Pearson has to go!

[Burbo17J2]

And Burnley do?

They were good when they came to us... And scenes... We didnt get any scenes when we scored against Stoke...

[Blue Ed]

Never mind the manager. The players are just not turning up for the games. Where are they...where is Nuge, Drinky, Kasper, De Laet, Kingy. To many player in poor form and need to think if the premiership is for them. Shape up or ship out.

[Larry_LCFC]

It is partly down the players I agree, however they need to be set up right in the first place for them to perform. That lays with the manager.

[Mark_w]

Of the fifteen relegated managers over the past five years, only three of those have been managers appointed mid-season. and before the end of the window.

 

Five.

[Basingstoke Fox]

The thought of Tony Pulis managing Leicester City depresses me.

[5waller5]

The thought of Tony Pulis managing Leicester City depresses me.

 

 

Me too

[inckley fox]

Five.

 

I assume you're referring to Meulenstein, who wasn't actually relegated with Fulham, and Laws - who was not a voluntary managerial change, but rather an enforced one caused by Coyle's defection to Bolton. Grant, Redknapp and Solskjaer are the only relegated, unenforced mid-season appointments who have enjoyed a January transfer window.

 

So the point stands. I'll quote my original post. Of the 15 managers that have been relegated over the past 5 years, only three were unenforced managerial changes made before the end of January.

 

And yet ten clubs in the bottom 6 on the 9th November have voluntarily made changes before the end of January - with only three of those teams going on to be relegated.

 

The point is that the argument that mid-season changes go wrong more often than they work out for sides in our position, is simply wrong. And you can try to tweak the facts a little, but in all honesty they can survive a tweak or two. They clearly show that there is nowhere near enough evidence to support the notion that sticking with an in situ manager at a struggling club is the best bet in a relegation fight. If anything, the evidence points towards the contrary.

 

And you can try to pick a hole here or a hole there in what I'm saying, but you've not actually come up with anything remotely convincing to counter the point.

 

There are lots of very good arguments for Pearson to stay. This isn't one of them.

[Mark_w]

The point is that the argument that mid-season changes go wrong more often than they work out for sides in our position, is simply wrong. And you can try to tweak the facts a little, but in all honesty they can survive a tweak or two. They clearly show that there is nowhere near enough evidence to support the notion that sticking with an in situ manager at a struggling club is the best bet in a relegation fight. If anything, the evidence points towards the contrary.

 

It doesn't show that because more teams stick with their managers than sack them before the end of January. So there will be both more managers that are relegated with the same manager all season and more managers who survive with them.

[lee7]

Sunderland is a must win game in my opinion for Pearson. If we fail to win that game then I think he'll get the sack.

I don't think the owners will want to risk us losing to Villa and QPR aswell because by then the gap could be a lot more worrying than it currently is.

I hope Pearson turns things around because of what he's done for the club but right now I can't see it getting any better unfortunately!

We don't even look threatening in the slightest in most games if we were atleast creating good chances but it was down to bad finishing I'd be a bit more optimistic.

[Stuliasz]

Sunderland is a must win game in my opinion for Pearson. If we fail to win that game then I think he'll get the sack.

I don't think the owners will want to risk us losing to Villa and QPR aswell because by then the gap could be a lot more worrying than it currently is.

I hope Pearson turns things around because of what he's done for the club but right now I can't see it getting any better unfortunately!

We don't even look threatening in the slightest in most games if we were atleast creating good chances but it was down to bad finishing I'd be a bit more optimistic.

 

So sacking the manager will magically remove the risk of us losing to QPR & Villa?

[LCFC Rennie]

Last season is irrelevant. Burnley's fans are much better than ours this season on away days... Mainly because we don't make any noise, there are too many day trippers

Probably because we watch our team get dominated and beat, doesn't give you much to cheer about does it.

[Costock_Fox]

I hope he still doesn't need to go, the poor bloke will get kidney stones.

[Spanner73]

I hope Pearson turns things around because of what he's done for the club but right now I can't see it getting any better unfortunately!

