Do players improve or regress under Pearson and his staff?

[Harry - LCFC]

Agree, you can't expect Pearson to get the maximum out of each player. I think that's very harsh.

 

You seem to just want to find any possible way to criticise Pearson if that's how you think. Could King have been better? Yes. Should Pearson be blamed for somehow "blocking" his development? No, for me that's a little ridiculous.

[seenitall]

Or maybe if they weren't all incredibly shit footballers on laughably high wages?

Which is the point at which you appear as hysterically unbending in your opinions as anyone you care to criticise on here - some balance please? You have no idea what money SSL, Danns or Mills were on and arguably (and no doubt you couldn't see through your blinkers to make a reasoned argument) all came to us as quality footballers - Danns was even wanted by Nige at Hull and Beckford scored more in the last few games for Huddersfield than our entire strike force combined. It is relevant to this point - just because Nige coaches certain players to the point they can no longer perform for us doesn't necessarily make them poor footballers.

 

The appeal of a manager like O Neill in the past was that he was able to take average players at other clubs and turn them into great players for us. Nige has achieved this with Wes but his sucess rate is poor when you take into account the number of players he has to admit defeat on, the four you mention, along with Drinkwater, Marshall, Knocky, Wood, Nugent, Kasper, Konch all fitting that category 

 

Defending Nige because you are in love with him is one thing but blatantly ignoring his faults suggests that love is blind!!

[Corky]

Why would he need to point out Pearson's faults when you are around to tell us in great detail?

[Jon25747]

Which is the point at which you appear as hysterically unbending in your opinions as anyone you care to criticise on here - some balance please? You have no idea what money SSL, Danns or Mills were on and arguably (and no doubt you couldn't see through your blinkers to make a reasoned argument) all came to us as quality footballers - Danns was even wanted by Nige at Hull and Beckford scored more in the last few games for Huddersfield than our entire strike force combined. It is relevant to this point - just because Nige coaches certain players to the point they can no longer perform for us doesn't necessarily make them poor footballers.

 

The appeal of a manager like O Neill in the past was that he was able to take average players at other clubs and turn them into great players for us. Nige has achieved this with Wes but his sucess rate is poor when you take into account the number of players he has to admit defeat on, the four you mention, along with Drinkwater, Marshall, Knocky, Wood, Nugent, Kasper, Konch all fitting that category 

 

Defending Nige because you are in love with him is one thing but blatantly ignoring his faults suggests that love is blind!!

I really dont see how you can include Kasper, knocky or nugent in that list

 

Kasper is champ keeper of the year, you have no idea of knockaert ability or performance before we bought him and nugent has scored more league goals this year than any other in his career. I dont disagree with Drinkwater and Marshall to some extent but you also have consider Konchesky's age and Woods downturn in form was at the same time as the ENTIRE team so you cant single him out.

[smudgerfox]

An equally interesting question is what happened to the players he's rejected? How many have made his rejection look a poor decision? In his first spell he fell out with DJ Campbell, who I really can's stand, but who did help Blackpool get promoted while on loan from us. But this tiime - Danns (Bristol City relegated, Huddersfield survived on last day). Beckford (had to be warned by Huddersfield chairman to work harder, avoided relegation on last day), Mills (played no part in the Bolton play-off bid after being first choice when they struggled. I can't think of a single example where you can say NFP made a mistake there....maybe Bamba (but I don't think he had much choice there and he is definitely more error-prone than Morgan).

[seenitall]

I really dont see how you can include Kasper, knocky or nugent in that list

 

Kasper is champ keeper of the year, you have no idea of knockaert ability or performance before we bought him and nugent has scored more league goals this year than any other in his career. I dont disagree with Drinkwater and Marshall to some extent but you also have consider Konchesky's age and Woods downturn in form was at the same time as the ENTIRE team so you cant single him out.

