bald reynard Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 Why the rush? Pearso'sn shown no signs of using him since his one big mistake at Leeds. Same as he stopped involving Moore and Gradel. Everything seems so black and white with the bloke but it wouldn't be mind kind of approach. Yes, the Fergie way is to give players a taste of first team action, highlight weaknesses, withdraw them to improve and involve them if they respond. But Pearson seems to play them, withdraw them and the next time you see them there's no noticeable difference. In fact, if anything they seem to get worse. Even Andy King's got worse because wee've managed to make such a positive player so comparatively negative. Schlupp got worse, Moore got worse and Gradel lost faith completely from what I saw and what he said to me when saying he had "no idea why he was constantly left out". It may be that Schlupp is being given the opportunity of a life-time - to either make it with United or to return with a far greater idea of what's required to be a proper left-back cos we don't seem to have any idea how make one and that goes back a lot further than the Pearson years. We couldn't even make one out of Alan Sheehan. When I look at our set-piece delivery nowcompared with what he offered by comparison i wince. Yes he was defensively vulnerable in certain ways but we simply couldn't adapt by play to his strengths and covering for his weaknesses. How that contrasts with United. So many of their great players had major weaknesses. Gary Neville was iffy in the air and vulnerable against far post crosses. Keane was a reactionary disaster waiting to happen and Scholes was one of the worst tacklers when defending that I've ever seen. But United coped with all that and simply played to their strengths, magnified them, showed faith and turned their strengths into lethal weapons. They did the same with Ronaldo, improving him beyond recognition. It's Pearson and his staff who really need a training spell at United - to learn just how to get the best from people. Because I'm still waiting to see anyone actually improve in a Leicester first team shirt - apart perhaps from centre-back Wes Morgan. Completely agree with all that. One of the best posts I've seen from Thracian (and I haven't paid him compliments before !). Pearson just doesn't have it. He's, at best, an average Championship manager and still hasn't got a clue about match tactics, or changing things around which aren't working. He's just too stubborn. What success we've had, I think is more down to Walsh as Scout and Shakespeare on the training ground.
Babylon Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 Making comparisons between Ronaldo improving at United and Alan Sheehan not improving here. I've seen it all now.
Babylon Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 What success we've had, I think is more down to Walsh as Scout and Shakespeare on the training ground. Deary me. Are you on their shoulder knowing who does what exactly? Funny how Pearson takes the blame for signing the shit players and any good ones are down to Walsh.
Swalker Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 We need him back!! Covers 2 positions although really want to see him get a run out in his natural striking role because that's where he's best! He's much better than waghorn and vardy so surely can nick one of their places off the bench. The guy has the next Max Gradel written all over him- shows he is a talented young lad, promises alot then next season Pearson gets rid
marbelladave Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 Making comparisons between Ronaldo improving at United and Alan Sheehan not improving here. I've seen it all now. It's about adding value...... A spectacular example sure, but United took a very promising winger and developed him into a world class forward. While not suggesting they are in the same class, how have Knockaert and Marshall developed with us? Not a lot as far as I can see and Marshall seems to be regressing....... Schlupp has barely progressed since being elevated to the senior squad, Gradel had to leave to get regular football, there is a pattern to all this and it is not a good one.
Leicfox Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 Some of the best left backs in the world started out as wingers/strikers in their youth, Patrick Evra & Ashley Cole to name two, and I'm sure that's where Man Utd will be testing him, Will Schlupp be the next?
Babylon Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 It's about adding value...... A spectacular example sure, but United took a very promising winger and developed him into a world class forward. While not suggesting they are in the same class, how have Knockaert and Marshall developed with us? Not a lot as far as I can see and Marshall seems to be regressing....... Schlupp has barely progressed since being elevated to the senior squad, Gradel had to leave to get regular football, there is a pattern to all this and it is not a good one. Did you watch a lot of Knockaert last year to know if he had progressed or not? Would we not get more for him than we paid?
