Raw Dykes Posted 27 March 2012 Posted 27 March 2012 Alan Young just said on the radio that he thought Michael Johnson might have got himself into a bit of trouble. Anyone know anything about that?
Out Foxed Posted 27 March 2012 Posted 27 March 2012 Alan Young just said on the radio that he thought Michael Johnson might have got himself into a bit of trouble. Anyone know anything about that? bert said he chinned pearson
THEFATBASTARD Posted 27 March 2012 Posted 27 March 2012 bert said he chinned pearson if all the players who had supposed to have "chinned " pearson, really had, he would be punch drunk now..bull...
Out Foxed Posted 27 March 2012 Posted 27 March 2012 if all the players who had supposed to have "chinned " pearson, really had, he would be punch drunk now..bull... bert said you chinned person too
Webbo Posted 27 March 2012 Posted 27 March 2012 if all the players who had supposed to have "chinned " pearson, really had, he would be punch drunk now..bull... I think this is a" whoooosh".
Dan Posted 27 March 2012 Posted 27 March 2012 In his first year in charge Pearson cut our wage bill by a third and over the course of his reign he came close to breaking even on transfers (if we include the supposed fees for departures before he arrived, and the supposed fee for Mattock). On the other hand Sven increased our wage bill by a third in his first six months (and more thereafter) and spent more money on transfers than every manager since Taylor combined. Pearson took us from League One to 5th in the Championship, Sven never once got us into the play-offs. It's an unfair comparison, but one which - however you look at it - massively favours NP. As for that list of players... Kasper, Konchesky, Peltier and St. Ledger make up four of the five men we might hold most responsible for our ropy defensive record (conceding thirteen in five games and having a worse goals-against record than any of the top six, unless I'm mistaken). Some of you may wish to blame the midfield, of course, of which Danns is the deepest lying player. Yes I know I'm repeatiing myself - and I'm sure that several of the aforementioned will go on to be key players for City - but up to now tthey have underperformed. It amazes me that people continue espousing the virtues of all the individual components of a team which has so far failed to deliver. And, with reference to the likes of Beckford and Danns, when it has worked for them, it has been under the stewardship of Pearson - who, even in his second spell, has a better points-per-game average than Sven, without spending anything like the cash - and not his predecessor. In terms of value for money, Sven really was one of the poorest managers in the history of this football club. That's not to say he achieved nothing, nor does it mean he wouldn't have gone on to put it right; nor even that it was judicious to get rid of him when we did, it's a fairly straightforward observation that his transfer policy came perilously close to blowing our best chance in a decade of competing at the top level. As for Johnson, to me he represents everything that Sven got wrong: A wild, costly stab in the dark when a careful analysis of the team's shortcomings and a shrewd cut-price dip into the lower leagues might have adequately done the job. Saved me a job. Cheers.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.