Bluetintedspecs Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Poor old Svend Svend Svend, he had a decent record in pulling though
Kitchandro Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Some football we played was very slick, however once we got found out we had no plan B. The recruitment was strange too, we signed a lot of good individuals who couldn't work as a team. There was obviously talent but they just didn't gel together, philosophy and mindset wasn't taken into account. Pearson comes a long and instills this gel-ing and positive atmosphere and takes us to where we are today. Not sure that's true. Most of his signings have gone onto become nothing since leaving us. A couple of the loans were ok but he couldn't keep them, and Kasper and Nugent were good signings, no doubt. Konchesky was a solid signing as well tbf. The rest were pants though. It wasn't just about gelling because Danns, Vassell, Beckford, Pantsil, Johnson, Ball, Mills and Peltier played absolutely no part in our promotion. They were just crap players.
Koke Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Not sure that's true. Most of his signings have gone onto become nothing since leaving us. A couple of the loans were ok but he couldn't keep them, and Kasper and Nugent were good signings, no doubt. Konchesky was a solid signing as well tbf. The rest were pants though. It wasn't just about gelling because Danns, Vassell, Beckford, Pantsil, Johnson, Ball, Mills and Peltier played absolutely no part in our promotion. They were just crap players. Some shocking players in there. £5.5m for Mills and £3m for Beckford. I'm sure we paid ridiculous wages to them too.
Monsell1976 Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 He didn't have a clue. That season we spent a cool 15 million under Sven, more than West Ham, who spent 10 mill. He assembled a squad of misfits including Danns, Fat Johnno and Beckford. Beckford.... With what he spent we were always going to win a few games and look very good in them. But he had no plan, no vision and seemingly, no discipline. The day Sven get replaced by Pearson was a very important one for this football club. I have to agree some of his signings were shite, but he also brought in some decent signings, and kasper is still with us, not sure he would have signed for us, without Sven.The two problems I have with Sven being slated is, was all the signings his, as people defending Pearson in the years after, stated he wasn't him in control of recruitment but the d.o.f, he could name the players he wanted, but wages, fees were down to the d.o.f. The second one was, ok we were inconsistent, but when a manager comes in, it can take some time to get consistent, **** me Pearson got away with some shocking poor runs, so my feeling at the time, and now is that he was sacked to soon. If my memory serves me right we were in or around the playoffs, he maybe should have been given the season. I'm not that interested in Sven as he's the past like Pearson, but just think he gets a bad press on here regards money spent, but as I have said, I doubt he was anything to do with finances. No matter what, at this moment in time, we appear to have the right recruitment policy and right manager in place.
Sionnach gorm Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 I certainly do not think he did a good job here, but Erickson was good manager. One of the best. In my opinion he's a shit person, but he understands football. Many who played under him learned a lot from him (one being Mancini). Unfortunately, he has stopped learning and teaching. He's become content with his passed success and become lazy. He could turn it around if he wanted.
foxoffderby Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 He also gave Paul Gally a new contract when it was coming to an end
Len Finsbury Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Not sure that's true. Most of his signings have gone onto become nothing since leaving us. A couple of the loans were ok but he couldn't keep them, and Kasper and Nugent were good signings, no doubt. Konchesky was a solid signing as well tbf. The rest were pants though. It wasn't just about gelling because Danns, Vassell, Beckford, Pantsil, Johnson, Ball, Mills and Peltier played absolutely no part in our promotion. They were just crap players. While they turned out to be crap players for us, they were growing in reputation in the teams that we bout them from. I can certainly see why some of them were signed. Mills had come off the back of a great season at Reading and at the time seemed like a quality centre back, Beckford, up until he signed for us, had a remarkable scoring record. Vassell, Ball and Pantsil brought with them experience, which was required to help these other, younger players through such as Danns and Peltier and Michael Johnson was, albeit fading, still considered to be a future England midfielder. The main problem with Sven's reign was constructing a team rather than a group of players. Our owners essentially did the same as they did at the start of this season and allowed their ambition be shown. The difference between the two seasons os that we have a ridiculously good recruitment team who know who fits and who doesn't. If Ranieri had come in when Sven did, he would have suffered a similar fate.Likewise, if Sven had been appointed this year, it wouldn't have been a disaster. Although I have no reservations in saying that we would have had quite the success as we have under the Don. Both were different times and different leagues. Sven is a manager better suited with the PL and better quality players than we had at our disposal back then. I must admit that during Sven's tenure, the profile of the club was certainly raised which almost made up any harm he did with signings. I don't quite understand the hatred towards Sven. It's not like he did it on purpose and I doubt he had any control over contracts and players' fees. All he did wrong was sign players without due diligence but I suspect that was more a result of over ambitious owners.
stretch1965 Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Very nice man, absolutely loaded with all the pay offs and has banged some top drawer women.
LAprice_ Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Sven was never that bad. He signed a lot of players who, before joining Leicester, were very highly rated. On paper it should have worked. Oddly for a man of his experience, he just seemed a bit naive. The Championship is a very poor league and he probably assumed it would be easier to get out of. I think the problem was that he bought too many players. There was very little team-cohesion. . He did sign some really important players. Schmeichel, Nugent and Konchesky being the best examples.
