Babylon Posted 15 July 2015 Author Share Posted 15 July 2015 How does he compare to Peter Taylor for premier wins? Yeah... because it's comparable taking a team from league one and keeping them up, to someone who took a team in the top 10 of the premier league and systematically dismantled the team, progressively getting worse with each player of O'Neills he replaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inckley fox Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 No judgement from me on Pearson in this post, but......................................... Our playing staff was so much better than at least six other teams last season. We were rooted to the bottom after 29 matches. We escaped relegation through the last nine matches. These are clearly the facts.The players we had on our playing staff were at least in part down to Pearson ( and Steve Walsh of course). Sunderland, Burnley, Hull, QPR, WBA and Villa at least had inferior squads to us. Base your judgements on Pearson's capabilities on these irrefutable facts! Of course I understand what you're saying, but the league table doesn't respect the order in which the games were won, just like a game doesn't respect the times that the goals are scored. It would be awful to demean O'Neill's Play-off triumph because we sealed it in the last minute of added-on time, or his first League Cup because the equaliser didn't come until the last couple of minutes. There's no reason to look at the distribution of Pearson's results as a criticism. When things were the other way round in 2012-13 some of us were reluctant to heap praise on him for the 6th place finish because of how poor the final third of the season had been. There's no reason we should take praise away from him now just because 2014-15 was the other way round! Ultimately, we have to be realistic in what we look for from Ranieri. I dearly hope we go onwards and upwards, but he's come into a difficult situation here. One report dubbed him the 'anti-Pearson', which tells you what a bold statement this is by the board. While Pearson's legacy is secured, theirs may well depend on what happens next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox 4 Life Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 Except that he was. MON got us two League Cups, Pearson pissed League One and the Championship. MON finished top half of the Premier League, Pearson had the highest win ratio of any Leicester manager ever. Are you seriously comparing 2 league cups and consecutive top 10 finishes in the premier league to winning league one and the championship? Pearson was great for us but how anyone can say he is on MONs level is beyond me. Of course pearson has the best win rate, most of those came in inferior leagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
les-tah Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 I stand by my comment . Pearson WASN'T good enough to Manage in the PL.. The first 29 games proved that!.. He got lucky in the last 9 and we somehow escaped relegation... Time will prove me right as he won't be a PL manager again!.. IMHO. i agree slightly, the first 29 games we were mostly awful and tactically shocking. The last 9 games he didn't suddenly turn into Mourinho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank to be Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 Except that he was. MON got us two League Cups, Pearson pissed League One and the Championship. MON finished top half of the Premier League, Pearson had the highest win ratio of any Leicester manager ever.Premier league win rate:Nigel Pearson 29% Peter Taylor 35% As if winning league one is anywhere near comparable to MON's achievements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 Includes the third division though, remove that and where does he stand? How does he compare to Peter Taylor for premier wins? You realise one inherited a team who had been relegated to the third tier and the other inherited a team who had finished top ten in the PL 4 times? If Pearson was even close he's a genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inckley fox Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 You realise one inherited a team who had been relegated to the third tier and the other inherited a team who had finished top ten in the PL 4 times? If Pearson was even close he's a genius. Obviously this is right. It amazes me that anybody needs it pointing out for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suffolk fox Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 Except that he was. MON got us two League Cups, Pearson pissed League One and the Championship. MON finished top half of the Premier League, Pearson had the highest win ratio of any Leicester manager ever. Yes, that maybe true. However, those wins were in the Championship and League one. Gillies and O'neals wins certainly the majority were in the top flight of English football yes the top flight at the time in the respective years. Pearson as I have said was a good manager for our club in the fact he got us promoted from league one to the Championship and also into the premier league. He also had the most money available to him than any other manager and with our funding and backing to not get into the premier league would have been a failure. Pearson was not a good premier league manager. We did get lucky with that end of season run and a lot of the teams we beat had nothing to play for. I did think it was great myself though. Many conveniently forget the awful league run we had where we couldn't buy a win from October to end of March. Burnley and Qpr for fooks sake were above us? Judge the season as a whole, yes, but an incredible slice of good fortune playing teams who were long on the beach certainly helped our cause and that's what saved us. Not a manager who stuck stubbornly to strange tactics, team selections, baffling substitutions and formations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5waller5 Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 No judgement from me on Pearson in this post, but......................................... Our playing staff was so much better than at least six other teams last season. We were rooted to the bottom after 29 matches. We escaped relegation through the last nine matches. These are clearly the facts.The players we had on our playing staff were at least in part down to Pearson ( and Steve Walsh of course). Sunderland, Burnley, Hull, QPR, WBA and Villa at least had inferior squads to us. Base your judgements on Pearson's capabilities on these irrefutable facts! Of course some will say ah yes but no but it was Pearson in charge for the last nine games, therefore it proves he is a brilliant manager. Others will say that with our squad we should never have even been in the bottom three teams at any time