We don't even look threatening in the slightest in most games if we were atleast creating good chances but it was down to bad finishing I'd be a bit more optimistic.

Absolutely spot on you can't see where any creativity or goals are going to come from , like always pearson knows better " still happy with your current squad nigel ?

[inckley fox]

It doesn't show that because more teams stick with their managers than sack them before the end of January. So there will be both more managers that are relegated with the same manager all season and more managers who survive with them.

 

I'm sorry, but this is simply wrong.

 

Of the thirty clubs who have been in the bottom 6 on 9th November, in the past five years:

 

* Ten have changed manager between September and January

* Three of those have been relegated

 

And just so you can see the stats for that majority of clubs you talk about who stay with the same manager beyond January:

 

* Twenty have either stayed with the same manager all season, or made a post-January change

* Seven of those have been relegated

 

Of the fifteen clubs relegated in the past five years:

 

* 6 have had no change in manager

* 3 changed manager between September and January, and stuck with that manager

* 1 changed manager between September and January, and changed the manager again

* 5 changed manager after January

 

Whichever way you twist the stats, they offer nothing which points towards being faithful to your manager at this stage in the season as a more successful approach than getting rid of him. Like I said, if anything it points towards the opposite.

 

But they also show something else; that of all the clubs in the bottom 6 at this time in the season, for the past five years, only ten out of the thirty have been relegated. That means five of the teams that have gone down have been teams that have dropped down the table, and it means that two thirds of the sides in the relegation fight at this stage of the season have gone on to survive. It's just that, if you are in the bottom six then you have a slightly better chance of survival if you sack your manager between now and January, than if you stick with him.

 

Like I say, there are plenty of arguments for keeping Pearson: it's early in the season and we can afford to wait a little longer and still leave ample time for a new boss, most sides in our position actually escape relegation in the end, he has some prior experience at this level, he's got an excellent knowledge of his squad, he's shown an ability to learn from past errors etc. But the argument that changing manager at this stage in the season goes wrong more often than not is just incorrect.

[lee7]

So sacking the manager will magically remove the risk of us losing to QPR & Villa?

Of course not. No matter who you are or who your playing against there is always a chance of losing.

I did say this is how I think the owners will be thinking. It is in no way what I want.

'Usually' when a new manager takes over a football team they experience an improvement in results so this is why I think the owners could sack him after Sunderland as we will have two games against fairly week opposition!

*weak

[BlackburnClaret]

We haven't scored in 5 games, but let's put it in perspective.

[*]Let's not even get started with Burnley...

That comment may just bite you on the arse in two weeks time.

[BlackburnClaret]

And Burnley do?

Away from home, yes, tremendous support. In fact I'd argue that the fans cheered us on to our equalizer at your place. At home it's a bit hit and miss.

[Guest]

No its not. Not always. That's one of the biggest myths in football.

Sometimes a team and a club need modernising, freshening up, new ideas. The question is and always has been, at what point?

Getting rid of Sven being a good example.

 

So we disagree, what's new.

 

Crying fans are so pathetic.

[chris_lcfc_85]

He deserves a bit more time to sort it but i do fear if we dont win the next 2 games......

[artursteppe]

I really had a rant after the Burnley game. People leaving the ground looked at me not understanding what they had just seen. I was fuming. We drew against a team who were really poor, I mean sh*t! We did not have the passion or desire to kill a game off in which we could have scored at any time. Burnley could not have stopped us from winning if we had really wanted to, and we didn't. Yes, we missed a couple of simple chances to kill the game, but the attitude was not good.

That is where it started, and although I am not a pessimist, that is where our season could have ended.

 

Pearson's strength is that he can remain emotionally flat whether we win or lose. His great weakness is that he remains emotionally flat.

 

I have never been a big fan of Pearson, I do respect him though. As of now, we have played eight of the top ten and only three teams in the bottom half of the table.

Maybe I am clutching at straws, maybe we can hope for more in the next few games, but it is a real concern if Pearson does not get the attitude and the selection right in the next few games.