 

Of course not - you're quite right, destroying the playing ability of the whole club is nothing to do with the manager - it could be the weather, poor footwear choices or just all those other pesky teams playing better than us (boo, not fair) but never let it be said that our manager (who seems nice and once had us top of the league like Peter Taylor did, but not quite as good) had anything to do with it - because apparently he spent less money (probably, although we don't know) and we are jolly lucky to be in the Championship at all and if you can't get out of the league in four attempts then you are just unlucky, not a bit crap and I am sorry for suggesting that Nigel is anything other than the best bloke ever and certainly better than a crappy club like Leicester City FC deserve - gosh we're lucky to have him.

[Jon25747]

Of course not - you're quite right, destroying the playing ability of the whole club is nothing to do with the manager - it could be the weather, poor footwear choices or just all those other pesky teams playing better than us (boo, not fair) but never let it be said that our manager (who seems nice and once had us top of the league like Peter Taylor did, but not quite as good) had anything to do with it - because apparently he spent less money (probably, although we don't know) and we are jolly lucky to be in the Championship at all and if you can't get out of the league in four attempts then you are just unlucky, not a bit crap and I am sorry for suggesting that Nigel is anything other than the best bloke ever and certainly better than a crappy club like Leicester City FC deserve - gosh we're lucky to have him.

Wow, what an immature reaction. A downturn in form is not necessarily 'destroying the playing ability of the whole club' for a start and we only lost 2 out of our last 8 games (all of the teams being in the top 9) so arguably we turned around that form anyway.

 

Care to constructively comment on any of my other points or do you want to make one childish comment and leave your input there?

 

EDIT - Pearson has had 3 full seasons in charge. One being champions of League 1. 2 getting into playoff in Championship. name anyone who has come even close to that success in the last 10 years?

[reynard]

Which is the point at which you appear as hysterically unbending in your opinions as anyone you care to criticise on here - some balance please? You have no idea what money SSL, Danns or Mills were on and arguably (and no doubt you couldn't see through your blinkers to make a reasoned argument) all came to us as quality footballers - Danns was even wanted by Nige at Hull and Beckford scored more in the last few games for Huddersfield than our entire strike force combined. It is relevant to this point - just because Nige coaches certain players to the point they can no longer perform for us doesn't necessarily make them poor footballers.

 

The appeal of a manager like O Neill in the past was that he was able to take average players at other clubs and turn them into great players for us. Nige has achieved this with Wes but his sucess rate is poor when you take into account the number of players he has to admit defeat on, the four you mention, along with Drinkwater, Marshall, Knocky, Wood, Nugent, Kasper, Konch all fitting that category 

 

Defending Nige because you are in love with him is one thing but blatantly ignoring his faults suggests that love is blind!!

 

SSL and Mills came to us as average to good championship players. Beckford was a desperation signing when all the other options we tried had failed and had never played at this level and had hardly set the world on fire in the premier league. I don't see a massive queue of premiership clubs queuing up for either Danns or SSL. Why? probably because they are not that good. Mills fell out with Sven and his attitude doesn't appear to have been great and it looks as if Bolton are trying to offload.

I'm not entirely clear what you mean by "admit defeat" on with Drinkwater et al.

 

You are correct about O' Neill but even he didn't get it correct all the time (I don't remember graham fenton improving much even though he cost £1m) and O'Neill did very little hands on coaching.

 

I think this argument is really all a red herring and nothing to do with the collapse towards the end of the season though I think our last 6 matches of the complete season showed the same form as Watford?

[seenitall]

Wow, what an immature reaction. A downturn in form is not necessarily 'destroying the playing ability of the whole club' for a start and we only lost 2 out of our last 8 games (all of the teams being in the top 9) so arguably we turned around that form anyway.

 

Care to constructively comment on any of my other points or do you want to make one childish comment and leave your input there?

 

EDIT - Pearson has had 3 full seasons in charge. One being champions of League 1. 2 getting into playoff in Championship. name anyone who has come even close to that success in the last 10 years?

