Pearson has to go!

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

16/1 next to go, you should lump on then boo all the next game, get all your mates to boo too, could make a few quid.

[cjslcfc]

I think many are blaming the diamond (or whatever it is) too much. As restrictive though it clearly is, I think Pearson may well have not signed well in the summer. Our formation certainly doesn't help, but I suggest Pearson knows we could struggle playing any particular formation at present. I think the opposition has been underestimated and we are looking a weakish squad.

 

The more Pearson cites a lack of quality in our play during our defeats, the more I think he realises some of our players just aren't cutting it and we could be seeing a few changes in January. 

 

I'd have to agree that Pearson probably knows now he didn't sign that well in the summer and that the players haven't adapted as well as he thought they would.

[WhatTheSchlupp?]

Not sure if he should go just yet, he deserves more time to turn it round - having said that if he wants to keep his job come the end of the season he needs to make some positive tactical changes. Knockaert for example has played virtually no part in the last 6 games in which we've been awful. In his cameo appearance at Newcastle we looked instantly better for example, yet he persistently plays Schlupp ahead of him and usually doesn't even make the bench! 

 

Why not play Mahrez and knockaert and go for it in games, especially against teams around us as Nigel's defensive first policy is clearly not working, we can't even create meaningful chances in games!

[Clever Fox]

He might be trying to get Knockaert up to speed by having him play regularly in the 21s. 

Sometimes players learn more by watching from the sidelines hopefully that is the case with Knockaert when he gets his chance.

[foxinsocks]

There's not an issue about the defence - sure things can always be better at set pieces and kasper should be more dominant in the 6yd box - but that can be sorted out. The issue is that we need to create the more chances to score - both away from home where we need to break and nick points, and, at home where we need to unlock teams who defend deep (esp after watching out man utd performance).

As fans, we pay to go to games, and, I believe we are entitled to an opinion. What I personally don't understand is how Nigel hope to create chances with the teams he is selecting - and this is a fair question that he is not answering. (Why does he say we are not in apposition to play wingers? Why are we not playing fast down the flanks like last year? - I hope it is not just because he is stubborn or trying to make some silly point...but with out an explanation I cannot rule this out).

Our best hope is that Nige sorts thing out and quickly - a change of manager is a big risk and throws everything up in the air - Nigel needs to sit with a mentor (he know enough folk in the game) and sort this out.... He should be wise enough to ask for and get help!

[MattyFromLE]

First caller on BBC RL making an excellent point.

 

Southampton were doing better with Nigel Adkins when they got rid.

 

Looks where they are now.

 

Adkins was sacked in January! Not November! 

[walkerleeds]

It wasn't so long ago plenty were pondering whether or not he would ditch us for Newcastle- How times change.

 

This is a young and inexperienced team that I have every confidence in, we can all see the potential (well, those who know football can.) in this group of players.

 

So show a bit of faith, we owe Nigel Pearson that.

[inckley fox]

I'm sorry, I've said what now? Could you let me know when I said that we are definitely better off keeping the same manager?

 

As far as I know, the closest I have come to saying anything of the sort was in a post about the views of the owners and it was more of a warning that changing managers isn't the guarantee of a change in fortunes that some people think it is.

 

http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/97692-pearson-out/page-12#entry3187083

 

I could be wrong but I think I've read a few posts from you suggesting that a change of manager goes wrong more often than not.

 

If you're saying that this isn't the case then I apologise for putting words in your mouth.

 

But please bear in mind that I think we need to keep Pearson - not because of past achievements, nor because loads of our other managerial appointments since O'Neill have been poor ones (plenty of other clubs have made better selections from the same pool of managers, during the same time period).

 

I believe we need to stick with him because (a) he hasn't necessarily been given the funds any manager would require to make the step up comfortably, (b) he has plenty of coaching experience at this level, if not management, © he knows these players better than anyone else, (d) we won't necessarily make a sensible change if we do, (e) we are on a poor run as opposed to having looked steadily substandard all season, and any manager deserves a chance to overcome that poor run (so long as the run doesn't look like it is going to make our PL status unsustainable which, at just four or five points off mid-table and a point or so off safety, it doesn't yet).

