sadoldgit Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Compare der Pardew dot com, compare der Pearson dot com. Simples! So then 13 games for Pardew and 3 wins and 13 games for Pearson and 3 wins. Pearson has hero status and Pardew gets a slagging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 not after starting old arguements are you? Think virtually all think Pardew is doing a decent rebuilding job. Whatever our relative views on NP are he is no more relevant to us now than Sturrock or Branfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 How dull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_stevo Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Pearson kept us up Pardew ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 I bet he will as well (and he had the disadvantage of starting in the relegation zone!) hth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 I bet he will as well (and he had the disadvantage of starting in the relegation zone!) hth! Yup. Simples! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Why do we have the same old tired worn out themes repeating? AP is so far doing ok, not good yet but maybe soon to come. Give the man, the team and the club some time for god's sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintalan Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 It's a hard one, staying in the Championship with the old regime or where we are with a new regime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Tiresome . Anyone with functioning brain processes can see that Nigel Pearson was/is a bloody good manager , I don't know what more he has to do to prove the point . A more interesting question would be : Why do so many on here seek to maintain long discredited points of view in the face of overwhelming evidence that they were wrong ? Ego problems I guess . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 yawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Pearson was a good manager and kept us up - although he did have a squad full of experienced season pro's to select from. I think he's proved his stock more with Leicester, he's built that team from the ground up and even a division higher, they're still winning regularly and pushing for promotion again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Presumably George Burley would be found on http://comparethealky.com Simples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niceandfriendly Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Pearson is a good manager and a decent bloke and I hope he continues to bring success to Leicester, and I think Pardew will be alright too. Not many people are seriously slagging off AP are they? Sober people aren't at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Compare der Pardew dot com, compare der Pearson dot com. Simples! So then 13 games for Pardew and 3 wins and 13 games for Pearson and 3 wins. Pearson has hero status and Pardew gets a slagging. Not many are slagging Pardew, some would slag Fregie or Wenger if they were our manager and we had just won the Chumps League, it goes with the territory. Difference between Pearson and Pards though is that perason got 3 wins in Division 2, whereas Pards has 3 wins in Division 3. Simples. I think Pards will be fine, he has a good backup team in place (unlike Pearson) and has been able to almost completely replace the first team. It is clear that the squad he inherited was in a shambolic state inherited from Wotte and JP (not to mention Lowe), and much the same could also be said for Pearson after the disasters of Burley, Dodd and Gorman. Anyone who still cannot see that Pearson is actually a very good manager is a bit of a plank. He was well respected before he joined us for his coaching abilities especially with youngsters (cf England youth set up) and working with top class managers and Bryan Robson. He just needed the break and we gave it him. Our old friend MM knew what he was getting and Pearson has not disappointed thus far. It saddens me that he was treated so badly by Lowe but that was par for the course, and I am glad to see the guy doing so well, even if it is for the **** that is Milan!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Tiresome . Anyone with functioning brain processes can see that Nigel Pearson was/is a bloody good manager , I don't know what more he has to do to prove the point . A more interesting question would be : Why do so many on here seek to maintain long discredited points of view in the face of overwhelming evidence that they were wrong ? Ego problems I guess . v defensive - not a single post negative against NP when you post this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Not many are slagging Pardew, some would slag Fregie or Wenger if they were our manager and we had just won the Chumps League, it goes with the territory. Difference between Pearson and Pards though is that perason got 3 wins in Division 2, whereas Pards has 3 wins in Division 3. Simples. I think Pards will be fine, he has a good backup team in place (unlike Pearson) and has been able to almost completely replace the first team. It is clear that the squad he inherited was in a shambolic state inherited from Wotte and JP (not to mention Lowe), and much the same could also be said for Pearson after the disasters of Burley, Dodd and Gorman. Anyone who still cannot see that Pearson is actually a very good manager is a bit of a plank. He was well respected before he joined us for his coaching abilities especially with youngsters (cf England youth set up) and working with top class managers and Bryan Robson. He just needed the break and we gave it him. Our old friend MM knew what he was getting and Pearson has not disappointed thus far. It saddens me that he was treated so badly by Lowe but