Guest Col city fan Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Sven was never that bad. He signed a lot of players who, before joining Leicester, were very highly rated. On paper it should have worked. Oddly for a man of his experience, he just seemed a bit naive. The Championship is a very poor league and he probably assumed it would be easier to get out of. I think the problem was that he bought too many players. There was very little team-cohesion. . He did sign some really important players. Schmeichel, Nugent and Konchesky being the best examples. Your penultimate sentence sums it up. There was just about zero team cohesion and zero game plan. Yes, he made some signings that turned out well, he also made some that were utter stinkers. The problem with Sven was that he was like a kid in a sweetshop. Given tons of money, and able to pay ridiculous wages, he went out and signed a squad with little thought regarding who would play where? I seem to remember we had no width whatsoever and played King at the top of a diamond. I remember watching game after game and wondering, tactically, what the Hell we were doing. He also hardly ever played Lloyd Dyer, who still at that time had an awful lot to offer. Managerially, he was clueless. Myself and my mates at the time used to joke that, given the money and the opportunity he had at the club, we could have probably done a better job in terms of picking players and getting them playing in some consistent formation. Sven did it the wrong way round. He signed biggish names, then tried to fit them into some sort of formation, rather than having a game plan then signing the players to be able to play it. Rubbish.
Guest MattP Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Given Sven procured about 50 players at vast expense you would expect at least a handful of them to turn out ok for the second division. Blind squirrel and all that.
Donut Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Let me start this post by saying i do NOT think Sven was the man to get us up. But i fully accept some criticism could come my way in saying he did have us playing some nice football in his first season here. when he was sacked, the club was close to the playoffs and actually drifted further away from the playoffs throughout that season, so we wouldnt have know how that season COULD have turned out. The players he signed in terms of football ability were all decent, but didnt blend together as a unit and he undoubtedly overspent on them. But its not like he took us down or even necessarily "ruined" the club as some would say. He was just mediocre and should have done an all round better job. I had much more confidence Pearson would deliver promotion than Sven.
ScouseFox Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 He also gave Paul Gally a new contract when it was coming to an end ive had this debate before and it's dead, but look at the comments on here from when that new deal was announced. celebrated as if we'd been promoted. hindsight and all that...
sdb Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Ha that's hilarious! People saying he spunked a load of money away (he did), but people on here were delighted over pretty much every one of his signings.
1972 Fox Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 He signed Kasper for £1m from Leeds which must have been the best bit of business he did for us.
Guest ttfn Posted 23 February 2016 Posted 23 February 2016 Seems like a genuinely lovely bloke. Shame about all the toss he bought.
Dan Posted 24 February 2016 Posted 24 February 2016 I have to agree some of his signings were shite, but he also brought in some decent signings, and kasper is still with us, not sure he would have signed for us, without Sven. The two problems I have with Sven being slated is, was all the signings his, as people defending Pearson in the years after, stated he wasn't him in control of recruitment but the d.o.f, he could name the players he wanted, but wages, fees were down to the d.o.f. The second one was, ok we were inconsistent, but when a manager comes in, it can take some time to get consistent, **** me Pearson got away with some shocking poor runs, so my feeling at the time, and now is that he was sacked to soon. If my memory serves me right we were in or around the playoffs, he maybe should have been given the season. I'm not that interested in Sven as he's the past like Pearson, but just think he gets a bad press on here regards money spent, but as I have said, I doubt he was anything to do with finances. No matter what, at this moment in time, we appear to have the right recruitment policy and right manager in place. Thought we sacked him at the right time personally. Turned 2011/12 into a bit of a shambles season but at least it gave Pearson a proper chance to assess what needed changing, without us being in any real danger of relegation. It was absolutely obvious after that Millwall game that we were a shambles. That was a disgrace of a performance and a result. Not even a hint of a side that could get anywhere near promotion. Truth be told though I think it was quite obvious after about three games we'd fvcked it. That Bristol City game was a nightmare. We played a side who'd started hopelessly and were lucky to only lose 1-2, Nicky Maynard the instigator as well. I was as excited as anyone that season, was a massive learning curve though, there's no way on earth given the whole season he'd have gotten us up. Correct decision from the owners.
Dan Posted 24 February 2016 Posted 24 February 2016 Let me start this post by saying i do NOT think Sven was the man to get us up. But i fully accept some criticism could come my way in saying he did have us playing some nice football in his first season here. when he was sacked, the club was close to the playoffs and actually drifted further away from the playoffs throughout that season, so we wouldnt have know how that season COULD have turned out. The players he signed in terms of football ability were all decent, but didnt blend together as a unit and he undoubtedly overspent on them. But its not like he took us down or even necessarily "ruined" the club as some would say. He was just mediocre and should have done an all round better job. I had much more confidence Pearson would deliver promotion than Sven. He held us back. We had enough money that season to build a side capable of really damaging the division but we were bang average. It was his plain recklessness that did it for me. Not even the fact he signed a fair chunk of crap, but didn't he stick the likes of Gallagher and Wellens on £20k a week too? Absolutely criminal. It could've been a lot worse than it was.