 

But this is a spectacularly poor run and, if the poor form starts to look inexorable, I would expect most of the more considered posters like yourself to look towards the fact that clubs do often make successful changes pre-January, and that one of the best survival specialists in the market is available right now. That's not to say that this will be the definitive answer if we, say, lose another few matches. But, were that to pass, we'd be daft not to look at the likes of Pulis as a viable alternative.

[ImBlue]

I was going to quote you, but it seems you've copyrighted some of it

[Ghost Troop]

Change the manager, keep the manager. Who knows if either is for the best. To be frank all I want at the moment is to create some goal scoring chances. Getting beat is a pisser, not really troubling the keeper makes me weep.

[sylofox]

So to all the Pearson must go morons.

 

Who is your choice to replace him?

[Monsell1976]

So to all the Pearson must go morons.

Who is your choice to replace him?

I'm not in the Pearson must go yet, and I don't think I'm a moron, but there is plenty of managers out there, as good as Pearson, and maybe better.

You try and think who would replace him by looking at who is out of work, but we may have to look at someone already at a club.

Question is do you go young and up and coming like the lad at mk dons, or go abroad, I can't remember his name but there was a promising French manager linked to us before.

Or do you go with a known manager, wouldn't want him but someone with Steve Mclaren.

Best all round is Pearson sorts himself and the players out, and we start competing again, but one thing is for sure, he isn't the only manager out there, and if he cannot get it right on the pitch, he will lose his job.

If I was in the owners shoes, I would be asking what has gone so wrong in the last 5 to 6 games, and would be looking at options and who could improve us, should this go on into Christmas.

They have put faith in him last time, but as has been said by someone else on here, they have invested a lot of time and money here, and will not want us to go down at the first attempt.

I just hope to **** that pearson starts getting it right again, never been a big Pearson fan, but don't like mid season changes, and if the owners had doubts about him they should have parted company when his contract ran out, but whatever faith any of us had in him is being tested at the minute, and as I said earlier he isn't helping himself, criticising his players, and anybody that is negative, and not looking at himself, or what football he is creating, or should I say not creating at present.

[Steveiefox]

Here we go again, at the first sight of adversity, we have all the usual suspects that have been champing at the bit to crawl out of the woodwork spouting their usual negative and stupid “sack the manager” routine. I bet you just couldn’t wait to start posting after being frustrated for so long. Our club is in the best shape it has been for years and I mean years. I have been going down the City for over 50 years and I have a long memory. We are financially stable, no boardroom squabble, a united squad and a manger who has brought success and stability to the club. After all this, just because we have had a blip for the last few games, now some of you “supporters” think we should change the manager yet again. Then what, we will see a list of previously failed managers up as contenders for the position then a new backroom staff and a new manager who then wants to “build his own team” and we are back to square one. What did you expect, we knew it would be a hard season, stop moaning and blaming the manager he hasn’t let us down before and get behind him, he has been brilliant for our club as have our Thai owners.

[Ian S]

He got us here, he knows this team, he will get it right! He always does.

 

After what this man has done for the club over the years he has a free pass from me this season, if we go down so be it, he's the man whos got us here. 

 

Id be completely ashamed if we turned our back on him

Totally agree, have we not learnt anything over the years, poor Manager after poor Manager in recent years with the only good times being with the man in situ.11 games in and we are struggling and playing poorly but it's just 11 games. It is not many months ago that virtually everyone was screaming at the club to get his long term contract sorted, he deserves a proper opportunity to prove himself at this level.

