined up well before he actually got back in at SMS.

Rich, methinks you're taking the ether of the internet a tad too serious. 'Twas never a James Bond, more a Simon Templar. As for the exaggerations, well sadly most were actually true, or were they?

You're as gullible as I was with regards Wilde if you believe him when he said Pearson was being "released" due to financial reasons.

Not the toughest draw so that's a positive, but certainly not an exciting one taunts going to tempt me in to making the journey north.

As I mentioned above I think Lowe should be given credit for delivering the stadium and helping set up an infrastructure that brought the club in to the 21st century. Although the previous board had started out down the new stadium route, they seemed to be struggling to really get it moving. Whether they could have used the SKY monies and delivered SMS is something we will never know. Always thought Staplewood was over hyped as was Lowe's claims of starting the Academy, I think he did reinvigorate it with some judicious decisions. But at the same time we shouldn't forget that Lowe squandered that legacy through a series of poor decisions that led to relegation and ultimately administration. Poor decisions that continued throughout our first season in the Championship. Given our cost structure (inc a rather expensive "mortgage"), the huge drop in income and what had happened to many other teams who fell out of the top flight around that period, then unless (a) we got repromoted in 2 years, or (b) found new investment to plug the holes we were always destined for a visit from Mark Fry. (Should I trot out the Man United of the South speech and suggest you were sexually aroused by that ;-) )

Harry Redknapp might be our pantomime villain, but his managerial record is fairly decent and as others have said whilst he might not be one of the top stellar managers, he is some way up the managerial list. IMHO there's certainly more managers below him than above him if you could come up with a league table. I think our view is tainted by his Portsmuff connections and also the debacle that was his tenure here with us. He came on a rebound, was never the right man for the job and was asked to work in a culture and set up that was alien to his method of operating. Woodward probably wasn't a bad shout when taken in isolation, but combine it with the context of restructuring following relegation and having to work alongside Redknapp, it was always going to be an uphill task.

Indeed. Not mega millions, but a few million to fill in some of the losses whilst we regrouped. Wilde failed to back up his promises of investing money and failed in finding others to aid him in that respect.

Have no idea why we've jumped to would he have done this or that, I merely answered your question of who would have been up for the job.

Stoneham was already well under way when the reverse takeover came upon us, (think within days of the takeover planning permission was granted), so the big question is, would the old board have been able to oversee Stoneham and/or would they have had the ability to deliver St Mary's???? On the plus side, the influx of SKY monies would have made their task easier, on the negative side, they hadn't shown much evidence of driving on in the past.

You asked who would be up for the job, I provided an answer. Any other candidates will be purely conjecture (either way) and as for success, hypothetical.

I do admire your ad hominen attacks LOL. The main reason plenty of those didn't go in to administration was because sugar daddies/external investors covered the losses following their relegation. Take away those cash injections and you have a huge black hole that many clubs, including us, succumbed to. And how can a hypothetical situation rankle anyone?? You'd have to be weird to get wound up about something you can't prove one way or the other. And of course using your same simple logic we could always say for certain that a process that started and ultimately ended with Lowe saw us go in to administration (but of course as we all know, things were a little bit more complicated than that).

Two years of parachute payments keep the wolves from the door. Of course administration was not guaranteed, but your initial claim that no other club of our size went in to administration is wide of the mark. At that time in football the gulf between the Premiership & Championship was soooo big that every club suffered terribly, with many going in to administration and others only avoiding it by having a sugar daddy. It would be harder to find clubs of our size and stature who managed themselves well following relegation, than it is to find those who struggled.

if you go back to his early teams at Leicester in the third tier they were heavily populated with youngsters and players coming through the youth set up (plus a few youngsters loaned in). http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?8760-Nigel-Pearson-He-only-plays-old-carthorses-who-are-expensive!&highlight=Leicester#.UuUVxjLfWSM

But now you've changed tack from (a) who would have taken the job? to (b) would he have kept us up? One answer to (a) is quite simply Pearson, but as for (b) no one knows.

Was hard to judge him one way or the other given than he had only been here for three months or so, but he met his short term targets and there was a semblance of "normality" during his short tenure (with hindsight he's proved a decent enough manager with Leicester though). Not sure he would have been able to keep the wolves from the door with a promotion though!!; Response was more directed towards Turkish who was doubtful anyone would have taken such a basket case of a job.

Nigel Pearson??