FireFox Posted 24 February 2016 Posted 24 February 2016 We wouldn't be where we are if we never had Sven. We wouldn't be where we are if we still had Sven.
Monsell1976 Posted 24 February 2016 Posted 24 February 2016 Thought we sacked him at the right time personally. Turned 2011/12 into a bit of a shambles season but at least it gave Pearson a proper chance to assess what needed changing, without us being in any real danger of relegation. It was absolutely obvious after that Millwall game that we were a shambles. That was a disgrace of a performance and a result. Not even a hint of a side that could get anywhere near promotion. Truth be told though I think it was quite obvious after about three games we'd fvcked it. That Bristol City game was a nightmare. We played a side who'd started hopelessly and were lucky to only lose 1-2, Nicky Maynard the instigator as well. I was as excited as anyone that season, was a massive learning curve though, there's no way on earth given the whole season he'd have gotten us up. Correct decision from the owners. Take your points, but just think they was hasty, was right in the end, as we are where we are now, but Pearson's run of results at times, he should have gone, against Barnsley was a disgrace, and first half of last season he pushed it.I just don't know if Sven was given the patients that Pearson got wether he would have achieved in the end. Like I say, doesn't matter now, got the right man in at the minute
LCCFox96 Posted 24 February 2016 Posted 24 February 2016 Likening Paul Gallagher to David Beckham and giving him a new 4 year deal with a huge pay rise is just a summary of the level of management experienced under Sven. Some other horrific signings in there too - Michael Ball, Michael Johnson, Lee Peltier.
Fox92 Posted 24 February 2016 Posted 24 February 2016 Sven was never that bad. He signed a lot of players who, before joining Leicester, were very highly rated. On paper it should have worked. Oddly for a man of his experience, he just seemed a bit naive. The Championship is a very poor league and he probably assumed it would be easier to get out of. I think the problem was that he bought too many players. There was very little team-cohesion. . He did sign some really important players. Schmeichel, Nugent and Konchesky being the best examples. He bought too many players who play in the same position. I can remember going to Coventry away first game of that season and we started with Wellens, Abe, Danns and Fernandes in midfield... not much balance is there considering they are all central midfielders. We were all excited by Mills who had looked a solid centre half at Reading but you can't justify that much of a transfer fee. Speaks volumes that Pearson got us Morgan for £1million.
Sol thewall Bamba Posted 24 February 2016 Posted 24 February 2016 He bought too many players who play in the same position. I can remember going to Coventry away first game of that season and we started with Wellens, Abe, Danns and Fernandes in midfield... not much balance is there considering they are all central midfielders. We were all excited by Mills who had looked a solid centre half at Reading but you can't justify that much of a transfer fee. Speaks volumes that Pearson got us Morgan for £1million. Didn't he openly say he wanted 2 players of first team quality for every position?
Kitchandro Posted 24 February 2016 Posted 24 February 2016 While they turned out to be crap players for us, they were growing in reputation in the teams that we bout them from. I can certainly see why some of them were signed. Mills had come off the back of a great season at Reading and at the time seemed like a quality centre back, Beckford, up until he signed for us, had a remarkable scoring record. Vassell, Ball and Pantsil brought with them experience, which was required to help these other, younger players through such as Danns and Peltier and Michael Johnson was, albeit fading, still considered to be a future England midfielder. The main problem with Sven's reign was constructing a team rather than a group of players. Our owners essentially did the same as they did at the start of this season and allowed their ambition be shown. The difference between the two seasons os that we have a ridiculously good recruitment team who know who fits and who doesn't. If Ranieri had come in when Sven did, he would have suffered a similar fate.Likewise, if Sven had been appointed this year, it wouldn't have been a disaster. Although I have no reservations in saying that we would have had quite the success as we have under the Don. Both were different times and different leagues. Sven is a manager better suited with the PL and better quality players than we had at our disposal back then. I must admit that during Sven's tenure, the profile of the club was certainly raised which almost made up any harm he did with signings. I don't quite understand the hatred towards Sven. It's not like he did it on purpose and I doubt he had any control over contracts and players' fees. All he did wrong was sign players without due diligence but I suspect that was more a result of over ambitious owners. That's the thing, they were rated by the man on the street who had barely watched them, but he obviously did not do enough research into them, because actually they weren't very good players and many had poor attitudes as well. This is the area where Pearson and his staff excelled. So yes, it was partly to do with who fit in, but actually these players weren't much good in reality and their careers since support that. Some of them were ok once in the past but that didn't make them good when he signed them. I don't hate Sven. I think he was clueless, but I don't hate him.
hackneyfox Posted 24 February 2016 Posted 24 February 2016 but didn't he stick the likes of Gallagher and Wellens on £20k a week too? I don't believe length of contracts or pay were decided by Sven. Both of the above were adored by most on here at the time.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.