Why do some people actually dislike Pearson as manager

[Leicester_Numan]

Would you really, though?

Think back to when Pearson left and we had Sousa. Now I love Sousa, wanted him to take us up. We played beautiful football (probably the best I've ever seen us play) but after a few games we were bottom of the league, and were not getting the results (6-1 at Portsmouth comes to mind).

I'd like it balanced, which I personally think Pearson gives us. We can play nice stuff and get the results, but if needed, we can play ugly and get the results.

To be fair, he did say exactly the same thing in Col's "Would you accept long ball football if it guaranteed promotion?" thread last pre-season

[red5]

What pressure? He's a manager they all have pressure, it's the same for them all.

And the formation change he was lacking wasn't going to 433, that did nothing, he should have gone 532 or 541 or variants of it to stop the defeats, he didn't he's crap and boring and should have gone end of 2012 season.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I still blame Sven.

[Rincewind]

Why do some people dislike Pearson as a manager?

 

Simple answer as far as I can see is that it makes them feel better when they attract responses

 

I would like managers given longer at clubs. There would be less transfers and more loyalty from the players

If a player thinks he is a vital member of a squad for the next 2/3/4 years his performance may improve.

City may not go up this season. It doesn't necessary mean they are not good enough or Pearson has failed but the team is still building. Once they have the right combination and players can come in as replacements and still feel comfatable with teamates then things will be right.

A new manager means a new personality and method of bonding.

[MC Prussian]

Doesn't matter what anyone says, you are blinded by the incompetent clown, gods knows why !

 

3 wins in 17 is not acceptable at any level of football, someone who had a clue wouldn't have stats like that, but ay lets pretend that didn't happen, lets try and disguise it. He will get the sack, because he is useless, l am not a fortune teller but l will guarantee you this will happen.

 

The bookies have Coco as favourite to get the sack, why do you think that is ?

How you judge a person as "incompetent" from afar, God knows why.

 

The losing stretch wasn't really pretty and I'm certainly not blinded by Pearson. But you're free to claim otherwise, even though I've criticized him in the past and also mentioned that I think he's got his flaws.

I don't see where anyone is disguising the bad results last season. Football's a funny sport, really. One day you're the worst thing on Earth, the next day, the next-best thing to sliced bread. And that doesn't just apply to Leicester City fans.

 

Pearson is not useless, how would he have gotten us into the playoffs twice then?

If your definition of a useful manager is one that can only but win - I suggest you look elsewhere, because they don't exist on Planet Earth.

 

Calling the manager a "clown" and "coco" shows me (and many others) that you don't have a clue and that it's all just personal, not objective.

Instead you revert to childish accusations and name-calling and deliberately avoid seeing the bigger picture (two playoff appearances, rough financial times, creating a squad that needs time, injuries, integration of loanees, etc.)

 

Why Pearson is the favourite for getting the sack? I don't know. I'd expect some of the relegated teams and their managers having more fears ahead of the upcoming season, as well as Bolton and FW*çst.

[BNET]

How you judge a person as "incompetent" from afar, God knows why.

 

The losing stretch wasn't really pretty and I'm certainly not blinded by Pearson. But you're free to claim otherwise, even though I've criticized him in the past and also mentioned that I think he's got his flaws.

I don't see where anyone is disguising the bad results last season. Football's a funny sport, really. One day you're the worst thing on Earth, the next day, the next-best thing to sliced bread. And that doesn't just apply to Leicester City fans.

 

Pearson is not useless, how would he have gotten us into the playoffs twice then?

If your definition of a useful manager is one that can only but win - I suggest you look elsewhere, because they don't exist on Planet Earth.

 

Calling the manager a "clown" and "coco" shows me (and many others) that you don't have a clue and that it's all just personal, not objective.

Instead you revert to childish accusations and name-calling and deliberately avoid seeing the bigger picture (two playoff appearances, rough financial times, creating a squad that needs time, injuries, integration of loanees, etc.)

 

Why Pearson is the favourite for getting the sack? I don't know. I'd expect some of the relegated teams and their managers having more fears ahead of the upcoming season, as well as Bolton and FW*çst.

As l said you are blinded.

 

The reason he is favourite for the sack, is that he is the most likely manager to fail in his given objective.

 

Some people use a lot of words to say fukc all.

 

Calling someone a clown doesn't make you clueless, your message actually gives me a good idea that you are genuingly clueless.

[MC Prussian]

As l said you are blinded.