during the season, which proves Pearson was crap! Which is pretty much why I sit in the middle ground between those two extremes .... NP was average. He did OK. It was exciting because of the nature of how he did ok - doing terribly and then brilliantly over the course of the season .... but as a whole he was average - achieving the minimum level of success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 15 July 2015 Author Share Posted 15 July 2015 Premier league win rate: Nigel Pearson 29% Peter Taylor 35% As if winning league one is anywhere near comparable to MON's achievements And? What exactly is it you are trying to show? One inherited a team not only proven to be good enough to stay up, but proven to win cups and get into Europe. The other inherited a team proven not to be good enough for the Championship. Do you actually think your stat shows Taylor as being a better manager, because the only thing it really proves is the mentality of the people even bringing it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 15 July 2015 Author Share Posted 15 July 2015 No judgement from me on Pearson in this post, but......................................... Our playing staff was so much better than at least six other teams last season. We were rooted to the bottom after 29 matches. We escaped relegation through the last nine matches. These are clearly the facts.The players we had on our playing staff were at least in part down to Pearson ( and Steve Walsh of course). Sunderland, Burnley, Hull, QPR, WBA and Villa at least had inferior squads to us. Base your judgements on Pearson's capabilities on these irrefutable facts! Of course some will say ah yes but no but it was Pearson in charge for the last nine games, therefore it proves he is a brilliant manager. Others will say that with our squad we should never have even been in the bottom three teams at any time during the season, which proves Pearson was crap! Our squad only showed it was good enough AFTER the signings in January, there is zero evidence it was good enough before hand... but plenty afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 Which is pretty much why I sit in the middle ground between those two extremes .... NP was average. He did OK. It was exciting because of the nature of how he did ok - doing terribly and then brilliantly over the course of the season .... but as a whole he was average - achieving the minimum level of success. The highest win percentage of any manager in history and he's "average" and "did ok" - a season with 102 points described as "doing terribly and then brilliantly over the course of the season". I despair sometimes, I need a lie down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank to be Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 Obviously this is right. It amazes me that anybody needs it pointing out for them. Pearson's win rate is based predominantly on four and a half years in the 2nd and 3rd tiers. He's the only manager in our history who has spent that long outside the top division and still been considered a success. There are reasons for that, of course, but you must admit it skews his win percentage to a great extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itsthejoeker Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 All of you need to change the ****ing record, this isn't about Pearson anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 FFS yeah let's just ignore Pearson's League One and Championship titles because 20 years ago we were a half decent club. So many twats! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indierich06 Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 No judgement from me on Pearson in this post, but......................................... Our playing staff was so much better than at least six other teams last season. We were rooted to the bottom after 29 matches. We escaped relegation through the last nine matches. These are clearly the facts.The players we had on our playing staff were at least in part down to Pearson ( and Steve Walsh of course). Sunderland, Burnley, Hull, QPR, WBA and Villa at least had inferior squads to us. Base your judgements on Pearson's capabilities on these irrefutable facts! Of course some will say ah yes but no but it was Pearson in charge for the last nine games, therefore it proves he is a brilliant manager. Others will say that with our squad we should never have even been in the bottom three teams at any time during the season, which proves Pearson was crap! What a load of bollocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank to be Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 FFS yeah let's just ignore Pearson's League One and Championship titles because 20 years ago we were a half decent club. So many twats! Not ignoring them at all, the championship win was very good and the league one win met expectations. But to compare winning league one with consecutive top ten premier league finishes, cup wins and European football is laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 But to compare winning league one with consecutive top ten premier league finishes, cup wins and European football is laughable. Comparing winning League One and wiping the floor with the Championship (which is a massive feat, especially considering it was during a cost-cutting phase), and survival in the Premiership against all the odds. Stop manipulating the facts to back up that chip on your shoulder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 Comparing winning League One and wiping the floor with the Championship (which is a massive feat, especially considering it was during a cost-cutting phase), and survival in the Premiership against all the odds. Stop manipulating the facts to back up that chip on your shoulder. Mate I've just noticed your signature it's killed me lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 15 July 2015 Author Share Posted 15 July 2015 He's the only manager in our history who has spent that long outside the top division and still been considered a success. He's also the only manager to have had to manage us from our lowest ever league start, to be forced out before completing his job, then asked back again and have to start building all over again. You act like he was just hand 4 years plus of uninterupted luxury to try and get us up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shen Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 Yes, that maybe true. However, those wins were in the Championship and League one. Gillies and O'neals wins certainly the majority were in the top flight of English football yes the top flight at the time in the respective years. Pearson as I have said was a good manager for our club in the fact he got us promoted from league one to the Championship and also into