that was par for the course, and I am glad to see the guy doing so well, even if it is for the **** that is Milan!! maybe I am a plank, or just have higher threshold for "very good" but think he still has more to achieve to be classed as very good. Personally would prefer Pardew at the moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fowllyd Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Not many are slagging Pardew, some would slag Fregie or Wenger if they were our manager and we had just won the Chumps League, it goes with the territory. Difference between Pearson and Pards though is that perason got 3 wins in Division 2, whereas Pards has 3 wins in Division 3. Simples. I think Pards will be fine, he has a good backup team in place (unlike Pearson) and has been able to almost completely replace the first team. It is clear that the squad he inherited was in a shambolic state inherited from Wotte and JP (not to mention Lowe), and much the same could also be said for Pearson after the disasters of Burley, Dodd and Gorman. Anyone who still cannot see that Pearson is actually a very good manager is a bit of a plank. He was well respected before he joined us for his coaching abilities especially with youngsters (cf England youth set up) and working with top class managers and Bryan Robson. He just needed the break and we gave it him. Our old friend MM knew what he was getting and Pearson has not disappointed thus far. It saddens me that he was treated so badly by Lowe but that was par for the course, and I am glad to see the guy doing so well, even if it is for the **** that is Milan!! Good post - I particularly liked that bit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 maybe I am a plank, or just have higher threshold for "very good" but think he still has more to achieve to be classed as very good. Personally would prefer Pardew at the moment I agree, Leicester did well last season because they held onto most of their squad and their promotion can be summed up in one word - Fryatt. Leicester are doing ok this season but are a bit in and out and nothing to suggest Pearson is a potential England manager of the future and I doubt he has what it takes to manage in the Premier League to get close to be very good. IMO Pearson has similar qualities to Keegan and relies on motivational abilities and running a tight ship but will always be lacking against tactically aware managers. Pardew started on -10pts and bottom of the league. When Pearson took over we were safe in 18th or thereabouts and with 2 games to go dropped us into the relegation zone and put our survival out of our own hands. Not very good and I suspect Carlisle fans will say the same. I wouldn't have employed him last season and I wouldn't have done so this season even with the benefit of hindsight as IMO he is more Bryan Robson than Brian Clough in terms of potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genk Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 Pearson & Pardew are both good managers. You can't compare their stats as it is two very different situation. Pearson had some very decent Championship players in his squad whereas Pardew has had to start from scratch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westofshannonsaint Posted 7 October, 2009 Share Posted 7 October, 2009 It's a hard one, staying in the Championship with the old regime or where we are with a new regime. true, at the time I wouldn't have minded Lowe coming back if he kept Pearson. and if he had stayed I think we would have stayed up last year and possibly not gone into administration, as things turned out, we are a league lower but alot more stable, with our new owner talking about progressing rather than selling off our best players to balance the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 It's like saying which is better. An Aston Martin or a pack of Jaffa Cakes. Both have undoubted qualities, but perform different tasks in different scenarios, so to draw comparisons is unfair on both of them. Pearson: No Money No Time Players lacking confidence and ideas tough fixture list Boardroom instability but... Some experienced players with undoubted quality Started outside the drop zone Pardew Lots of Money Will have time to get the team right Tallented squad Stable boardroom but... -10 starting possition High expectations Has to replace a lot of our better players who left, as well as the poor ones. Overall two decent managers, but there is really no fair way to pick a "winner" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 v defensive - not a single post negative against NP when you post this? You don't detect an implicit (agenda driven) criticism of Pearson in the OP ? As others have so elegantly pointed out a statistical comparison between NP and AP is invalid as the context of their respective Saints careers are very different . What should not be in serious debate is that Pearson (at the very least) is a good CCC/L1 manager , it seems to me that this was quite clear while he was with us and his subsequent record with Leicester proves the point . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 (edited) Wow, SadOldGit makes an original post.... I am concerned by certain analogies I see in Pardew's and Burley's approach, a much more interesting comparison than Pardew to Pearson. Pearson performed a minor bloody miracle for us, and has gone on to prove he is a good manager. The jury is very much out on Pardew, its much too early. Edited 8 October, 2009 by alpine_saint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 maybe I am a plank, or just have higher threshold for "very good" but think he still has more to achieve to be classed as very good. Personally would prefer Pardew at the moment but you would NickG, that's your blind loyalty coming out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 It's like saying which is better. An Aston Martin or a pack of Jaffa Cakes. Both have undoubted qualities, but perform different tasks in different scenarios, so to draw comparisons is unfair on both of them. Pearson: No Money No Time Players lacking confidence and ideas tough fixture list Boardroom instability but... Some experienced players with undoubted quality Started outside the drop zone Pardew Lots of Money Will have time to get the team right Tallented squad Stable boardroom but... -10 starting possition High expectations Has to replace a lot of our better players who left, as well as the poor ones. Overall two decent managers, but there is really no fair way to pick a "winner" Yes I would agree cannot see much to chose between them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 but you would NickG, that's your blind loyalty coming out. who would you prefer then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 who would you prefer then? How can you be sure that Pearson would have done worse than Pardew in our new era ? Pardew has a stable board room with no politics, and has been able to pick his players and his back-room staff. He has, in effect, been given huge lattitude to do his job compared to Pearson. Remember, Pearson has achieved what he has at Leicester with Mandaric looking over his shoulder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 Why don't you start a "compare the owner" thread, SOG? It would have equal relevance; i.e. not much at all. We are where we are. It's all water under the bridge. Move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 How can you be sure that Pearson would have done worse than Pardew in our new era ? Pardew has a stable board room with no politics, and has been able to pick his players and his back-room staff. He has, in effect, been given huge lattitude to do his job compared to Pearson. Remember, Pearson has achieved what he has at Leicester with Mandaric looking over his shoulder. not sure at all. would have liked him to stay when he left. Pardew has impressed me with his building of backroom etc and his experience. Sure NP would have done well for us - my gut feeling - and its only that, is Pardew will be better for us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 You don't detect an implicit (agenda driven) criticism of Pearson in the OP ? As others have so elegantly pointed out a statistical comparison between NP and AP is invalid as the context of their respective Saints careers are very different . What should not be in serious debate is that Pearson (at the very least) is a good CCC/L1 manager , it seems to me that this was quite clear while he was with us and his subsequent record with Leicester proves the point . maybe - I read it more as a defence of Pardew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 maybe - I read it more as a defence of Pardew. Why does SOG feel the need to defend Pardew? There aren't many on his back, as most accept the difficulties he has had to face since Lowe's inept running of the club got us relegated. He's just singing from the same sheet as Nineteen, because Pearson was hired by Crouch and dismissed by Lowe. That's the agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 who would you prefer then? Pearson. Why? Already proven he can get relegated club up at the first time of asking (not saying AP can't do it - we will not know for another 20 months) and every story I heard about Pearson from inside the club was very positive re his man management. I know SoG prefers Burley and uses statistics to back up his case but statistics lie at the best of times. When Bern is probably not 100% aware of is just how critical the situation was the day Pearson arrived. The club were in a virtual meltdown that week, not helped by the disastrous few games under Dodd and Gorman and the demoralised state Burley's complete lack of interest had left us in. Pearson walked into a crisis and by the skin of his teeth saved us. I honestly believe if Lowe had kept Pearson there is every chance we would have avoided admin and still been in the CCC. Not that would have been a good thing having now been bought by Liebher but one we would have all taken last April. NickG - I am not against AP at all. He talks very well - I have agreed with everything he says, but I am a little concerned that on the pitch he has made some obvious tactical errors and the team are not gelling as well as perhaps they should by now. My Reading and WHU contacts are very criticical of him citing his arrogance and stubborness but I will hold fire until after Xmas before really judging him. He has had a hard task and has signed some good players, but while we wait to climb the table it will be interesting to watch Leicester's progress this year to see how Pearson performs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 I find it so strange the negativity at best and bile at worst directed, towads Nigel Pearson. It is not lost on me that most of the dissenters were either, lowe supporters, anti Crouch or both. I don't need to look at statistics or games to win ratios, anyone who had followed us for the season when Pearson took over, will know that he picked up a throughly demotovated, uninspiring and luck lustre team that were heading for relegation and turned them around. Sure there blips along the way and it came down to the wire, but he did what he had to do in a very short period of time and regardless of which side of the fence your politics lay at that point in time, every Saints fan, should thank him and wish him well. His sacking is now a mute point as we will never know whether he would have faired any differently to the mighty dutch duo, but for those that continue to slate him with labels such as "Boot boy" etc. you