5waller5 Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 Did you watch a lot of Knockaert last year to know if he had progressed or not? Would we not get more for him than we paid? I'd suggest that's down to exposure rather than improvement. I'd equally suggest he hasn't decline or improved in the 6 months or so he's been here.
marbelladave Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 Did you watch a lot of Knockaert last year to know if he had progressed or not? Would we not get more for him than we paid? Now you are just being silly..... He has been at City for 7 - 8 months and a regular starter for 6 months. Do you think he has improved in that time, I don't. And what about Marshall? Even allowing for the fact that he was perhaps a little over rated last season (due to his goals) I suggest that he has certainly regressed this.
MooseBreath Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 Well I think the comparisons between NP at Leicester and SAF at Old Trafford are perfectly reasonable. Pearson out. There is simply no excuse for not being as good at developing players as the most successful manager in British football history has been at the most successful club in Britain. If you're not developing players to the standard of Ronaldo who are among the best players to have ever played the game then you might as well just quit football because you're obviously not good enough. It's really just appalling that we haven't been able to produce a full back like Gary Neville. It is incredibly easy to develop players like that who go on to be the most capped right back of all time for England. If Pearson can't even do that then we need to get rid. Pathetic.
Babylon Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 Well I think the comparisons between NP at Leicester and SAF at Old Trafford are perfectly reasonable. Pearson out. There is simply no excuse for not being as good at developing players as the most successful manager in British football history has been at the most successful club in Britain. If you're not developing players to the standard of Ronaldo who are among the best players to have ever played the game then you might as well just quit football because you're obviously not good enough. It's really just appalling that we haven't been able to produce a full back like Gary Neville. It is incredibly easy to develop players like that who go on to be the most capped right back of all time for England. If Pearson can't even do that then we need to get rid. Pathetic. I'm sure you are right and nobody ever improves under him. That's why he got a bunch of freebies to win league one, get to the play offs, take an average team last year and get us second two games ago. Quite an achievement for someone who players only regress under. Sorry moose, quoted wrong person.
marbelladave Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 I'm sure you are right and nobody ever improves under him. That's why he got a bunch of freebies to win league one, get to the play offs, take an average team last year and get us second two games ago. Quite an achievement for someone who players only regress under. Sorry moose, quoted wrong person. Are you actually suggesting that any of the players I mentioned have improved under NFP? I find this and many of the arguments on this thread somewhat odd. Is it really that difficult to understand that a reasonably successful manager such as Pearson may not actually be perfect in everything that he does? We have seen plenty of posts suggesting that NFP is inflexible in terms of setup and formation, that he has no Plan B, that he is unable to change a game that is running against us (among others). Are you going to argue that these views are all nonsense as well? I hope not! Well, I am going to add another suggestion, that NFP and his staff have a poor record in developing and improving creative players. Solid defenders, hard working midfielders, no problem, improving wingers and attacking players in general, errr no, I'm struggling to think of one. Does this mean that all the things that he has achieved do not matter? Of course not, that argument would be foolish, just as it is foolish to argue that (arguably) the best manager City have had in many a year is actually perfect in everything that he does.
Guest Col city fan Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 Are you actually suggesting that any of the players I mentioned have improved under NFP? I find this and many of the arguments on this thread somewhat odd. Is it really that difficult to understand that a reasonably successful manager such as Pearson may not actually be perfect in everything that he does? We have seen plenty of posts suggesting that NFP is inflexible in terms of setup and formation, that he has no Plan B, that he is unable to change a game that is running against us (among others). Are you going to argue that these views are all nonsense as well? I hope not! Well, I am going to add another suggestion, that NFP and his staff have a poor record in developing and improving creative players. Solid defenders, hard working midfielders, no problem, improving wingers and attacking players in general, errr no, I'm struggling to think of one. Does this mean that all the things that he has achieved do not matter? Of course not, that argument would be foolish, just as it is foolish to argue that (arguably) the best manager City have had in many a year is actually perfect in everything that he does. You're wasting your time Dave... Believe me.
marbelladave Posted 21 February 2013 Posted 21 February 2013 You're wasting your time Dave... Believe me. Surely not...... Babylon isn't stupid, I'm positive he can see that some of his arguments are complete tosh.......