the premier league. He also had the most money available to him than any other manager and with our funding and backing to not get into the premier league would have been a failure. Pearson was not a good premier league manager. We did get lucky with that end of season run and a lot of the teams we beat had nothing to play for. I did think it was great myself though. Many conveniently forget the awful league run we had where we couldn't buy a win from October to end of March. Burnley and Qpr for fooks sake were above us? Judge the season as a whole, yes, but an incredible slice of good fortune playing teams who were long on the beach certainly helped our cause and that's what saved us. Not a manager who stuck stubbornly to strange tactics, team selections, baffling substitutions and formations. Did we not play against QPR, Burnley, Newcastle, Sunderland and WBA at times when they were all more or less involved in the same relegation battle? Some people have such a chip on their shoulders, they really do not want to acknowledge how big an achievement it was to come back from the dead to ultimately survive comfortably. Which is pretty much why I sit in the middle ground between those two extremes .... NP was average. He did OK. It was exciting because of the nature of how he did ok - doing terribly and then brilliantly over the course of the season .... but as a whole he was average - achieving the minimum level of success. NP achieved the minimum level of success? Another arrogant fan that believes we have a divine right to instant overachieving success just because we have wealthy owners. No judgement from me on Pearson in this post, but......................................... Our playing staff was so much better than at least six other teams last season. We were rooted to the bottom after 29 matches. We escaped relegation through the last nine matches. These are clearly the facts.The players we had on our playing staff were at least in part down to Pearson ( and Steve Walsh of course). Sunderland, Burnley, Hull, QPR, WBA and Villa at least had inferior squads to us. Base your judgements on Pearson's capabilities on these irrefutable facts! Of course some will say ah yes but no but it was Pearson in charge for the last nine games, therefore it proves he is a brilliant manager. Others will say that with our squad we should never have even been in the bottom three teams at any time during the season, which proves Pearson was crap! What a WUM. I fail to see how your opinion of Premier League squads is "irrefutable fact". The fact that we were rooted at the bottom with 9 games to go, yet survived by 6 points demands a lot more respect than a simple assessment of "He got lucky!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daddylonglegs Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 All of you need to change the ****ing record, this isn't about Pearson anymore. In fairness this is a thread about Ranieri, so he should be the main topic of conversation but you can't expect people to just ignore all the records he broke with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank to be Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 He's also the only manager to have had to manage us from our lowest ever league start, to be forced out before completing his job, then asked back again and have to start building all over again. You act like he was just hand 4 years plus of uninterupted luxury to try and get us up. You cut the part of my post that acknowledged that there were reasons for Pearson spending that much time in lower divisions and now you've given me reasons. I know the reasons and they're perfectly good. My point is regarding the flaws of using win rate as a comparative tool between managers who have managed in different divisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
My Nads Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 FFS yeah let's just ignore Pearson's League One and Championship titles because 20 years ago we were a half decent club. So many twats! Not ignoring them at all, the championship win was very good and the league one win met expectations. But to compare winning league one with consecutive top ten premier league finishes, cup wins and European football is laughable. Without Nige we might well still be in League one or worse! You cant just gloss over what he did for the club as if anyone could have done it, because the shower of shit managers we had before him certainly couldn't! How's it possible to be so flippant about what he has done for us. I consider getting us promoted from League one, sorting Sven's mess out, storming the Championship and keeping us in it a lot more impressive than what O'Neill did here. The football(?) we played under O'Neill was hard to watch most of the time. MON was successful and he was good in his way, but lets not forget the team he took over was decent. McGee was crap but under Little it was a decent team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank to be Posted 15 July 2015 Share Posted 15 July 2015 Without Nige we might well still be in League one or worse! You cant just gloss over what he did for the club as if anyone could have done it, because the shower of shit managers we had before him certainly couldn't! How's it possible to be so flippant about what he has done for us. I consider getting us promoted from League one, sorting Sven's mess out, storming the Championship and keeping us in it a lot more impressive than what O'Neill did here. The football(?) we played under O'Neill was hard to watch most of the time. MON was successful and he was good in his way, but lets not forget the team he took over was decent. McGee was crap but under Little it was a decent team.Winning league one was decent, but that was a squad that should never have been relegated. Sven didn't have us in a mess, we were just outside the play offs. On a money invested vs results basis we weren't doing well but we were still a very strong championship team. It took Pearson two and a half years to get us up from a similar position from which it took MON a few months. MON followed it with top ten finishes, cup wins and European football. We'll never know what Pearson would have ultimately followed it with, all we know is that his first season was a narrow escape from relegation. As for quality of football, Pearson's first tenure wasn't pretty, the football got better but let's not forget that much of last season was painful to watch. Again, it's easier to play free flowing attacking football in the championship than it is in the premier league, so you can't really compare, but in any case MON had us playing some decent stuff at times too, breaking down the wing at pace and whipping crosses in was one of our key plays and we did it well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.