That has to be it. Pearson needs to go.

[Bettsj2]

Not too delusional then.

I wouldn't say its completely impossible.

West Ham are having an injury crisis, out of the cup, not going down and not going to make Europe.

Gold and Sullivan want the big name to go into the new stadium. It would be better for them if they were in place sooner than later.

Allardyce is out of contract so no compo would need agreeing.

At the minute we are still Premier League and have a very slim chance of survival.

It is unlikely but not impossible. Would he come here? Who knows? He loves a big wage so if we pay you never know.

[Ollie93]

A nice, unapproved interview to a French media source saying we were a stepping stone.

 

He came out after and said that wasn't true didn't he? Either way, even if a player is going to leave he should still be player. I saw Knocky this season put in a tremendous effort one game then hasn't been played since.

 

Just doesn't make sense

[inckley fox]

Oh look... someone else appearing to think football is like managing your local supermarket.

 

There are a lot of football managers out there who potentially could, and in some cases will, do a job at this level even if they'd be the last people we'd expect to. It could be someone internal - Cambiasso, Phillips, Shakespeare - it could be someone from the lower leagues like Howe, could be a guy who had mixed fortunes at this level in the past like McCarthy, Hoddle (though I find that last one especially unlikely)... you never know. When West Ham fans opposed Pardew and Big Sam as managers they wouldn't have expected either to be where they are now. The same could have been said for Rodgers a few years back, or Monk at Swansea and so on.

 

Even the best-fit managers often fail to pull it off. Pearson looks like a 'good fit' if we accept that we need to work on bouncing back next season, but then again so did Micky Adams in 2004, McGhee in 1995 (we were on the slide when he left in the December), Pleat in 1987. 

 

It's always a gamble. Even sticking with the same manager is a gamble. But if we were serious about staying in this league and you have a manager who doesn't appear to be adapting, I can understand people saying that they'd rather risk a manager who might just come good (on a short term deal, for instance) and - let's face it - they probably couldn't have done much worse.

 

But it's not over yet, is it? If we're going to stick with Pearson, then we may as well get behind him, see how good a start he gets to next season (whichever league he's in) and then look at it again. But in retrospect we probably should have taken a risk, and there's an argument that we should still do it now. The logic being a 'might pull it off' manager is better than an (apparently) 'never going to pull it off' manager, I suppose.

[Ollie93]

Just pulled this off the BBC sport website....

 

 

Aston Villa goalkeeper Shay Given has hailed new manager Tim Sherwoodas someone who "oozes confidence".

Given, who previously played alongside Sherwood at Blackburn - where the latter was captain - told the club's website: "He's always been a leader and was always a very good skipper.

"He was the main man in the changing room. He was the go-between with the players and the manager.

"I think he's fantastic leader, a real positive person and he just oozes confidence."

 

 

I think that's all that's needed with us, a bit of confidence. After what's happened this season all the players are down, Pearson is obviously feeling it. A bit of confidence goes along way.

[Babylon]

There are a lot of football managers out there who potentially could, and in some cases will, do a job at this level even if they'd be the last people we'd expect to. It could be someone internal - Cambiasso, Phillips, Shakespeare - it could be someone from the lower leagues like Howe, could be a guy who had mixed fortunes at this level in the past like McCarthy, Hoddle (though I find that last one especially unlikely)... you never know. When West Ham fans opposed Pardew and Big Sam as managers they wouldn't have expected either to be where they are now. The same could have been said for Rodgers a few years back, or Monk at Swansea and so on.

 

Even the best-fit managers often fail to pull it off. Pearson looks like a 'good fit' if we accept that we need to work on bouncing back next season, but then again so did Micky Adams in 2004, McGhee in 1995 (we were on the slide when he left in the December), Pleat in 1987. 

 

It's always a gamble. Even sticking with the same manager is a gamble. But if we were serious about staying in this league and you have a manager who doesn't appear to be adapting, I can understand people saying that they'd rather risk a manager who might just come good (on a short term deal, for instance) and - let's face it - they probably couldn't have done much worse.

 

But it's not over yet, is it? If we're going to stick with Pearson, then we may as well get behind him, see how good a start he gets to next season (whichever league he's in) and then look at it again. But in retrospect we probably should have taken a risk, and there's an argument that we should still do it now. The logic being a 'might pull it off' manager is better than an (apparently) 'never going to pull it off' manager, I suppose.

 

That person was basically saying he should be sacked whether there is someone better out there or not. I wouldn't run my company like that, I wouldn't want the club to run it like that. It stinks of desperation, short termism and no plan. I want the club, if they are going to make a change to think carefully not only about today and survival, but tomorrow and where we could be.

 

I've always been long term over short term, that's always how I've been. I also don't buy the "they couldn't do much worse" stuff, yes they could. Lots of teams have got worse after sacking their manager chasing the dream.