[Burbo17J2]

Here we go again, at the first sight of adversity, we have all the usual suspects that have been champing at the bit to crawl out of the woodwork spouting their usual negative and stupid “sack the manager” routine. I bet you just couldn’t wait to start posting after being frustrated for so long. Our club is in the best shape it has been for years and I mean years. I have been going down the City for over 50 years and I have a long memory. We are financially stable, no boardroom squabble, a united squad and a manger who has brought success and stability to the club. After all this, just because we have had a blip for the last few games, now some of you “supporters” think we should change the manager yet again. Then what, we will see a list of previously failed managers up as contenders for the position then a new backroom staff and a new manager who then wants to “build his own team” and we are back to square one. What did you expect, we knew it would be a hard season, stop moaning and blaming the manager he hasn’t let us down before and get behind him, he has been brilliant for our club as have our Thai owners.

Well actually no. There are lots of people that are just thinking it might be better... Stop with all the "usual suspects" and "out of the woodwork". Most of the people who do want him gone, are like me... I was there when we were sh1t, so I can say what I want

[GaelicFox]

Looses his next two and Tony Pulis will be employed again

[GaelicFox]

William Hill have seen a lot of hefty bets on him bejing sacked most of which were clients in the city , 16-1 into 8-1 with hills , was16-1 generally now 10-1 generally with most firms , the money hills have taken is interesting as the last few managerial changes have been flagged up by Hills cutting the odds dramatically first

[MC Prussian]

I could be wrong but I think I've read a few posts from you suggesting that a change of manager goes wrong more often than not.

 

If you're saying that this isn't the case then I apologise for putting words in your mouth.

 

But please bear in mind that I think we need to keep Pearson - not because of past achievements, nor because loads of our other managerial appointments since O'Neill have been poor ones (plenty of other clubs have made better selections from the same pool of managers, during the same time period).

 

I believe we need to stick with him because (a) he hasn't necessarily been given the funds any manager would require to make the step up comfortably, (b) he has plenty of coaching experience at this level, if not management, © he knows these players better than anyone else, (d) we won't necessarily make a sensible change if we do, (e) we are on a poor run as opposed to having looked steadily substandard all season, and any manager deserves a chance to overcome that poor run (so long as the run doesn't look like it is going to make our PL status unsustainable which, at just four or five points off mid-table and a point or so off safety, it doesn't yet).

 

But this is a spectacularly poor run and, if the poor form starts to look inexorable, I would expect most of the more considered posters like yourself to look towards the fact that clubs do often make successful changes pre-January, and that one of the best survival specialists in the market is available right now. That's not to say that this will be the definitive answer if we, say, lose another few matches. But, were that to pass, we'd be daft not to look at the likes of Pulis as a viable alternative.

Your theory is lacking a bit of substance. Because, after all, it's only a theory.

 

We don't know how much money is required to buy existence in the Premier League (avoiding relegation). The absolute figures usually differ, you can't compare the prices over the course of the past twenty odd years due to inflation, it's all variables.

 

As for your second point, I'd highly doubt you could call assisting other managers and spending the odd game here and there at the helm "plenty of coaching experience" at Premier League level.

 

He may know his players, but doesn't know how to fit them into his system. That is his biggest challenge right now and a problem he needs to address as quickly as possible.

The poor run we're on at the moment is only poor when you look at the amount of losses in successions and the lack of attacking intent. Defensively, I think we're set up the right way (with the odd De Laet Explosion backfiring) because we've lost a many a game by a very small margin and were also a bit unlucky at times. The midfield is our biggest concern. We've yet to establish a steady four in the middle (I think that's Pearson's magic number), but he keeps chopping and changing, which in turn leads to our midfielders feeling and acting insecure. Our out of sync midfield is also the reason our strikers aren't provided with long balls or ground assists.

Add it all up and you as a football fan and spectator are being "entertained" by the opposition, mostly.

 

Swapping managers in January is still a big gamble - after all, Pearson knows his players best so he better use that knowledge fast. Also, I keep hearing the name "Pulis" being mentioned, as if it was some magical powder one has to apply for all sorrows to go away. Keep in mind that you yourself are referring to him as a "survival specialist". That doesn't mean Pulis is the right man for this club in the long run. He might as well take the club as a whole a few steps backwards. But that's pure speculation on my behalf.