The reason he is favourite for the sack, is that he is the most likely manager to fail in his given objective.

Some people use a lot of words to say fukc all.

Calling someone a clown doesn't make you clueless, your message actually gives me a good idea that you are genuingly clueless.

You still fail to come up with reasonable explanations why you think he's useless. I'd concur with you if he had gotten us relegated or playing only unimpressive hoofball tactics. Oh, wait... What did you make of Holloway at the time then? Was he more or less "useless"?

I use a lot of words because I'm trying to make a point. Unlike people who revert to petty name-calling and insults - as demonstrated by your last and clueless sentence, proving my point.

[Rincewind]

who to replace him?

[Aus Fox]

As l said you are blinded.

The reason he is favourite for the sack, is that he is the most likely manager to fail in his given objective.

Some people use a lot of words to say fukc all.

Calling someone a clown doesn't make you clueless, your message actually gives me a good idea that you are genuingly clueless.

He may be favourite for the sack, but we've been favourites for promotion for the last 3 years doesn't mean it will always happen.

How many managers have we had since we were last in the prem? I can't count but only one of them has come close to getting us back there, sacking the manager isn't always the best option particularly when he is building a good young squad.

[Dan]

so you've forgotten  the cardfiff game already. home leg, bad tactics.

 

I'll give you that. We were pathetic that day. However - we actually turned it around and looked extremely comfortable in that one before a Chopra dive got them back into it, and I have no idea how he can account for a penalties loss.

[Dan]

Hit the nail on the head blatantly so obvious........Pity the party members are so narrow minded and one visioned spectacled. It's like following a cult hero on here for some a man who can never do any wrong even when it is blatantly obvious something is they overlook it and turn a blind eye.

Latest rumours emanating from the club is that he is not seeing eye to eye with Terry Robinson let us hope these are true. It may puarsuade the messiah to walk again.

 

Yet the vast majority have labelled the fact he has his faults too?

 

The pro-Pearson arguments are generally better than the anti. There are occasionally very decent arguments against him (inckley fox in the past) but the comment that someone made about the majority of them being because of personal dislike wasn't far wrong IMO.

[Dan]

He may be favourite for the sack, but we've been favourites for promotion for the last 3 years doesn't mean it will always happen.

How many managers have we had since we were last in the prem? I can't count but only one of them has come close to getting us back there, sacking the manager isn't always the best option particularly when he is building a good young squad.

 

I think the fact people have resorted to using bookies' odds to back up their argument speaks volumes to be honest.

[BNET]

You still fail to come up with reasonable explanations why you think he's useless. I'd concur with you if he had gotten us relegated or playing only unimpressive hoofball tactics. Oh, wait... What did you make of Holloway at the time then? Was he more or less "useless"?

I use a lot of words because I'm trying to make a point. Unlike people who revert to petty name-calling and insults - as demonstrated by your last and clueless sentence, proving my point.

3 out of 17, got it ?

[Fox92]

Is it me or did we actually play 4-3-3 quite a lot last season?

 

Yes, we did! There's no wonder he persists with 442 when 433 and 451 both didn't work for him.

[Kitchandro]

Yeh because Foxes Talk has been really desperate for a thread like this.

[BNET]

I think the fact people have resorted to using bookies' odds to back up their argument speaks volumes to be honest.

 

 

I think the fact people have resorted to using bookies' odds to back up their argument speaks volumes to be honest.

Why not use bookies odds ffs, they are experts, l can't believe some of  the rubbish posted.

[marbelladave]

He may be favourite for the sack, but we've been favourites for promotion for the last 3 years doesn't mean it will always happen.

How many managers have we had since we were last in the prem? I can't count but only one of them has come close to getting us back there, sacking the manager isn't always the best option particularly when he is building a good young squad.

 

This statement tells you everything you need to know about NFP and Leicester City. You just need to think about it for a few moments.

 

We have been favourites for promotion because we have had a good squad of players and the funds to add as necessary. Given the resources at his disposal NFP really should have got us promotion last season, simple as that.

 

NFP is now favourite for the sack because he did not get the job done when he had the resources and now that he does not, he is expected to fail.

 

It is all about 'added value', ie what does he, personally, bring to the team? In terms of matchday preparations, setup, tactics etc, the answer is not a lot.

[BNET]

This statement tells you everything you need to know about NFP and Leicester City. You just need to think about it for a few moments.

