ADK Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 I'm not sure Whitbread has failed, he was brought it as defensive cover and that's what he's been. Vardy might still have a role to play next season as a squad player. Successes Morgan De Laet James Drinkwater Marshall Knockeart Wood Ok some of those have had patchy form but they all have had strong games for us and all but Morgan are young and likely to improve.
Chairman of the Bored Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 We're still going in the right direction; will take a while to get over yesterday but I still back Pearson to get us up. He does need to focus on the "give and go" style of mid-season which was some of the best footy we've played in ages rather than revert to hoof ball when things get tricky. He's done it once and he can do it again, so the summer signings will be critical in that respect. He still gets my vote though as we do need stability, more chop and change will not help at all.
hackneyfox Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 I'm not sure Whitbread has failed, he was brought it as defensive cover and that's what he's been. Vardy might still have a role to play next season as a squad player. Successes Morgan De Laet James Drinkwater Marshall Knockeart Wood Ok some of those have had patchy form but they all have had strong games for us and all but Morgan are young and likely to improve. The idea that because a player is young he will automatically improve has yet to be proven, perhaps they were playing above their natural level and have recently been found out. With the form that Drinkwater, Marshall and Wood have shown recently would you call them a success?
hackneyfox Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 He still gets my vote though as we do need stability, more chop and change will not help at all. Stability alone does not bring success and as Pearson is lacking in tactical nous ......... All the previous managers over the last 10 years should have been sacked earlier than they were.
indierich06 Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 Vardy, Futacs, Whitbread have all failed so for 90% to have been a success he'd have had to buy in 30 players. Many still question De Laet, Drinkwater & Marshall, Kane wasn't a permanent signing but was a loan as was Keane who has got worse. So who has been a success? Morgan James Knocky Wood? FFS, I haven't sat down with my calculator and worked out what ****ing percentage of players have been a success here. Alright, let's say the vast majority. Good signings: James Morgan Knockaert Wood Keane Marshall De Laet Drinkwater Not all spectacular, amazing signings, but all good, solid signings. The shit list: Vardy Futacs Unequivocally shit. The Jury's still out: Whitbread Kane Whitbread's never looked fit enough, would like to see him after a proper pre-season. As for Kane, I still think he has a lot more to offer than what we've seen. Hasn't helped him that we brought him in when we were at our lowest ebb and then played him out of position. Wouldn't be against him coming back next season. And that gives the manager a Pearson-Signing-Success-O-Meter rating of 67%! So let's take a look at what he's won! Why, it's the chance to manage Leicester City again for another promotion push! THE CROWD GOES WILD!
whoareyaaa Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 He has to stay IMO, let him have one more season he knows this league very well now and we have a good bunch of players obviously I would ship out about 8 of the current squad and then bring in some experience in key parts. I would hate to see Lennon be given the job I really would, However Lennon working alongside MON would be interesting.
Chairman of the Bored Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 Stability alone does not bring success and as Pearson is lacking in tactical nous ......... All the previous managers over the last 10 years should have been sacked earlier than they were. I'd like to see some evidence based assessment of your statement. In the long term, I think stability is more likely to achieve success. And success needs to be sustainable. The cub also needs to grow around Pearson so that when we do get in the Prem we can stay there.
hackneyfox Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 In all of that defence of Pearson there is one part that screams out why he isn't good enough. 'and then played him out of position' He's done the same with Schlupp, Wood & Nugent, King has been used as a defensive midfielder which spolit his game, Marshall & Knocky don't know whether they're central or wide.
hackneyfox Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 I'd like to see some evidence based assessment of your statement. In the long term, I think stability is more likely to achieve success. And success needs to be sustainable. The cub also needs to grow around Pearson so that when we do get in the Prem we can stay there. In the long term having a manager who has tactical awareness and knows how to change a game (preferably before rather than after the opposition have) with the correct use of substitutions rather than 'like for like' doesn't count for a s much as stability? Getting a decent manager in and giving him time is obviously the correct way of going about things, but the key is getting a decent manager in the first place, for me Pearson isn't that manager.
ADK Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 We don't really have the squa depth at the moment though, that is why players are out of position. Konch is injured, who are we gonna play in left back? Some kid from the academy?