do so at the risk of looking stupid, as with a title under his belt and one defeat in 11 in the championship (Very little spent & good use of the kids) (Yes that's the same championship they were relegated from) he looks very much on course to be a very good if not excellent manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 Presumably George Burley would be found on http://comparethealky.com Simples. link doesnt work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 It's like saying which is better. An Aston Martin or a pack of Jaffa Cakes. Both have undoubted qualities, but perform different tasks in different scenarios, so to draw comparisons is unfair on both of them. Pearson: No Money No Time Players lacking confidence and ideas tough fixture list Boardroom instability but... Some experienced players with undoubted quality Started outside the drop zone Pardew Lots of Money Will have time to get the team right Tallented squad Stable boardroom but... -10 starting possition High expectations Has to replace a lot of our better players who left, as well as the poor ones. Overall two decent managers, but there is really no fair way to pick a "winner" Very true but I will always take the qualities of the Aston Martin over the jaffa cakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 Pardew only gets a slagging from those who are a bit thick. Same as Pearson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 Very true but I will always take the qualities of the Aston Martin over the jaffa cakes. Let's hope you're never starving then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 I find it so strange the negativity at best and bile at worst directed, towads Nigel Pearson. It is not lost on me that most of the dissenters were either, lowe supporters, anti Crouch or both. I don't need to look at statistics or games to win ratios, anyone who had followed us for the season when Pearson took over, will know that he picked up a throughly demotovated, uninspiring and luck lustre team that were heading for relegation and turned them around. Sure there blips along the way and it came down to the wire, but he did what he had to do in a very short period of time and regardless of which side of the fence your politics lay at that point in time, every Saints fan, should thank him and wish him well. His sacking is now a mute point as we will never know whether he would have faired any differently to the mighty dutch duo, but for those that continue to slate him with labels such as "Boot boy" etc. you do so at the risk of looking stupid, as with a title under his belt and one defeat in 11 in the championship (Very little spent & good use of the kids) (Yes that's the same championship they were relegated from) he looks very much on course to be a very good if not excellent manager. You missed off anti-McMenemy. Why was Pearson employed? Was it for his managerial credentials to lift teams to safety via a 93rd minute goal in your team's last league game of the season courtesy of your goalkeeper? 8 years later after working for managerial gods such as Bryan Robson did Crouch and McMenemy recognise that Pearson was just just the man for us having not actually worked as a manager for all those years? A strange appointment and it makes you wonder where they got his name from, doesn't it? Perhaps they thought they needed a man to hone Kelvin's kicking skills to shooting accuracy just in case and with two games to go it looked that even a 93rd minute strike from Kelvin in our last game of the season was not going to be enough unless others slipped up which thankfully they did. Pearson helped us limp over the line and no doubt hindered us along the way as well as many seem to have forgotten that abject 5-0 drubbing at Hull having beaten them 4-0 at home a few months earlier in the season. We were lucky with Pearson to survive as we were with Crouch and his big shadow telling him which way to turn allegedly and so it was hardly surprising lowe was going to be biting his hand off to employ the 'very good' manager, Nigel Pearson. Milan knows the score with regards finances and with his squad in League 1 just needed a disclipinarian and motivator, the equivalent of an NCO in the football manager ranks. Pearson fitted that bill and no need to head for the Officers mess to look for an expensive manager of real pedigree. IMO it won't be long before he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 Let's hope you're never starving then. Always sell the Aston and oranges grow on tress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clifford Nelson Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 Pearson. Why? Already proven he can get relegated club up at the first time of asking (not saying AP can't do it - we will not know for another 20 months) and every story I heard about Pearson from inside the club was very positive re his man management. I know SoG prefers Burley and uses statistics to back up his case but statistics lie at the best of times. When Bern is probably not 100% aware of is just how critical the situation was the day Pearson arrived. The club were in a virtual meltdown that week, not helped by the disastrous few games under Dodd and Gorman and the demoralised state Burley's complete lack of interest had left us in. Pearson walked into a crisis and by the skin of his teeth saved us. I honestly believe if Lowe had kept Pearson there is every chance we would have avoided admin and still been in the CCC. Not that would have been a good thing having now been bought by Liebher but one we would have all taken last April. NickG - I am not against AP at all. He talks very well - I have agreed with everything he says, but I am a little concerned that on the pitch he has made some obvious tactical errors and the team are not gelling as well as perhaps they should by now. My Reading and WHU contacts are very criticical of him citing his arrogance and stubborness but I will hold fire until after Xmas before really judging him. He has had a hard task and has signed some good players, but while we wait to climb the table it will be interesting to watch Leicester's progress this year to see how Pearson performs. Strangely enough Pearson never stood a chance to take us into last season. The Crouch board was to replace him with Pulis, topical today as the evidence is moving to Lincoln. 