 

We have been favourites for promotion because we have had a good squad of players and the funds to add as necessary. Given the resources at his disposal NFP really should have got us promotion last season, simple as that.

 

NFP is now favourite for the sack because he did not get the job done when he had the resources and now that he does not, he is expected to fail.

 

It is all about 'added value', ie what does he, personally, bring to the team? In terms of matchday preparations, setup, tactics etc, the answer is not a lot.

Like

[Babylon]

Why not use bookies odds ffs, they are experts, l can't believe some of the rubbish posted.

The same experts who last season also had us as favourites to go up and Pearson to get the sack. The same ones who again have is as one of the favourites.

The reason for both odds are because the owners have put a lot of money in and had already got rid of two managers since they have been here.

To use the sacking odds as some kind of evidence is as ridiculous as saying us being one of the favourites shows how great they think Pearson is.

I really don't know why you and others who dislike Pearson need to resort to grasping at things like this.

[Babylon]

This statement tells you everything you need to know about NFP and Leicester City. You just need to think about it for a few moments.

We have been favourites for promotion because we have had a good squad of players and the funds to add as necessary. Given the resources at his disposal NFP really should have got us promotion last season, simple as that.

NFP is now favourite for the sack because he did not get the job done when he had the resources and now that he does not, he is expected to fail.

It is all about 'added value', ie what does he, personally, bring to the team? In terms of matchday preparations, setup, tactics etc, the answer is not a lot.

He was one of the favourites for the sack last year, and I remember Sven being up there also. More to do with foreign trigger happy owners who are more likely to dump a manager than what the bookies think of a manager.

[BNET]

The same experts who last season also had us as favourites to go up and Pearson to get the sack. The same ones who again have is as one of the favourites.

The reason for both odds are because the owners have put a lot of money in and had already got rid of two managers since they have been here.

To use the sacking odds as some kind of evidence is as ridiculous as saying us being one of the favourites shows how great they think Pearson is.

I really don't know why you and others who dislike Pearson need to resort to grasping at things like this.

Shakes head and walks away !

[Monsell1976]

who to replace him?

There lies the problem, I am not a fan of Pearson, and was very disappointed when he was brought back, as at the time there was better options unemployed, at the time for me I would have had billy Davies, but that's me, he knows the division and with investment I think we would be out of this division by now, maybe my thoughts maybe proven right this year, as he is spending well, and looks to be building a strong side.

But now I don't know who is out of work that would be any good, because we cannot afford a manager currently employed.

The only names that come to mind are gus poyet, but as much as I don't rate Pearson he might as well have the season now, they should have sacked him at the end of the season, a new manager could have had a full preseason to get his style across, and swap and changed the squad, bringing in someone after say 10 games is pointless, even if he has a bad start.

As much as I think Pearson won't get us promoted, he won't get us relegated either, we should just accept another season in the championship.

[Babylon]

Shakes head and walks away !

Well yes you probably should, and keep walking to a bookies and ask them what things get taken into account when they come up with these odds.

Why do you think Zola is at 14/1, yet Owen Coyle and Nigel Clough are at 25/1 or Nigel Adkins and Freedman are at 20/1... do you think that means they believe Zola isn't up to the job as much as Nigel Clough?

 

Or do they take into account the type of owners, their history of sacking managers, clubs expectations, time in the job and dozens of other things. Just because Pearson is favourite (actually second favourite) doesn't mean they think he's not up to the job, just as them making us favourites doesn't mean they think he is the best manager out there.

[Leicester_Numan]

Shakes head and walks away !

We can only hope

[marbelladave]

He was one of the favourites for the sack last year, and I remember Sven being up there also. More to do with foreign trigger happy owners who are more likely to dump a manager than what the bookies think of a manager.

 

He was one of the favourites last year because he had the resources to take us up and expectation was high, so any early 'failures' and he may well have been out.

 

Had our season been in reverse, ie 3 wins in the first 17 games I doubt he would have lasted past november, if that.

 

But in general my point remains the same, with the squad and resources at his disposal, he really should have got us up. 

[Webbo]

He was one of the favourites last year because he had the resources to take us up and expectation was high, so any early 'failures' and he may well have been out.

 

Had our season been in reverse, ie 3 wins in the first 17 games I doubt he would have lasted past november, if that.

 

But in general my point remains the same, with the squad and resources at his disposal, he really should have got us up. 

You could say that about 5 or 6 clubs last year but unfortunately they only allow 3 to go up per season