ADK Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 Alan Curbishley with Charlton is a good demonstration of what giving a manager time can do.
indierich06 Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 In all of that defence of Pearson there is one part that screams out why he isn't good enough. 'and then played him out of position' He's done the same with Schlupp, Wood & Nugent, King has been used as a defensive midfielder which spolit his game, Marshall & Knocky don't know whether they're central or wide. Needs must. Modern footballers need to be adaptable and because of the buffoon who had the job before Pearson, money's a bit tight and we can't afford a massive squad for cover because we're still stuck with the failures of the last manager. Schlupp has been more than adequate cover at LB, Wood and Nugent have been used on the wing maybe once or twice, but that's it. King is a natural defensive midfielder, so I don't know what the issue is there and Marshall and Knockaert are wingers who like to cut inside as well, and they're used as such. You see it as a tactical failing, I see it as getting the most out of your squad and dealing with what is a very difficult situation thanks to the last moron who was in charge.
Kitchandro Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 FFS, I haven't sat down with my calculator and worked out what ****ing percentage of players have been a success here. Alright, let's say the vast majority. Good signings: James Morgan Knockaert Wood Keane Marshall De Laet Drinkwater Not all spectacular, amazing signings, but all good, solid signings. The shit list: Vardy Futacs Unequivocally shit. The Jury's still out: Whitbread Kane Whitbread's never looked fit enough, would like to see him after a proper pre-season. As for Kane, I still think he has a lot more to offer than what we've seen. Hasn't helped him that we brought him in when we were at our lowest ebb and then played him out of position. Wouldn't be against him coming back next season. And that gives the manager a Pearson-Signing-Success-O-Meter rating of 67%! So let's take a look at what he's won! Why, it's the chance to manage Leicester City again for another promotion push! THE CROWD GOES WILD! Can't say I agree with all of that. I think the gamble of putting the young Keane in at centre back hasn't worked, he's made too many errors and looked well out of his depth against Watford. It was the defence that really cost us and he was all over the place. I'd put De Laet on the jury's out list at best. He is not a good defender, but very useful on the ball. I'll give Wood the benefit of the doubt because I'm sure he's a better player than he has been since his injury, but if we're honest, as good as he was when he first joined he's been absolutely woeful on the whole since. His signing may be a success in the long term but when you look at this season in isolation, our performances dipped dramatically after his inclusion. Is that because we changed our style of play for him? Drinkwater as well, had some very good games but has faded into obscurity when it's really mattered, he's not very consistant. Marshall is also borderline, he's been crap for most of the season but he could still yet fulfill his potential. I'd also put Whitbread and Kane in the shit list, they've really not done enough positive to suggest they are of use to us. One thing I would say is I think quite a few of these players have played well below themselves far too often this season. Pearson cannot be held completely responsible for that.
5waller5 Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 Can't say I agree with all of that. I think the gamble of putting the young Keane in at centre back hasn't worked, he's made too many errors and looked well out of his depth against Watford. It was the defence that really cost us and he was all over the place. I'd put De Laet on the jury's out list at best. He is not a good defender, but very useful on the ball. I'll give Wood the benefit of the doubt because I'm sure he's a better player than he has been since his injury, but if we're honest, as good as he was when he first joined he's been absolutely woeful on the whole since. His signing may be a success in the long term but when you look at this season in isolation, our performances dipped dramatically after his inclusion. Is that because we changed our style of play for him? Drinkwater as well, had some very good games but has faded into obscurity when it's really mattered, he's not very consistant. Marshall is also borderline, he's been crap for most of the season but he could still yet fulfill his potential. I'd also put Whitbread and Kane in the shit list, they've really not done enough positive to suggest they are of use to us. One thing I would say is I think quite a few of these players have played well below themselves far too often this season. Pearson cannot be held completely responsible for that. I fundamentally disagree with this. That's exactly what the manager does - gets the best out of his players .....
deanolegend1989 Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 FFS, I haven't sat down with my calculator and worked out what ****ing percentage of players have been a success here. Alright, let's say the vast majority. Good signings: James James Morgan Morgan Knockaert Knockaert Wood Keane Marshall De Laet Drinkwater Not all spectacular, amazing signings, but all good, solid signings. The shit list: Vardy Vardy Futacs Futacs Whitbread KANE Unequivocally shit. The Jury's still out: Whitbread Marshall Kane De Laet Drinky Keane Wood Whitbread's never looked fit enough, would like to see him after a proper pre-season. As for Kane, I still think he has a lot more to offer than what we've seen. Hasn't helped him that we brought him in when we were at our lowest ebb and then played him out of position. Wouldn't be against him coming back next season. And that gives the manager a Pearson-Signing-Success-O-Meter rating of 67%! So let's take a look at what he's won! Why, it's the chance to manage Leicester City again for another promotion push! THE CROWD GOES WILD! Ive made some changes for you. Anyone who thinks Kane isnt total garbage needs a reality check. Id rather have Alan Maybury.