 

This is my main gripe with people like you (although you have the fantastic ability to keep hiding your more blatant criticism in some kind of a fancy gift wrap) is that you're all too quick to call for a cure, when in reality, the body needs to use its own metabolism in order to find back to sane ways. Using this allegory, I firmly believe Pearson needs to see this out. It's his mess so he's also responsible for cleaning it up.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

I think many are blaming the diamond (or whatever it is) too much. As restrictive though it clearly is, I think Pearson may well have not signed well in the summer. Our formation certainly doesn't help, but I suggest Pearson knows we could struggle playing any particular formation at present. I think the opposition has been underestimated and we are looking a weakish squad.

That's the truth. The team and the manager are far too frail to deal with the big league.

 

Anyone who can actually see a chink of possible improvement, at this moment in time, is fooling themself, to the point of extreme delusion.

 

The blame lies firmly at Pearson's door. The guy has proved himself to be ineffective. Can he turn it around? No I don't think so, but I will back him as far as I can see fit do do so.

[inckley fox]

I was going to quote you, but it seems you've copyrighted some of it

 

Oh dear. Yes, sorry!

[Master Fox]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Err, no. 

[Mark_w]

That's the truth. The team and the manager are far too frail to deal with the big league.

 

Anyone who can actually see a chink of possible improvement, at this moment in time, is fooling themself, to the point of extreme delusion.

 

The blame lies firmly at Pearson's door. The guy has proved himself to be ineffective. Can he turn it around? No I don't think so, but I will back him as far as I can see fit do do so.

 

Like the last time he proved himself to be ineffective? Like the last time I and many others fooled ourselves into seeing a chink of possible improvement?

 

I seem to remember things going pretty well then. Extreme delusion is fun.

[inckley fox]

Your theory is lacking a bit of substance. Because, after all, it's only a theory.

 

We don't know how much money is required to buy existence in the Premier League (avoiding relegation). The absolute figures usually differ, you can't compare the prices over the course of the past twenty odd years due to inflation, it's all variables.

 

As for your second point, I'd highly doubt you could call assisting other managers and spending the odd game here and there at the helm "plenty of coaching experience" at Premier League level.

 

He may know his players, but doesn't know how to fit them into his system. That is his biggest challenge right now and a problem he needs to address as quickly as possible.

The poor run we're on at the moment is only poor when you look at the amount of losses in successions and the lack of attacking intent. Defensively, I think we're set up the right way (with the odd De Laet Explosion backfiring) because we've lost a many a game by a very small margin and were also a bit unlucky at times. The midfield is our biggest concern. We've yet to establish a steady four in the middle (I think that's Pearson's magic number), but he keeps chopping and changing, which in turn leads to our midfielders feeling and acting insecure. Our out of sync midfield is also the reason our strikers aren't provided with long balls or ground assists.

Add it all up and you as a football fan and spectator are being "entertained" by the opposition, mostly.

 

Swapping managers in January is still a big gamble - after all, Pearson knows his players best so he better use that knowledge fast. Also, I keep hearing the name "Pulis" being mentioned, as if it was some magical powder one has to apply for all sorrows to go away. Keep in mind that you yourself are referring to him as a "survival specialist". That doesn't mean Pulis is the right man for this club in the long run. He might as well take the club as a whole a few steps backwards. But that's pure speculation on my behalf.

 

This is my main gripe with people like you (although you have the fantastic ability to keep hiding your more blatant criticism in some kind of a fancy gift wrap) is that you're all too quick to call for a cure, when in reality, the body needs to use its own metabolism in order to find back to sane ways. Using this allegory, I firmly believe Pearson needs to see this out. It's his mess so he's also responsible for cleaning it up.

 

I think this is unfair. I'm certainly not calling for Pearson to go, I'm just saying that the debate is valid and there may come a point wherein, for instance, Pulis in for Pearson looks like the most sensible option - and that point can't come when we're completely cut adrift, or January is gone and a new manager has no time to build.