Thracian Posted 22 February 2013 Posted 22 February 2013 Are you actually suggesting that any of the players I mentioned have improved under NFP? I find this and many of the arguments on this thread somewhat odd. Is it really that difficult to understand that a reasonably successful manager such as Pearson may not actually be perfect in everything that he does? We have seen plenty of posts suggesting that NFP is inflexible in terms of setup and formation, that he has no Plan B, that he is unable to change a game that is running against us (among others). Are you going to argue that these views are all nonsense as well? I hope not! Well, I am going to add another suggestion, that NFP and his staff have a poor record in developing and improving creative players. Solid defenders, hard working midfielders, no problem, improving wingers and attacking players in general, errr no, I'm struggling to think of one. Does this mean that all the things that he has achieved do not matter? Of course not, that argument would be foolish, just as it is foolish to argue that (arguably) the best manager City have had in many a year is actually perfect in everything that he does. You're wasting your time Dave... Believe me. Entirely agree.
teblin Posted 22 February 2013 Posted 22 February 2013 Drinkwater has improved has he not? As has James? As has wes Morgan?
MC Prussian Posted 22 February 2013 Posted 22 February 2013 Are you actually suggesting that any of the players I mentioned have improved under NFP? I find this and many of the arguments on this thread somewhat odd. Is it really that difficult to understand that a reasonably successful manager such as Pearson may not actually be perfect in everything that he does? We have seen plenty of posts suggesting that NFP is inflexible in terms of setup and formation, that he has no Plan B, that he is unable to change a game that is running against us (among others). Are you going to argue that these views are all nonsense as well? I hope not! Well, I am going to add another suggestion, that NFP and his staff have a poor record in developing and improving creative players. Solid defenders, hard working midfielders, no problem, improving wingers and attacking players in general, errr no, I'm struggling to think of one. Does this mean that all the things that he has achieved do not matter? Of course not, that argument would be foolish, just as it is foolish to argue that (arguably) the best manager City have had in many a year is actually perfect in everything that he does. I think that's got mainly to do with the fact that Pearson has had about a season and a half to steady the ship. In this period, the first step was to get rid of unwanted/unwilling/overpaid players. I can't think of a manager who's been able to develop players that he's brought along or youth/young players that were already at the club over that short amount of time. It requires a lot of preparation. Anyone expecting Pearson to do miracles and act as some sort of wizard is slightly out of his mind. Clearly, some people still expect way too much way too quickly. In general, I find it to be a huge issue in modern football because managers are usually the first ones to be sacrificed for short-term success, and with new managers the whole process starts anew. And again and again... It would be best to judge Pearson in a year or two. Provided he's still with us then.
Greatness_Since_1884 Posted 22 February 2013 Posted 22 February 2013 Why the rush? Pearso'sn shown no signs of using him since his one big mistake at Leeds. Same as he stopped involving Moore and Gradel. Everything seems so black and white with the bloke but it wouldn't be my kind of approach. Yes, the Fergie way is to give players a taste of first team action, highlight weaknesses, withdraw them to improve and involve them if they respond. But Pearson seems to play them, withdraw them and the next time you see them there's no noticeable difference. In fact, if anything they seem to get worse. Even Andy King's got worse because we've managed to make such a positive player so comparatively negative. Schlupp got worse, Moore got worse and Gradel lost faith completely from what I saw and what he said to me when saying he had "no idea why he was constantly left out". It may be that Schlupp is being given the opportunity of a life-time - to either make it with United or to return with a far greater idea of what's required to be a proper left-back cos we don't seem to have any idea how make one and that goes back a lot further than the Pearson years. We couldn't even make one out of Alan Sheehan. When I look at our set-piece delivery now compared with what he offered by comparison i wince. Yes he was defensively vulnerable in certain ways but we simply couldn't adapt by playing to his strengths and covering for his weaknesses. How that contrasts with United. So many of their great players had major weaknesses. Gary Neville was iffy in the air and vulnerable against far post crosses. Keane was a reactionary disaster waiting to happen and Scholes was one of the worst tacklers when defending that I've ever seen. But United coped with all that and simply played to their strengths, magnified them, showed faith and turned their strengths into lethal weapons. They did the same with Ronaldo, improving him beyond recognition. It's Pearson and his staff who really need a training spell at United - to learn just how to get the best from people. Because I'm still waiting to see anyone actually improve in a Leicester first team shirt - apart perhaps from centre-back Wes Morgan. And where is this potentially amazing left back playing now? Alan Sheehan by the way had already said he didn't want a new contract and had agreed a deal with Leeds before NP arrived - not much he could've done about that. On Schlupp, do people not think training with the best club and best manager in England might help him become a better player?