Sorry mate, forgot we were in blinding form at the end of the season. Just because Nige left us and blew it at Hull as well as Leicester doesn't get him out of it being four seasons of failure - and no I don't consider two play off defeats before we even get to Wembley anything other than a wind up at the end of the season - its like sex without orgasm - pretty pointless. 

 

As with the other Nige fans - if it makes you happy then be happy - you have nothing to defend, you have got your man in the job and mediocre performances and mid table finishes in Div 2 will be enough for you (for 10 years some are suggesting).

 

He lsot his mojo after the pen shoot out against Cardiff and three years later has shown no sign of finding it again

[Jon25747]

Sorry mate, forgot we were in blinding form at the end of the season. Just because Nige left us and blew it at Hull as well as Leicester doesn't get him out of it being four seasons of failure - and no I don't consider two play off defeats before we even get to Wembley anything other than a wind up at the end of the season - its like sex without orgasm - pretty pointless. 

 

As with the other Nige fans - if it makes you happy then be happy - you have nothing to defend, you have got your man in the job and mediocre performances and mid table finishes in Div 2 will be enough for you (for 10 years some are suggesting).

 

He lsot his mojo after the pen shoot out against Cardiff and three years later has shown no sign of finding it again

 

You havent commented on any of my original points.

 

Kasper - Keeper of the year.

Nugent - More league goals than any other season

Konchesky - Been fairly consistent and is now 32 so is always going to deteriorate at that age

 

I dont know how you can say that Pearson has made them worse.

[Guest Col city fan]

But that's all speculation. We don't know if he could have gotten better under a different manager, so there's no real merit in speculating is there? All we can do is judge how he has fared under the manager's he's played under so far and I'd say he's gotten better as the years have gone on, but I think being on the sidelines with injury for a prolonged period last season has certainly set him back a bit. Would hope to see Kingy back to his best next season.

I personally think the point still stands.

King (as I've said) is a gifted footballer, but away from home in a flat 4-4-2 gets left exposed.

This season, King has been pretty much average. Some class games, some naff ones. And he's been injured.

I'd like to see how good Andy King could be in a side playing with confidence which allows him the freedom to do what he does best.. Make those instinctive bursts into the box.

Under Pearson we have not yet seen the lads potential I don't think, just glimpses.

Yes it's speculation, but you get King as the fulcrum in a free-flowing, passing and move side and I betcha he'd look a lot lot better.

[seenitall]

You havent commented on any of my original points.

 

Kasper - Keeper of the year.

Nugent - More league goals than any other season

Konchesky - Been fairly consistent and is now 32 so is always going to deteriorate at that age

 

I dont know how you can say that Pearson has made them worse.

 Kasper - keeper of the year but not as successful as the three teams keepers who went up

Nugent - scored twice since February - hmmmmmm

Konch - 32 and finished - Jesus, makes old scholesy and Giggsy look ancient (and he is in Div 2  for crying out loud, not Serie A)

 

None of them were bathed in glory this year - Kasper is the best of the three mentioned but has he actually improved since he got here???? Only you and Nige know the answer.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

I personally think the point still stands.

King (as I've said) is a gifted footballer, but away from home in a flat 4-4-2 gets left exposed.

This season, King has been pretty much average. Some class games, some naff ones. And he's been injured.

I'd like to see how good Andy King could be in a side playing with confidence which allows him the freedom to do what he does best.. Make those instinctive bursts into the box.

Under Pearson we have not yet seen the lads potential I don't think, just glimpses.

Yes it's speculation, but you get King as the fulcrum in a free-flowing, passing and move side and I betcha he'd look a lot lot better.

I think your right Col

[inckley fox]

Nugent? The player who in their last 2 seasons has scored more league goals than in other in his career?

 

Don't just choose stats that highlight your point.

 

He scored the same number in 2006/07. And as for the guy who says King was an academy player before Pearson came, well I think he made his debut for Megson.

 

But I agree that both got better under Pearson, though King's finest hour was perhaps in the season after NP left. They're not alone - Dyer, Berner, Brown, Fryatt, Howard and Weale all improved in his first reign.