 

But I make no apologies for being 'quick to call for a cure'. I believe that cure can come from Pearson. But I can't accept that this is not a poor run, because it is. And not just in terms of goals / results / fine margins. We've had less than half the shots, shots on target and shots off target than the teams we've played against. These margins aren't fine. And the cure will need to come, and quick, wherever it comes from, unless we wish to sit apathetically by while the club is relegated.

 

My point, I repeat, is that the argument needs to be had, and I don't see how anybody can take a 'keep Pearson at all costs' stance any more than they can take a 'Pearson is totally out of his depth' stance. But if, like me, you think he should stay, then you need to weigh up all of the pros and cons and then with an open mind come to that conclusion. If your mind is made up beforehand, or if you simply think we shouldn't be debating this sort of thing, then there's very little point in entering into discussion. I don't believe that's the case where you're concerned, so I see no harm in us fans conjecturing and debating and looking at the strengths / weaknesses of the different arguments.

[inckley fox]

Like the last time he proved himself to be ineffective? Like the last time I and many others fooled ourselves into seeing a chink of possible improvement?

 

I seem to remember things going pretty well then. Extreme delusion is fun.

 

I'm afraid you're equally deluded if you are equating his success at the top of the second tier with success at the bottom end of the Premier League.

 

Aidy Boothroyd, Nigel Adkins, Chris Hughton, Mick McCarthy, Micky Adams, Nigel Worthington, Ian Dowie, Tony Mowbray, Bryan Robson, Neil Warnock, Roy Keane, Billy Davies, Gary Megson, Owen Coyle, Phil Brown, Ian Holloway, Brian McDermott and Malky Mackay are all evidence that the best second tier managers don't always cut the mustard at the top.

 

I'm sure fans of the above and their teams spent ages pointing out their past achievements. What really matters is how capable a manager Pearson will prove at this level. And there are actually a fair few reasons for us to believe that he may be able to do a job, and not yet a sufficient number of reasons to believe that he won't/

 

What we have to do is give Pearson ample time to show he's more of a Brendan Rodgers, Steve Bruce, Sam Allardyce, Tony Pulis, Harry Redknapp, Kevin Keegan or, arguably, Roberto Di Matteo than any of the above. But we certainly shouldn't take that for granted. If Southampton, Palace and West Brom had done so they wouldn't even be in the Premier League to beat us.

[Dan LCFC]

I really had a rant after the Burnley game. People leaving the ground looked at me not understanding what they had just seen. I was fuming. We drew against a team who were really poor, I mean sh*t! We did not have the passion or desire to kill a game off in which we could have scored at any time. Burnley could not have stopped us from winning if we had really wanted to, and we didn't. Yes, we missed a couple of simple chances to kill the game, but the attitude was not good.

That is where it started, and although I am not a pessimist, that is where our season could have ended.

 

Pearson's strength is that he can remain emotionally flat whether we win or lose. His great weakness is that he remains emotionally flat.

 

I have never been a big fan of Pearson, I do respect him though. As of now, we have played eight of the top ten and only three teams in the bottom half of the table.

 

Maybe I am clutching at straws, maybe we can hope for more in the next few games, but it is a real concern if Pearson does not get the attitude and the selection right in the next few games.

 

It may need very little to get things going. My team selection for the last few games would have been a midfield three ( where they can cover for overlapping full backs ) and Mahrez in a free role behind Ulloa and Vardy. Mahrez could then operate through the middle and on either wing which could cause problems for any team. Mahrez would love the responsibility, the strikers would be re-enthused and the midfield would have a variety of options to attack, as long as they were well organised to cover defensive duties, particularly with the full backs supporting attacks.

 

Whatever, at least there may be some method in my madness, but there seems to be none in Pearson's.

 

That's an interesting statistic though it's hard to work out if it should reflect well on us or not - I mean, there's a reason they're in the top half.

 

I'd take that team over the current one which is just awful. Four central midfielders yet no real variety or obvious attacking intent from any of them. Awful. I'd still favour 4-4-2 with this group of players though and we need to do whatever we can to make sure Ulloa is getting chances, because it's rare he doesn't take them.