Why do so many fans want Pearson to be the manager next season?

[shade]

I'm wavering.

I think there are good arguments to keep him - some of our performances up to the end of January were among the most exciting I've seen a Leicester team play in a long time and we amassed a lot of points (and goals) that ultimately got us the play-off place that, after last season, we probably would have hoped for. He has brought down the wage budget, seems to have picked up some good young talent and shipped out some of the crap. We did come very close and there would be no questions asked at the moment if only Knockaert had placed his pen better (or poked the follow up a bit harder). We got to the very brink of a play-off final that I would have fancied us to win.

On the other hand, we had the disastrous freefall after January and couldn't buy a win for three months. It is almost unforgiveable to implode in that fashion with barely a whimper. Some tactical decisions have been incomprehensible, playing certain players out of position, a series of odd substitutions, a habit of using subs in the last few minutes of tight games to little effect... and Harry Kane. Chuck in the mysterious loss of form of Chris Wood (possibly not his fault, but he's not exactly come out in support of Wood or explained whether he's ill/injured).

If I wasn't a little sick of our constant changes of manager in the search for The Special One, I would say get rid now. I'm still tempted to take that view if only to inject a bit of excitement into this post-play off depression - Martin O'Neill would be amazing but wouldn't come back; if we got Neil Lennon I would be delighted to have a former player with a bit of passion and a decent managerial CV; a McCarthy or McDermott would be OK but are they worth the change? I think overall that I am (just) on the side of keeping him for now. We have put a lot of effort to get to this point and a new manager would inevitably start over again; we'd lose Craig Shakespeare who I think is tremendously valuable as a scout; and there is no guarantee we could do any better - constant change has not served us particularly well for the last decade, it leaves a lot of "deadwood" as players are put to one side and I think Pearson probably has a good argument to say he is only part of the way through building something.

Even keeping Pearson creates its own stability issues in that he will be under massive pressure to start the season well. If we don't then we could be back in that cycle of a mid-season managerial change again, which is even worse than changing in the summer. Given the nature of the Championship, things can turn quickly so I would say to our owners that if they are going to keep Pearson then he must have the whole season as long as we are there or thereabouts.

But I will probably change my mind next week!

saved me typing anything!

[LeicesterLuke91]

He's building the foundations of a very good team of players. I can only imagine the average age of our squad is quite young and therefore suggests he's building for the future.

If a new manager were to take over at the KP we would see a dramatic overhaul of the current players. Every manager likes to have his own preferred players in each position. This would cost us more money and time for them to settle. The squad we have right now (excluding of couple of additions in the summer) are settled, growing in confidence and will get us up.

This is a marathon, not a sprint.

Backing Pearson 100%

[marbelladave]

To me it is dead simple, we have a manager who,

1) Recruits well, particularly some good young players, manages the finances well, including trying hard to reduce the wages bill, deals effectively, ruthlessly even, with players who do not suit his plans. Therefore he should stay.

2) Is tactically rigid and conservative, is rarely able to influence a game through substitutions or tactical changes, fails to address obvious weaknesses and does not improve his players, particularly his attacking ones. Therefore he should go.

I think both statements are true, just pick the one you consider more important.

[leicesterlad1989]

Building a good youthful team. Good contact; i.e. the United connection. Played some fantastic football earlier on this season. Can't deny we had a brilliant first half of the season. Stability is key to any success.

 

To those who want rid - Who do you want?

 

I would fully understand if Pearson was sacked, purely for the bad run alone but I just don't know who is realistically available.

[hackneyfox]

To me it is dead simple, we have a manager who,

1) Recruits well, particularly some good young players, manages the finances well, including trying hard to reduce the wages bill, deals effectively, ruthlessly even, with players who do not suit his plans. Therefore he should stay.

2) Is tactically rigid and conservative, is rarely able to influence a game through substitutions or tactical changes, fails to address obvious weaknesses and does not improve his players, particularly his attacking ones. Therefore he should go.

I think both statements are true, just pick the one you consider more important.

1 is the job of a general manager

[hackneyfox]

Building a good youthful team. Good contact; i.e. the United connection. Played some fantastic football earlier on this season. Can't deny we had a brilliant first half of the season. Stability is key to any success.

 

To those who want rid - Who do you want?

 

I would fully understand if Pearson was sacked, purely for the bad run alone but I just don't know who is realistically available.

Stop worrying about who is available, as mentioned above with a salary on offer of 1m there will be plenty of decent mangers, currently employed, who will apply.

[marbelladave]

He's building the foundations of a very good team of players. I can only imagine the average age of our squad is quite young and therefore suggests he's building for the future.

If a new manager were to take over at the KP we would see a dramatic overhaul of the current players. Every manager likes to have his own preferred players in each position. This would cost us more money and time for them to settle. The squad we have right now (excluding of couple of additions in the summer) are settled, growing in confidence and will get us up.

This is a marathon, not a sprint.

Backing Pearson 100%

This is the usual argument, and if we continue with the style and type of manager that is the norm in this league, then it has some merit.

Personally I think clubs in our position need a different strategy, a more unified approach to how we want to operate and play as a club and as a team, this managerial merry go round and the change in personnel that it usually entails is risky and perhaps not even viable under FFP.