Babylon Posted 22 February 2013 Posted 22 February 2013 Are you actually suggesting that any of the players I mentioned have improved under NFP? No, I am suggesting perhaps just perhaps half the players listed. The likes of Sheehan, Schlupp (as a striker) and that every other youngster that Thracian has banged on about for the last 5 years haven't actually been that good and were already above their natural level. Players like King are already playing at their level. The only one there is even a clear argument of them being good enough was Gradel. He took over a bunch of relegated players, added a loads of frees cand cast offs, a couple of money signings and turned them into a play off team. How is that not improving players? People like Wayne Brown, Solano, Dyer, Chris Powell, Berner, Michael Morrison were players from lower leagues or players that people that had given up on. He signed Hobbs who went on to be sold at a profit, did he not improve? Fryatt was pretty much gubbins prior to Pearson arriving and then every year under him here and at Hull he scored a lot of goals. Morgan similarly was derided on here by almost everyone and he's turned into a great player for us. You said it's about adding Value, well Knockaerts value will also be considerably more than it was previously, and how do any of us know whether he's improved on the player he was last year. At Hull he got in the likes of Chester for a couple of hundred k and Dull were valuing him £2/£3/£4m. I'm not arguing he's perfect, I'm arguing against the fact he's made out to be incapable of "adding value" or improving players. Our youth team has produced nothing of any real prem quality since Heskey, and before that I can't even remember one we made that someone else wanted. Perhaps the problems here with regards not getting talented youngsters improving through the ranks lie somewhat deeper than Nigel Pearson, because this problem has been around for a long long time. Comparing us to United is bonkers, because they have the pick of the countries talent. They can also buy the worlds best kids like Ronaldo. They spent £12.24 million on the lad, it's not like the quality wasn't there. And it took him years to turn into the consistent player his is now, and yet you judge Pearson because you don't think Knockaert has improved in 6 months, something you can't even prove anyway. Ferguson has been at United for god knows how long, Pearson was here for a couple of years, and now another year for his second stint. United can ship them out to teams like us for experience, we did that with Gradel and it blew up in our face... it's easier for them to blood them at other teams AND retain them, kids want to be at United so they go back... are they bothered about being at Leicester? All three full seasons he's had we've been competing for something, that hasn't given us the luxury to chuck in the kids to aid them either. And we've not had the luxury of loaning them out that often, perhaps only a month or two at a time due to not having a huge squad, as we needed their backup. Sometimes it's easier for people in say Derbys position, where they have nothing to play for, not the pressure from the top and nothing to lose by blooding the kids.
marbelladave Posted 22 February 2013 Posted 22 February 2013 Drinkwater has improved has he not? As has James? As has wes Morgan? Do read the posts before replying...... I refer you to the words "creative players" and "wingers and attacking players", it might help...... I think that's got mainly to do with the fact that Pearson has had about a season and a half to steady the ship. In this period, the first step was to get rid of unwanted/unwilling/overpaid players. I can't think of a manager who's been able to develop players that he's brought along or youth/young players that were already at the club over that short amount of time. It requires a lot of preparation. Anyone expecting Pearson to do miracles and act as some sort of wizard is slightly out of his mind. Clearly, some people still expect way too much way too quickly. In general, I find it to be a huge issue in modern football because managers are usually the first ones to be sacrificed for short-term success, and with new managers the whole process starts anew. And again and again... It would be best to judge Pearson in a year or two. Provided he's still with us then. Reasonable response but I suggest you look at Marshall, he has now been here for over a year and is clearly going backwards, Dyer has been here forever and not improved one jot. I accept that since his second coming, NFP has had a lot to sort out and, quite frankly, he has done pretty well, but to suggest that this gave him no time to work with his squad is a nonsense. If he really was spending all his time on 'executive management' issues then he should have given day to day control of the first team squad over to his assistant and if he was not up to job, brought in someone who was. What I personally find confusing and frustrating is that NFP clearly made huge changes to our playing style during the summer, to great effect, but we have failed to develop from that excellent promise. The early season issues are still there and the evidence of matchdays suggests that they have not been seriously addressed.