Kitchandro Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 I fundamentally disagree with this. That's exactly what the manager does - gets the best out of his players ..... You believe he can be held completely responsible for players performances?
seenitall Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 You believe he can be held completely responsible for players performances? Completely 100%
hackneyfox Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 Schlupp has been more than adequate cover at LB, Wood and Nugent have been used on the wing maybe once or twice, but that's it. King is a natural defensive midfielder, so I don't know what the issue is there and Marshall and Knockaert are wingers who like to cut inside as well, and they're used as such. You think Schlupp has been more than adequate as a left back? I think he's clearly not a left back. Wood & Nugent were pushed out wide when Schlupp played up front, Nugent has been played out wide a number of times this season and clearly isn't happy with that.
hackneyfox Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 FFS, I haven't sat down with my calculator and worked out what ****ing percentage of players have been a success here. Alright, let's say the vast majority. Good signings: James Morgan Knockaert Wood Keane Marshall De Laet Drinkwater Not all spectacular, amazing signings, but all good, solid signings. The shit list: Vardy Futacs Unequivocally shit. The Jury's still out: Whitbread Kane Whitbread's never looked fit enough, would like to see him after a proper pre-season. As for Kane, I still think he has a lot more to offer than what we've seen. Hasn't helped him that we brought him in when we were at our lowest ebb and then played him out of position. Wouldn't be against him coming back next season. And that gives the manager a Pearson-Signing-Success-O-Meter rating of 67%! So let's take a look at what he's won! Why, it's the chance to manage Leicester City again for another promotion push! THE CROWD GOES WILD! You claimed 90% and now we're down to 67% and there's afew of us who have doubts about the players you claim have been a success. Morgan, Knocky, James - Success although Morgan has been a bit off recently. De Laet - Has done quite well but many disagree Wood, Marshall, Drinkwater - Have gone backwards Keane - not ours but gone backwards Kane - Not ours but dogshit Vardy, Futacs - Clearly not good enough Whitbread - Jury is really out on this one but in the main poor So that's a 25% success rate 25% bloody awful 33% gone backwards under Pearson
Webbo Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 Stay. Although I'm having my doubts about him I can't think of a replacement who would definitely do a better job. I'm sure some arsehole will say something like my grandma could do a better job but lets be realistic.
indierich06 Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 Ive made some changes for you. Anyone who thinks Kane isnt total garbage needs a reality check. Id rather have Alan Maybury. Thanks, but your changes are bullshit. I don't need anyone else to tell me what my opinions are.
indierich06 Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 You claimed 90% and now we're down to 67% and there's afew of us who have doubts about the players you claim have been a success. Morgan, Knocky, James - Success although Morgan has been a bit off recently. De Laet - Has done quite well but many disagree Wood, Marshall, Drinkwater - Have gone backwards Keane - not ours but gone backwards Kane - Not ours but dogshit Vardy, Futacs - Clearly not good enough Whitbread - Jury is really out on this one but in the main poor So that's a 25% success rate 25% bloody awful 33% gone backwards under Pearson 90% was an arbitrary figure plucked out of the air you pedantic ****er. I still maintain only two of those signings were shit. You're entitled to your own opinion. Mind you, you've been gunning for Pearson all season, so I suppose it didn't much matter what he achieved while he was here when people have already made their minds up.
deanolegend1989 Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 Thanks, but your changes are bullshit. I don't need anyone else to tell me what my opinions are. Everyones entitled to their opinions, but thank the lord your not our manager if you think Kane is even average. Also you say you think 2 of his signings were shit? care to tell me which 2? Because if Kane aint 1 of them, Id like to know who they are.
hackneyfox Posted 13 May 2013 Posted 13 May 2013 90% was an arbitrary figure plucked out of the air you pedantic ****er. I still maintain only two of those signings were shit. You're entitled to your own opinion. Mind you, you've been gunning for Pearson all season, so I suppose it didn't much matter what he achieved while he was here when people have already made their minds up. I've laso noticed that the Pearsonites are, in general, the ones who abuse those who disagree with them. I wonder why? I wasn't gunning for Pearson when we played the ball on the ground and were doing well, I thought and hoped that he'd learnt something as a manger, then he reverted to his previous style of defensive hoof ball. You've been just a set in your ways as me, I at least am able to see when he did get it right. He seems incapable of learning as a manager and so cannot help improve the players which, for me, is clearly proven by the fact that most have gone backwards over the season.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.