 

My concern might be that first time around a number of younger players also made strides - Hobbs, Morrison, Gradel, King, Cleverley and Waghorn stand out.

 

This time, however, younger and less experienced players have stalled:

 

Marshall was rated here last season (and no, not only for his goals) but it's fair to say he's not improved. Equally Waghorn has continued to go backwards and I'm surprised to see people suggesting that King has matched his levels of two years ago. We've not debuted a single YTS player this year, Moore fell away from the first team picture, Knockaert's best form came in his first two months, Wood's best form came in his first three weeks and Futacs went nowhere. I have no idea how anyone thinks Keane made progress while the likes of Delfouneso, Lingard and Kane all failed to advance during their loans. Drinkwater faded as the season went on. Schmeichel is young for a keeper and his game still contains the same flaws as two years back, while Vardy - though 26 - still looks every bit the spectacular flop.

 

Perhaps some of it is transfer policy. Perhaps some of these over-performed at first. Or maybe the coaching staff was better last time (we had more of them for a start - Taggart and, of course, Powell). Yet only the staunchest and least realistic of Pearson fans could fail to be just a little worried.

[Guest Col city fan]

He scored the same number in 2006/07. And as for the guy who says King was an academy player before Pearson came, well I think he made his debut for Megson.

But I agree that both got better under Pearson, though King's finest hour was perhaps in the season after NP left. They're not alone - Dyer, Berner, Brown, Fryatt, Howard and Weale all improved in his first reign.

My concern might be that first time around a number of younger players also made strides - Hobbs, Morrison, Gradel, King, Cleverley and Waghorn stand out.

This time, however, younger and less experienced players have stalled:

Marshall was rated here last season (and no, not only for his goals) but it's fair to say he's not improved. Equally Waghorn has continued to go backwards and I'm surprised to see people suggesting that King has matched his levels of two years ago. We've not debuted a single YTS player this year, Moore fell away from the first team picture, Knockaert's best form came in his first two months, Wood's best form came in his first three weeks and Futacs went nowhere. I have no idea how anyone thinks Keane made progress while the likes of Delfouneso, Lingard and Kane all failed to advance during their loans. Drinkwater faded as the season went on. Schmeichel is young for a keeper and his game still contains the same flaws as two years back, while Vardy - though 26 - still looks every bit the spectacular flop.

Perhaps some of it is transfer policy. Perhaps some of these over-performed at first. Or maybe the coaching staff was better last time (we had more of them for a start - Taggart and, of course, Powell). Yet only the staunchest and least realistic of Pearson fans could fail to be just a little worried.

Great post.

[Jon25747]

 Kasper - keeper of the year but not as successful as the three teams keepers who went up

Nugent - scored twice since February - hmmmmmm

Konch - 32 and finished - Jesus, makes old scholesy and Giggsy look ancient (and he is in Div 2  for crying out loud, not Serie A)

 

None of them were bathed in glory this year - Kasper is the best of the three mentioned but has he actually improved since he got here???? Only you and Nige know the answer.

 

Keeper of the year suggests he was the best keeper, maybe not in the best team granted. Did he win it at any stage before coming here? No. Has he won it under Pearson yes. That to me suggests he has improved.

 

I am judging Nugent based on the title of the thread and in the last 2 seasons has been more successful than he has been before (in terms of goals/game).

 

I didnt say he was finished, I was making the point that deterioration in fullback positions is significantly more noticable thanin the centre of the park. To compare them to Giggs and Scholes is not a like for like comparison, especially as they are not typical examples.

[Jon25747]

He scored the same number in 2006/07. And as for the guy who says King was an academy player before Pearson came, well I think he made his debut for Megson.

 

But I agree that both got better under Pearson, though King's finest hour was perhaps in the season after NP left. They're not alone - Dyer, Berner, Brown, Fryatt, Howard and Weale all improved in his first reign.