'Him who's name is never to be repeated' (unless they rename the bogs after him) had no intention of appointing him in the first place because he cost too much and he wouldn't have accepted becoming the manager of a boys team. NP did a good job when he came in and has shown since then that he is a good manager. AP came here under entirely different circumstances doing very different things. For the building job that is needed here AP has got the credentials, which NP somewhat lack, maybe. But would I have howled if he had been appointed? I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 Pardew only gets a slagging from those who are a bit thick. Same as Pearson. agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 Both are clearly decent managers that we were/are lucky to have in the respective situations we were/are in. I just thank our lucky stars we don't have Lowe around any more to scupper their efforts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 You missed off anti-McMenemy. Why was Pearson employed? Was it for his managerial credentials to lift teams to safety via a 93rd minute goal in your team's last league game of the season courtesy of your goalkeeper? 8 years later after working for managerial gods such as Bryan Robson did Crouch and McMenemy recognise that Pearson was just just the man for us having not actually worked as a manager for all those years? A strange appointment and it makes you wonder where they got his name from, doesn't it? Perhaps they thought they needed a man to hone Kelvin's kicking skills to shooting accuracy just in case and with two games to go it looked that even a 93rd minute strike from Kelvin in our last game of the season was not going to be enough unless others slipped up which thankfully they did. Pearson helped us limp over the line and no doubt hindered us along the way as well as many seem to have forgotten that abject 5-0 drubbing at Hull having beaten them 4-0 at home a few months earlier in the season. We were lucky with Pearson to survive as we were with Crouch and his big shadow telling him which way to turn allegedly and so it was hardly surprising lowe was going to be biting his hand off to employ the 'very good' manager, Nigel Pearson. Milan knows the score with regards finances and with his squad in League 1 just needed a disclipinarian and motivator, the equivalent of an NCO in the football manager ranks. Pearson fitted that bill and no need to head for the Officers mess to look for an expensive manager of real pedigree. IMO it won't be long before he does. Your anti Mcmenemy line seems to allude to the totally false allegation that his son was Mcmenemy's agent. I often wonder who started that little gem. Anyway as confirmed by Saints, Crouch and Pearson himself it is totally without merit and no fees or costs were paid to either, for hiring Pearson. As for a strange appointment, If the criteria was anything like an English manager who is used to working with kids...............it doesn't seem so strange and given we don't know how he came over in the interview process, it's hardly for us to judge. As you were one of the ones who continually slated him..... does it grate a bit he won the league? Once it looked like promotion was assured you told us all his real test would be the Championship..... 1 defeat in 11, little money spent and using the kids as well, looks pretty good to me. You also told us that he only won the title because he kept the same squad, which in the most part he has again, but that squad under another manager proppred up the league, but with Pearson, have a shot a promotion. Looks like a sound peice of business from Mr mandick and can't see him ditching this one just yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandwichsaint Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 It's like saying which is better. An Aston Martin or a pack of Jaffa Cakes. Both have undoubted qualities, but perform different tasks in different scenarios, so to draw comparisons is unfair on both of them. Pearson: No Money No Time Players lacking confidence and ideas tough fixture list Boardroom instability but... Some experienced players with undoubted quality Started outside the drop zone Pardew Lots of Money Will have time to get the team right Tallented squad Stable boardroom but... -10 starting possition High expectations Has to replace a lot of our better players who left, as well as the poor ones. Overall two decent managers, but there is really no fair way to pick a "winner" You missed off 'no pre-season' FFS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 You missed off anti-McMenemy. Why? Was he our Chairman at any point? Why was Pearson employed? Was it for his managerial credentials to lift teams to safety via a 93rd minute goal in your team's last league game of the season courtesy of your goalkeeper? 