But sadly during that era, any club who were relegated from the top flight almost certainly then booked themselves in for a visit from the administrators not long after, with only those lucky to have or find a sugar daddy (or quickly repromoted) escaping this fate. Almost as certain as night follows day, the fall out from relegation required a huge restructure, large amounts of investment or a date with administration. And contrary to your claim above plenty of clubs went in to administration (with almost every other relegated club in that period only avoiding administration by having a sugar daddy to bankroll them through the initial years). Without outside investment to tide us over or quick repromotion, then I'm afraid administration was nigh on inevitable, another symptom of the initial relegation from the top flight. All three (or was it four or even five) of the various management teams that were at the helm in the Championship failed in their attempts to get us promoted, failed in attempts to bring in cash to tide us over, and failed to balance the books (and I criticised every one of the various permutations that failed, although Mr Crouch gets some serious latitude for sticking his hand in his pocket in our darkest days and bringing us the closest to washing our face).

An interesting response to a somewhat comprehensive rebuttal of your claim that it was only us who suffered financial hardships following a relegation from the top flight. onwards and upwards pal.

Interestingly both the Clubs who went down with us in 2005 suffered financial difficulties with Palace really struggling and Norwich only keeping their heads above the water due to injections of funds from their main shareholders. The year before saw Leeds, Wolves & Leicester relegated. Wolves got a new owner to stabilise them, Leicester had not long come out of administration following a previous relegation and once again struggled until Mandaric propped them up with £££ and then there is Leeds!!! West Ham, Sunderland, Birmingham are others relegated around the same time and all struggled financially, needing big money investors to keep their heads above the water. Ipswich entered administration, whilst others such as Sheffield United have continuously struggled, Derby went in to receivership from an early 2000ish relegation and struggled again after another relegation. Coventry, relegated in early 2000s are an absolute basket case. Sheff Weds are still struggling after their fall from the top flight and think Forest only stayed afloat due to tens of millions pumped in by their former Chairman. Newcastle needed millions from Ashley to keep them afloat following their relegation (same can be said for Blackburn, Boro, Wigan etc). Hull and Portsmouth needed restructuring to differing degrees!!!! Given the huge drop in income following relegation in the early days of the Premier League, many clubs have consistently struggled to keep their heads above the water with most, like us, unable to balance the books (and those that avoided administration only doing so by huge injections of £££ from owners/shareholders/new investors). The recent change on parachute payments might help, but we are still seeing the likes of Bolton run up huge debts following relegation. In his early days I though Lowe had much to be proud of, notably overseeing the move to the new ground (SKY + Council + support certainly helped, but he delivered it) and a decent team on the pitch. In many areas he also dragged us in to the 21st century. Sadly I think like many others in football, his ego then spiralled out of control. He was culpable for a series of poor decisions that led to our relegation in 2005, then for me without new ££££ coming in, or a quick repromotion [sic], then administration was almost inevitable.

You couldn't be more wrong in one post. it is not illegal to trade in debt, and nor is it illegal to trade whilst insolvent. Many companies have quite rightly continued to trade after the cash has run out, and I suggest you read up on this area (and the Blue Sky defence) before you start typing.

Sorry, should have made clear above reply was to SaintRichmond (& Saint86) about counter opinion to interim appointment on page 1

1) no one has confirmed or denied that he did resign 3 months ago 2) even if he did hand his notice in, I would imagine he had a 6 or even 12 months notice period, so his recent departure may still have been premature & somewhat unexpected. 3) I would imagine any replacement of a similar calibre is already in employment and therefore any appointment would have similar issues relating to notice periods, gardening leaves and protracted start dates. I certainly remember a delay when Kenyon moved from United to Chelsea. 4) an interim CEO from within is not overly desireable, but in circumstances like these somewhat inevitable.

But in his defence (and I'm no sycophant), he appointed the managers (and sacked them) and provided the environment and steer in which they and the players operated. Of course he had substantial financial backing which certainly helped, but as we have seen many times in football, purely throwing money at the problem will not guarantee success. I think it would be unfair to overlook his role in breathing life back in to the Club as I think he had a massive influence over the past 4 & a bit years. Certainly made easier with the backing he was given, certainly not irreplaceable and certainly not without his faults (many of which stem from the "ego problem" that somehow seems to afflict anyone who comes in to contact with a. Football club!!). I purposely only put £££££££s on the top line, as like you I'm not sure what the bottom line is saying!!!! The millions in TV monies must help ease the pressures, but not sure what he's been spending to achieve the success!!! As for selling on, it will be an interesting few months.