 

My concern might be that first time around a number of younger players also made strides - Hobbs, Morrison, Gradel, King, Cleverley and Waghorn stand out.

 

This time, however, younger and less experienced players have stalled:

 

Marshall was rated here last season (and no, not only for his goals) but it's fair to say he's not improved. Equally Waghorn has continued to go backwards and I'm surprised to see people suggesting that King has matched his levels of two years ago. We've not debuted a single YTS player this year, Moore fell away from the first team picture, Knockaert's best form came in his first two months, Wood's best form came in his first three weeks and Futacs went nowhere. I have no idea how anyone thinks Keane made progress while the likes of Delfouneso, Lingard and Kane all failed to advance during their loans. Drinkwater faded as the season went on. Schmeichel is young for a keeper and his game still contains the same flaws as two years back, while Vardy - though 26 - still looks every bit the spectacular flop.

 

Perhaps some of it is transfer policy. Perhaps some of these over-performed at first. Or maybe the coaching staff was better last time (we had more of them for a start - Taggart and, of course, Powell). Yet only the staunchest and least realistic of Pearson fans could fail to be just a little worried.

I agree that less players seem to be improving this time round and that is worrying.

 

Good post.

 

(I meant Nugents goals/game)

[inckley fox]

Wow, what an immature reaction. A downturn in form is not necessarily 'destroying the playing ability of the whole club' for a start and we only lost 2 out of our last 8 games (all of the teams being in the top 9) so arguably we turned around that form anyway.

 

Care to constructively comment on any of my other points or do you want to make one childish comment and leave your input there?

 

EDIT - Pearson has had 3 full seasons in charge. One being champions of League 1. 2 getting into playoff in Championship. name anyone who has come even close to that success in the last 10 years?

 

This, I maintain, is the weakest of all the arguments.

 

We're at the end of the least successful decade in our club's history. To be the most successful manager during that time is like being the most talented member of One Direction.

 

For six and a half years of that time we were managed by people other than Pearson. So what you're saying is that the three and a half years with Pearson have been more successful than the six and a half years without him, during the biggest period of failure we've ever had.

 

Interestingly, for one and a half of those 3.5 years we also had the most expensive side in our club's entire history. For three of those six and a half years we were in total financial meltdown.

 

I also get fed up with fans of Sven and Pearson refusing to acknowledge half seasons as the responsibility of that manager, as if only full seasons should go into consideration. Gillies kept us up in half a season in 58/59, Pleat kept us up in half a season in 87/88. O'Neill took us up in half a season in 95/96. Taylor took us down in far less than half a season in 01/02. Kelly kept us up in half a season in 05/06. So if we can say the likes of Taylor and, say, Sousa were failures on the basis of half a season, and we credit other managers for what they did in half a season, then why do we suddenly ignore it when it suits us to? Managers take credit for results from the day they assume charge. All of them.

[smudger63]

Totally disagree. If you went to the Watford playoff games as well as the last few games, you'd see the motivation was there and ALL of the players were playing for the manager

Or maybe they realised that despite being crap for the previous couple of months,they were now only 2 games from wembley, and 3 from the premier league.

Surely that was more than enough motivation, i`m not sure that playing for the manager really came into it, by that stage.

[Jon25747]

This, I maintain, is the weakest of all the arguments.

 

We're at the end of the least successful decade in our club's history. To be the most successful manager during that time is like being the most talented member of One Direction.

 

For six and a half years of that time we were managed by people other than Pearson. So what you're saying is that the three and a half years with Pearson have been more successful than the six and a half years without him, during the biggest period of failure we've ever had.

 

Interestingly, for one and a half of those 3.5 years we also had the most expensive side in our club's entire history. For three of those six and a half years we were in total financial meltdown.