I would like to see a 'football manager' who looks after the football at all levels and has a vision for how the club is to operate and move forward within the limits set by the board.

Coaches, even the first team coach, are employed to work within that system, they will obviously have input as to the players that are needed or not needed but the base principle is that they work within the existing framework.

Takes a different kind of person to be prepared to work in that sort of a setup, the old style 'I'm the boss' type of manager would clearly not suit, so it requires a big change in the way the club operates,

[marbelladave]

1 is the job of a general manager

Not sure what you are suggesting here, it is quite clear that NFP has handled a large part of the "general managers" job since his return.

[hackneyfox]

Running a club this way means continuity in your style of play and that there is no large turnover of players when the coach changes.

[hackneyfox]

Not sure what you are suggesting here, it is quite clear that NFP has handled a large part of the "general managers" job since his return.

I think I'm agreeing with you that there needs to be a manger who oversees the bigger picture of player recruitment, salaries etc.

[FLINTHAMFC]

Simple answer is he is the best man for the job. Name me a better one we have had in the last 10 years. As for the football. City fans always moan about wanting to see passing slick football but when we have a manager that implements that style of play we want them out Holloway and Sousa spring to mind). Pearson is the rock we need at City, leave him be and he will get us there.

[Loggy88]

Pearson should stay in charge. I think stability is important when we have had a big disappointment like Sunday. I think we need to offload 3 or 4 players and we need 3 new signings. A centre back, centre midfielder and striker. But in the new signings coming in, I would like to see more experienced players. Not any 30+ but 26,27,28. There's been some talk that it will be even harder next season to go up but out the only team relegated who I think will be top 6 is Reading for me.

[marbelladave]

I think I'm agreeing with you that there needs to be a manger who oversees the bigger picture of player recruitment, salaries etc.

So the first team coach is subordinate to the structure and policies of the club, while having input on playing staff he does not have the ultimate say and his primary responsibility is to work with, and develop, the players he has.

Back in the day, I suggested this sort of setup with Sven in the 'General Manager (Football)' role but this did not meet approval. Given the excesses that took place during his time, that was probably a good call, though I think the model has real merit.

[Foxes Blue Blood]

Mixed feelings about Pearson, some very good some very bad! but Who is better than Pearson, is available and would come to Leicester?

 

We have some good young players, we have a few that should go and I think will go, surely with 12 months left on Pearsons contract the club will stay with him?

Rumour is Wood has been carrying an injury, what about the other players?

Kane had to play each game according to his loan contract, he won't be here next season.

 

Leave it to the club if they want Pearson to stay we must be united behind him.

[dannythefox]

Yes he's saved/ cut back on money but any manager would of had to do that given the stupid wages etc! Pearson is an ok manager nothing more he's not got the edge to finish in the top 2 he's proved that this season when teams pack the midfield out he hasn't got a clue what to do!

[indierich06]

Stop worrying about who is available, as mentioned above with a salary on offer of 1m there will be plenty of decent mangers, currently employed, who will apply.

 

Yeah **** it, let's just sack him and see who applies, that sounds like a great way to run a football club.

[flowwolf]

Got us to the playoffs... within one kick of Wembley.

 

 

Then our LUCK finally ran out .

[flowwolf]

Nige will get us there. One of the reasons we fell apart was our squad is half the size of some other teams in this division. We used the fewest players out of any club in the Championship which has to lend itself to tiredness.

If we improve a few areas over the summer, keep the likes of King, Kasper, James, Morgan and Knockaert then we'll have a real shot at it next season.

 

 

Thats because the dickhead loaned so many out or sold them. We had a big enough squad at the start of the season.

[Harry - LCFC]

To answer the question: Because I view him as a good manager who has a done a good job here. I believe he'll continue the good work and give us a greater chance next season.

[flowwolf]

Yeah **** it, let's just sack him and see who applies, that sounds like a great way to run a football club.

 

 

Or yeah lets keep him and have to put up with another season of hoofball, tactical naivity and religation. Sounds like a great way to run a football club.

[hackneyfox]

Yeah **** it, let's just sack him and see who applies, that sounds like a great way to run a football club.

In an ideal world we'd have a replacement lined up but isn't it illegal to approach managers who are crrently employed?

[Fox92]

Then our LUCK finally ran out .

 

So, over 46 games we were 'lucky'. I don't think so. A cup competiton is a knockaert competition, so the 'best' team doesn't always win. However, during a 40+ league, the best teams are those who finish 1-6. There is no such thing as 'luck' - The harder you work, the more luck you create for yourself.

[jamesmilner]

Big rumour, twitter ? He's definitely going ? Not if but when ?

[blue heart]

80 percent in favour with a total collapse since January? Relegation form for next season.

Shut up daft lad

[flowwolf]

So, over 46 games we were 'lucky'. I don't think so. A cup competiton is a knockaert competition, so the 'best' team doesn't always win. However, during a 40+ league, the best teams are those who finish 1-6. There is no such thing as 'luck' - The harder you work, the more luck you create for yourself.

 

 

So you don't consider scraping into the playoffs on the last day with vertually the last kick of the day and Bolton fvcking up lucky ? You don't consider knockaerts dive being construed as a penalty by a blind ref as lucky ? Christ if I were you I would have a few bob on the lottery this week you never know you may get lucky.