Babylon Posted 22 February 2013 Posted 22 February 2013 Do read the posts before replying...... I refer you to the words "creative players" and "wingers and attacking players", it might help...... To be fair the point has been twisted slighting from the start as I don't believe the original moan was limited to creative players.
marbelladave Posted 22 February 2013 Posted 22 February 2013 No, I am suggesting perhaps just perhaps half the players listed. The likes of Sheehan, Schlupp (as a striker) and that every other youngster that Thracian has banged on about for the last 5 years haven't actually been that good and were already above their natural level. Players like King are already playing at their level. The only one there is even a clear argument of them being good enough was Gradel. He took over a bunch of relegated players, added a loads of frees cand cast offs, a couple of money signings and turned them into a play off team. How is that not improving players? People like Wayne Brown, Solano, Dyer, Chris Powell, Berner, Michael Morrison were players from lower leagues or players that people that had given up on. He signed Hobbs who went on to be sold at a profit, did he not improve? Fryatt was pretty much gubbins prior to Pearson arriving and then every year under him here and at Hull he scored a lot of goals. Morgan similarly was derided on here by almost everyone and he's turned into a great player for us. You said it's about adding Value, well Knockaerts value will also be considerably more than it was previously, and how do any of us know whether he's improved on the player he was last year. At Hull he got in the likes of Chester for a couple of hundred k and Dull were valuing him £2/£3/£4m. I'm not arguing he's perfect, I'm arguing against the fact he's made out to be incapable of "adding value" or improving players. Our youth team has produced nothing of any real prem quality since Heskey, and before that I can't even remember one we made that someone else wanted. Perhaps the problems here with regards not getting talented youngsters improving through the ranks lie somewhat deeper than Nigel Pearson, because this problem has been around for a long long time. Comparing us to United is bonkers, because they have the pick of the countries talent. They can also buy the worlds best kids like Ronaldo. They spent £12.24 million on the lad, it's not like the quality wasn't there. And it took him years to turn into the consistent player his is now, and yet you judge Pearson because you don't think Knockaert has improved in 6 months, something you can't even prove anyway. Ferguson has been at United for god knows how long, Pearson was here for a couple of years, and now another year for his second stint. United can ship them out to teams like us for experience, we did that with Gradel and it blew up in our face... it's easier for them to blood them at other teams AND retain them, kids want to be at United so they go back... are they bothered about being at Leicester? All three full seasons he's had we've been competing for something, that hasn't given us the luxury to chuck in the kids to aid them either. And we've not had the luxury of loaning them out that often, perhaps only a month or two at a time due to not having a huge squad, as we needed their backup. Sometimes it's easier for people in say Derbys position, where they have nothing to play for, not the pressure from the top and nothing to lose by blooding the kids. The usual mix of sense and nonsense...... When talking about added value, I was talking about creative and attacking players, and you struggle to find any. Dyer and Fryatt were the only names you came up with and their improvements are marginal at best. The Ronaldo comparison was brought up by someone else, I even said it was an extreme example, yet the 'value added' by United was huge, even allowing for his talent and £12m price tag. To my mind there are simply too many issues regarding NFP as a coach for me to be entirely comfortable with him. I addressed some of them in a previous post so I will not repeat myself. What I find particularly disturbing is that despite those issues being well known we do not appear to have even tried to address them, look at our vulnerability to shots from distance for example, our wretched corners, just a couple more things to add to our other limitations listed. That NFP has kept us in the top 6 pretty much the whole season despite those issues is actually a fine achievement and appears to be enough for some, but I can not help thinking that we would be even better placed had some of those issues been addressed over the last 6 - 7 months.
marbelladave Posted 22 February 2013 Posted 22 February 2013 To be fair the point has been twisted slighting from the start as I don't believe the original moan was limited to creative players. To be equally fair, my comments on 'the original moan' that we are not improving our players did cite creative players in every case. When challenged I made it clear that I was talking about such players.......
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.