 

I also get fed up with fans of Sven and Pearson refusing to acknowledge half seasons as the responsibility of that manager, as if only full seasons should go into consideration. Gillies kept us up in half a season in 58/59, Pleat kept us up in half a season in 87/88. O'Neill took us up in half a season in 95/96. Taylor took us down in far less than half a season in 01/02. Kelly kept us up in half a season in 05/06. So if we can say the likes of Taylor and, say, Sousa were failures on the basis of half a season, and we credit other managers for what they did in half a season, then why do we suddenly ignore it when it suits us to? Managers take credit for results from the day they assume charge. All of them.

Ok. 1 title and 2 playoffs in 3.5 years. Hardly takes much away from my comment.

 

Yes we had financial troubles previously but we also had some terrible managers. Managers live and die by results and Pearson has been our most successful in that time.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Like all managers, some players will improve and others not.

[inckley fox]

Keeper of the year suggests he was the best keeper, maybe not in the best team granted. Did he win it at any stage before coming here? No. Has he won it under Pearson yes. That to me suggests he has improved.

 

I am judging Nugent based on the title of the thread and in the last 2 seasons has been more successful than he has been before (in terms of goals/game).

 

I didnt say he was finished, I was making the point that deterioration in fullback positions is significantly more noticable thanin the centre of the park. To compare them to Giggs and Scholes is not a like for like comparison, especially as they are not typical examples.

 

Fair enough, Schmeichel had a decent campaign - though did I read that those awards are voted for long before the end of the season? And I'm not sure I'd base progress on awards. Julian Joachim was Villa's player-of-the-year in, I think, 1998, but few would claim he'd progressed from five years earlier. These things depend on the competition, don't they?

 

As for Nugent, yes you're quite right, he's done well under Pearson. And it'd be totally over-the-top to claim that nobody has got better under him, even since his return. I maintain that he's struggled with inexperienced players.

 

In fact, I was talking to a football coach during the Watford game who pointed out that Dyer and especially Knockaert, as a youngster, don't look like they've ever been coached to use their right foot. He said that in both legs Knockaert would have scored had he not tried to shift onto his left, and that this was the issue with the penalty rebound (not sure if that's right?). It seems like a small thing, but remember Guppy saying how he'd had no right foot until Walford made him practise for hours on end shooting and crossing over and over with his right? It massively improved him as a player. These could be symptoms of shortcomings in the coaching (though I don't claim to be an expert on the matter).

[seenitall]

Ok. 1 title and 2 playoffs in 3.5 years. Hardly takes much away from my comment.

 

Yes we had financial troubles previously but we also had some terrible managers. Managers live and die by results and Pearson has been our most successful in that time.

Or one Div 3 title and four mid table Div 2 finishes in 5 years - most successful out of lots of crap = best of a bad bunch = not really that good

[Jon25747]

Fair enough, Schmeichel had a decent campaign - though did I read that those awards are voted for long before the end of the season? And I'm not sure I'd base progress on awards. Julian Joachim was Villa's player-of-the-year in, I think, 1998, but few would claim he'd progressed from five years earlier. These things depend on the competition, don't they?

 

As for Nugent, yes you're quite right, he's done well under Pearson. And it'd be totally over-the-top to claim that nobody has got better under him, even since his return. I maintain that he's struggled with inexperienced players.

 

In fact, I was talking to a football coach during the Watford game who pointed out that Dyer and especially Knockaert, as a youngster, don't look like they've ever been coached to use their right foot. He said that in both legs Knockaert would have scored had he not tried to shift onto his left, and that this was the issue with the penalty rebound (not sure if that's right?). It seems like a small thing, but remember Guppy saying how he'd had no right foot until Walford made him practise for hours on end shooting and crossing over and over with his right? It massively improved him as a player. These could be symptoms of shortcomings in the coaching (though I don't claim to be an expert on the matter).

Good point on the single footedness but Dyer seemed to do much better under Pearson than Sousa or Sven. You could argue though that Dyer would be better off learning to cross with his left than start to use his right.

 

Fair point on the award but if it on comparison, he has been the best in the division this year. Surely there has to be progress made?

[Babylon]

Like all managers, some players will improve and others not.

Crikey... most sensible thing I've seen you post!