8 years later after working for managerial gods such as Bryan Robson did Crouch and McMenemy recognise that Pearson was just just the man for us having not actually worked as a manager for all those years? He obviously wasn't totally a non-entity, was he, or else he would not have had his association with the England youth team, would he? A strange appointment and it makes you wonder where they got his name from, doesn't it? Perhaps they thought they needed a man to hone Kelvin's kicking skills to shooting accuracy just in case and with two games to go it looked that even a 93rd minute strike from Kelvin in our last game of the season was not going to be enough unless others slipped up which thankfully they did. Pearson helped us limp over the line and no doubt hindered us along the way as well as many seem to have forgotten that abject 5-0 drubbing at Hull having beaten them 4-0 at home a few months earlier in the season. This would be the same Hull who were poor at the beginning of last season, but who pulled themselves up to be promoted to the Premiership, so patently a much better team than us at the time. This was also the Hull that began their time up there quite well, beating Arsenal 2-1, Tottenham 1-0, lost narrowly 4-3 to Man Ure and drawing 2-2 with Liverpool. Obviously a totally ****e team when we played them a second time, eh, Nineteen? We were lucky with Pearson to survive as we were with Crouch and his big shadow telling him which way to turn allegedly and so it was hardly surprising lowe was going to be biting his hand off to employ the 'very good' manager, Nigel Pearson. More fool Lowe and his massive ego. And if you were consistent in your arguments (not a hope) then you'd also be asking what possessed Lowe to hire these two Dutch non-entities with far less experience in English football than Pearson. Milan knows the score with regards finances and with his squad in League 1 just needed a disclipinarian and motivator, the equivalent of an NCO in the football manager ranks. Pearson fitted that bill and no need to head for the Officers mess to look for an expensive manager of real pedigree. IMO it won't be long before he does. Again, you showcase your inability to be consistent. Why did Leicester need a disciplinarian and a motivator and we didn't? Even in the division above, we didn't exactly head for the Officers' mess to look for an expensive manager with a pedigree, preferring instead to chance it with a couple of foreign mercenary corporals. At the start of last season, many had the foresight to envisage the situation whereby Pearson would pass us on the way up whilst we went in the other direction. So it has transpired. I know that you and SOG find that hard to swallow, but that's how the cookie crumbles. As Pearson has proved his pedigree in this division, there is scant reason why MM would sack him, is there? Time you got this chip off your shoulder. Lowe, Wilde, Crouch, McMenemy, Askham, etc, are all history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 Strangely enough Pearson never stood a chance to take us into last season. The Crouch board was to replace him with Pulis, topical today as the evidence is moving to Lincoln. 'Him who's name is never to be repeated' (unless they rename the bogs after him) had no intention of appointing him in the first place because he cost too much and he wouldn't have accepted becoming the manager of a boys team. NP did a good job when he came in and has shown since then that he is a good manager. AP came here under entirely different circumstances doing very different things. For the building job that is needed here AP has got the credentials, which NP somewhat lack, maybe. But would I have howled if he had been appointed? I don't think so. Clifford - you are well-informed but your timing of events a little askrew. Yes Crouch had sounded out Pulis and had put Dodd and Gorman in as an interim measure until Pulis negotiated leaving Stoke (assuming they hadn't gone up - which of course they did) but was then forced to appoint NP when Dodd and Gorman's team self-imploded at Bristol. Pearson made such an impression on Crouch he would have kept him on without a doubt had Lowe not returned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 'Him who's name is never to be repeated' (unless they rename the bogs after him) had no intention of appointing him in the first place because he cost too much and he wouldn't have accepted becoming the manager of a boys team. I still find it hard to believe that Pearson would have cost more than the double Dutch and the other guy who came in with them. As for the assertion that Pearson was unprepared to work with the kids, again that is unsubstantiated. Um Pahars would have jumped on this, as he has done several times already in the past. Several of the players in Leicester's promotion team and indeed his current team are youngsters. There was not an edict that the team had to be entirely composed of kids; that was purely an integral part of the mad experiment and was the reason it floundered. I'm sure that Pearson would have had a blend of young and older players with experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 what i find funny about the whole "playing the kids arguement".. arry was slated for not wanting to play the kids and said we would get slaughtered if we did....the calls on here "to play the kids" and not the "wasters" were defening.. seems he was right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 perhaps there should be one thread where we are all allowed one post, to pass judgement on Crouch / LMC/NP/Lowe/Burley etc and then we all move on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 8 October, 2009 Share Posted 8 October, 2009 what i find funny about the whole "playing the kids arguement".. arry was slated for not wanting to play the kids and said we would get slaughtered if we did....the calls on here "to play the kids" and not the "wasters" were defening.. seems he was right He was right. Most of us agreed with him at the time. Shame he had to prove it to Lowe by allowing us to be defeated to Northampton. Harry knew where Lowe was going with the kids nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now