WTF is wrong with you people

[Babylon]

Babs on the sven one i considered the team to be struggling yes the expectiation and money spent

Well expectation is our problem, people need to be more realistic. We weren't great and things didn't look good. But I don't consider 2 points off the playoffs to be struggling. I wouldn't then and I would this season.

He should have been given longer without question for me. The biggest worry for me were the constant formation and player changes. He didn't seem to know what his best setup was or his best team. I think he wanted to carry on with the 4-3-3 but because obvious very early we didn't have the players for that and we ended up all over the place.

But even with those worries you should get time to rectify it.

[tylesta]

Well expectation is our problem, people need to be more realistic. We weren't great and things didn't look good. But I don't consider 2 points off the playoffs to be struggling. I wouldn't then and I would this season.

He should have been given longer without question for me. The biggest worry for me were the constant formation and player changes. He didn't seem to know what his best setup was or his best team. I think he wanted to carry on with the 4-3-3 but because obvious very early we didn't have the players for that and we ended up all over the place.

But even with those worries you should get time to rectify it.

that is the thing you go out spend a wedge of cash on players, how many did we sign i'm not to sure, it's going to be hard to find your best 11 but after 13 games you should know your best team and formation.

[tylesta]

In the last decade, every season minus two, we've sacked (at least one) manager by the end of November. NONE OF THOSE SEASONS HAVE EVER RESULTED IN ANYTHING POSITIVE.

The two seasons where we were intelligent enough to let the manager have a full season, we've had a division title and a playoff appearance.

So to recap: sacking the manager in the first few months has had a 0% usefulness rate, not doing so has had a 100% usefulness rate.

HAVEN'T YOU FIGURED OUT THAT STABILITY IS WHAT THIS CLUB NEEDS?

Are there really morons calling for the manager to be sacked after 3 league matches?! You really think this is going to result in something different than it has all the other recent seasons where we did the same pointless thing? Please tell me this is a joke.

also there was a promotion to the premier league and relegation from the premier league 2003/2004

[_Fatboyslow_]

Would you, for example, stick with Nige for the next two/three seasons however we do in the league in the name of stability?

With the type of player he has brought in, mainly under 23, then I belive that this season is a give me. Coupled with the leftovers from the last couple of seasons he should be given at least untill Nov 2013.

[Grey Fox]

It's foolish to say keep the bloke no question as it is sack him after three games. I would like him to get to the end of the season, but that is obviously dependent on a few things.

There are so many factors involved (for me) other than just points on the board. My and our aim is obviously to get to the premier league, this season would be wonderful, but I certainly don't expect that at all costs and would be happy with constant improvement. What the owners think is a different matter entirely.

If we are 15th at Christmas using Cols scenario, then it really depends on whether we are on improving at that point. We could start off terribly for the first 10 games. But if things start to click and results / performances are improving then you must give it time. If we look like we are going backwards or stagnating then you have something to think about.

This sacking in October crap certainly isn't getting us anywhere though. The next manager will want his own player, will want a preseason, might implement changes in the summer window that take time to bed in, but because he's already been here 8 months people are unwilling to give it time and start ramping up the pressure again. Then guess what... we have another manager again next October.

Give the man in charge a proper shot barring a disaster and see what happens. We have to at some point. If he fails and we get someone else in later on in the year so be it, at least they can start a fresh without being tainted by someone else's poor season.

This is a great point. Sacking the manager near the start of the season is pointless IMO. It's hardly ever worked in the history of the league let alone just for us. Let the manager have the full season and then sack him at the end if it's clear he's not heading in the right direction.

The only reason a manager should be sacked during the season IMO is if you are in a nothing to lose situation, in the relegation zone and going down anyway. Then you may as well bring in a new man and see if you can get out. Other than that, stick with the same man until the end of the season and then decide.

I actually think a board having a reputation for sacking managers makes things worse. As soon as you have a little bad run like we are having everyone starts thinking that there might be a sacking. I'm sure the players think the same as us and they shouldn't. They should be 100% focussed on playing and not if the manager that bought them will be sacked soon. The past reputation therefore unsettles things further and sort of sucks the club into a self fulfilling prophesy. I hope not, but having a trigger happy reputation certainly doesn't help things IMO.

[Col city fan]

This is a great point. Sacking the manager near the start of the season is pointless IMO. It's hardly ever worked in the history of the league let alone just for us. Let the manager have the full season and then sack him at the end if it's clear he's not heading in the right direction.

The only reason a manager should be sacked during the season IMO is if you are in a nothing to lose situation, in the relegation zone and going down anyway. Then you may as well bring in a new man and see if you can get out. Other than that, stick with the same man until the end of the season and then decide.