 

It may need very little to get things going. My team selection for the last few games would have been a midfield three ( where they can cover for overlapping full backs ) and Mahrez in a free role behind Ulloa and Vardy. Mahrez could then operate through the middle and on either wing which could cause problems for any team. Mahrez would love the responsibility, the strikers would be re-enthused and the midfield would have a variety of options to attack, as long as they were well organised to cover defensive duties, particularly with the full backs supporting attacks.

 

Whatever, at least there may be some method in my madness, but there seems to be none in Pearson's.

[Mark_w]

I really had a rant after the Burnley game. People leaving the ground looked at me not understanding what they had just seen. I was fuming. We drew against a team who were really poor, I mean sh*t! We did not have the passion or desire to kill a game off in which we could have scored at any time. Burnley could not have stopped us from winning if we had really wanted to, and we didn't. Yes, we missed a couple of simple chances to kill the game, but the attitude was not good.

That is where it started, and although I am not a pessimist, that is where our season could have ended.

 

Pearson's strength is that he can remain emotionally flat whether we win or lose. His great weakness is that he remains emotionally flat.

 

I have never been a big fan of Pearson, I do respect him though. As of now, we have played eight of the top ten and only three teams in the bottom half of the table.

Maybe I am clutching at straws, maybe we can hope for more in the next few games, but it is a real concern if Pearson does not get the attitude and the selection right in the next few games.

 

It may need very little to get things going. My team selection for the last few games would have been a midfield three ( where they can cover for overlapping full backs ) and Mahrez in a free role behind Ulloa and Vardy. Mahrez could then operate through the middle and on either wing which could cause problems for any team. Mahrez would love the responsibility, the strikers would be re-enthused and the midfield would have a variety of options to attack, as long as they were well organised to cover defensive duties, particularly with the full backs supporting attacks.

 

Whatever, at least there may be some method in my madness, but there seems to be none in Pearson's.

 

Right, a child could win the Championship and beat Man United 5-3, that's not evidence that there's any method to what Nigel Pearson does. If only we had a tactical visionary like you in charge, who could jam Riyad Mahrez out of position into the formation Nigel Pearson is playing now, and storm the league. I'm sure that's all there is to football management. artursteppe in.

[Captain...]

I'm sorry, but this is simply wrong.

 

Of the thirty clubs who have been in the bottom 6 on 9th November, in the past five years:

 

* Ten have changed manager between September and January

* Three of those have been relegated

 

And just so you can see the stats for that majority of clubs you talk about who stay with the same manager beyond January:

 

But you are looking at 30 clubs, when only 15 can be relegated, only half of those can be relegated, so for it to be statistically significant you need to take a lot more than 3 when you would expect 5 of them to be relegated. You also need to clarify the starting position, a team 6th from bottom changing their manager in November and finish 17th doesn't prove your point.

 

Changing managers cannot be measured accurately as it all depends on how you are changing for who, changing a muppet like Holloway for an experienced manager like Pulis is always going to have a positive effect, replacing a long standing manager like McKay for a premier league novice like Solksjear less so, changing an experienced manager like Hughes for an experienced manager like Redknapp doesn't mean anything when you have a poisonous dressing room and a squad of overpaid mercenaries.

 

I guess I agree with your point, but I don't like the way you have tried to explain it.

[Babylon]

But you are looking at 30 clubs, when only 15 can be relegated, only half of those can be relegated, so for it to be statistically significant you need to take a lot more than 3 when you would expect 5 of them to be relegated. You also need to clarify the starting position, a team 6th from bottom changing their manager in November and finish 17th doesn't prove your point.

I was just about to say the same.

[cuddly ken]

Never mind the manager. The players are just not turning up for the games. Where are they...where is Nuge, Drinky, Kasper, De Laet, Kingy. To many player in poor form and need to think if the premiership is for them. Shape up or ship out.

You have to give it to NP and the players, they've all managed to get bumper contracts out of the club on the back of one good season in a poor Championship.

[harpendenfox]

To think, a few short weeks ago there was some concern that Newcastle might sack Pardew and be interested in Nige.