I actually think a board having a reputation for sacking managers makes things worse. As soon as you have a little bad run like we are having everyone starts thinking that there might be a sacking. I'm sure the players think the same as us and they shouldn't. They should be 100% focussed on playing and not if the manager that bought them will be sacked soon. The past reputation therefore unsettles things further and sort of sucks the club into a self fulfilling prophesy. I hope not, but having a trigger happy reputation certainly doesn't help things IMO.

+1

[Kitchandro]

I'm not sure it's always a bad idea, I thought getting rid of Sousa when we did was a good decision and I still believe that now. He'd destroyed the team that Pearson built and I had no faith in him at all.

This however, is a completely different situation.

[Babylon]

I'm not sure it's always a bad idea, I thought getting rid of Sousa when we did was a good decision and I still believe that now. He'd destroyed the team that Pearson built and I had no faith in him at all.

This however, is a completely different situation.

It's not, you have to judge each case on it's merits. I'm always behind the manager to get a chance, but even I was concerned with Sousa before a ball was kicked. I tried to back him up, but even I was wanting him about after about game 7. Utterly clueless.

[Grey Fox]

I'm not sure it's always a bad idea, I thought getting rid of Sousa when we did was a good decision and I still believe that now. He'd destroyed the team that Pearson built and I had no faith in him at all.

This however, is a completely different situation.

I think Sousa would come under the banner of 'taking the club down', so you have nothing to lose by sacking him. Being mid table and being bottom with no positive signs are quite different things.

[marty78]

Well expectation is our problem, people need to be more realistic. We weren't great and things didn't look good. But I don't consider 2 points off the playoffs to be struggling. I wouldn't then and I would this season.

He should have been given longer without question for me. The biggest worry for me were the constant formation and player changes. He didn't seem to know what his best setup was or his best team. I think he wanted to carry on with the 4-3-3 but because obvious very early we didn't have the players for that and we ended up all over the place.

But even with those worries you should get time to rectify it.

Completely agree with that, our expectation is almost the enemy of our ambition. You only have to look at the reaction to losing at Blackburn (a Premier League side last season) to see just how unrealistic our expectations have become.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

In the last decade, every season minus two, we've sacked (at least one) manager by the end of November. NONE OF THOSE SEASONS HAVE EVER RESULTED IN ANYTHING POSITIVE.

The two seasons where we were intelligent enough to let the manager have a full season, we've had a division title and a playoff appearance.

So to recap: sacking the manager in the first few months has had a 0% usefulness rate, not doing so has had a 100% usefulness rate.

HAVEN'T YOU FIGURED OUT THAT STABILITY IS WHAT THIS CLUB NEEDS?

Are there really morons calling for the manager to be sacked after 3 league matches?! You really think this is going to result in something different than it has all the other recent seasons where we did the same pointless thing? Please tell me this is a joke.

Another person who believes we should carry on losing, and do nothing about it.

Pay me the £2,000,000 per year Pearson gets for doing nothing for our club.

[deep blue]

With the type of player he has brought in, mainly under 23, then I belive that this season is a give me. Coupled with the leftovers from the last couple of seasons he should be given at least untill Nov 2013.

He should be given all of this and next season, unless results are so disastrous that it really is untenable. Some managers can bring instant results, but Pearson isn't that type. He builds a squad slowly, carefully, deliberately. What is there at the end will be more sustainable (i.e. it will be a squad that can grow into a higher level, and not on huge wages).

He has proved himself with us before, and it's refreshing to see a more exciting style of play this season (something that many did not think him capable of).

And as someone has already pointed out, over the last 10 years statistics show that replacing a manager during a season has had zero positive effect for us, whereas when we've retained the same manager throughout the season we've been successful.

[The Doctor]

In the last decade, every season minus two, we've sacked (at least one) manager by the end of November.

Word to the wise - when you want to use stats, make sure you get them right:

2002-2003 - Full Season (Adams)

2003-2004 - Full Season (Adams)

2004-2005 - October (Adams)

2005-2006 - January (Levein)

2006-2007 - April (Kelly)

2007-2008 - August (Allen), October (Megson)

2008-2009 - Full Season (Pearson)

2009-2010 - Full Season (Pearson)

2010-2011 - October (Sousa)

2011-2012 - October (Sven)

So err, out of the last decade we have lost the manager before November on 4 occasions, not 8.

[Bluetintedspecs]

In answer to the thread question......... Nothing I'm ok thanks, looking forward to the match on Saturday, think we'll win,won't be booing whatever and might have a take away because of the kick off time.