[HankMarvin]

Mate the reality, rather than what some optimistic fans posted on Foxes Talk before the season began, is that we were absolutely shit in 07/08. Although what that has to do with the conversation I have no idea, the side that went down and the one that came back up were fairly different if you're old enough to remember.

 

I also don't think that Brighton, Charlton and Swansea coming up and finishing outside the play-offs is proof that what Nigel Pearson did was an easy task. Nor do I think Brentford and Wolves coming up with very good squads and currently being outside the play-offs with a few months left is proof of that. Norwich did very well. Southampton had a ridiculously good side even in League One. Nigel Pearson had to get an awful lot out of a very average side in 09/10 to get us where he did and deserves an awful lot of credit for that.

 

And I don't think Albrighton's wife thought she was risking her husbands career, because she thought he was gone. You can't assume they automa the premiertically hold the same opinion.

 

The year we were relegated we spent 4.6 million 1.5 on Steve Howard who funnily enough you mention in that Pearson done well to finish 5th 2 years later, plus fryatt and hobbs who went on to play in premier league, Gallagher was a former premier league player .

 

 

Errr yes... it wasn't a top half quality team that had a blip of a season and went down.

 

We'd not been anywhere near the top 5 or 6 for years. Before the 07/08 season you say there was lots of optimism (blind opimism clearly) we'd finished only finished 15th, 16th and then 19th in 06/07. We'd been slowly slipping down the leagues, appointed several clowns along the way and wasted a load of cash on rubbish.

 

The team that won league one was mostly put together by Pearson, so was the one that finished 5th. They bared little resemblance to the team that got relegated other than a few players.

Ha ha brilliant.

 

I say? or the link to this website in 2007 suggests, its not my opinion it was fact!!

 

 

Optimism based on investment not just from this site but the media also with the 4th highest transfer budget that year we certainly wasn't being tipped to get relegated,

 

 

1 West Brom 46 12 8 3 51 27 11 4 8 37 28 +33 81 ©15m

2 Stoke 46 12 7 4 36 27 9 9 5 33 28 +14 79 (P)£3,500,000

3 Hull 46 13 7 3 43 19 8 5 10 22 28 +18 75 (P)£1,450,000

4 Bristol C 46 13 7 3 33 20 7 7 9 21 33 +1 74 100k

5 C Palace 46 9 9 5 31 23 9 8 6 27 19 +16 71£750,000

6 Watford 46 8 7 8 26 29 10 9 4 36 27 +6 70 £4,850,000

7 Wolves 46 11 6 6 31 25 7 10 6 22 23 +5 70  £2,175,000

8 Ipswich 46 15 7 1 44 14 3 8 12 21 42 +9 69 £2,000,000

9 Sheff Utd 46 10 8 5 32 24 7 7 9 24 27 +5 66 200k

10 Plymouth 46 9 9 5 37 22 8 4 11 23 28 +10 64 0

11 Charlton 46 9 7 7 38 29 8 6 9 25 29 +5 64 £3,225,000

12 Cardiff 46 12 4 7 31 21 4 12 7 28 34 +4 64 0

13 Burnley 46 7 9 7 31 31 9 5 9 29 36 -7 62  £2,050,000

14 QPR 46 10 6 7 32 27 4 10 9 28 39 -6 58 £5,750,000

15 Preston 46 11 5 7 29 20 4 6 13 21 36 -6 56 100k

16 Sheff Wed 46 9 5 9 29 25 5 8 10 25 30 -1 55 0

17 Norwich 46 10 6 7 30 22 5 4 14 19 37 -10 55 250k

18 Barnsley 46 11 7 5 35 26 3 6 14 17 39 -13 55 0

19 Blackpool 46 8 11 4 35 27 4 7 12 24 37 -5 54 300k

20 Southampton 46 9 5 9 26 27 4 10 9 30 45 -16 54 3,2m

21 Coventry 46 8 8 7 25 26 6 3 14 27 38 -12 53 500k

22 Leicester 46 7 7 9 23 19 5 9 9 19 26 -3 52 ® 4.6m

23 Scunthorpe 46 7 8 8 31 33 4 5 14 15 36 -23 46 ® 0

24 Colchester 46 4 8 11 31 41 3 9 11 31 45 -24 38 ®  600k

 

 

07

22 Southend 46 6 6 11 29 38 4 6 13 18 42 -33 42 ®0

23 Luton 46 7 5 11 33 40 3 5 15 20 41 -28 40 ®100k

24 Leeds 46 10 4 9 27 30 3 3 17 19 42 -26 36 ®*£1,350,000

 

06

 

 

22 Crewe 46 7 7 9 38 40 2 8 13 19 46 -29 42 ®£74,000

23 Millwall 46 4 8 11 13 27 4 8 11 22 35 -27 40 ®£125,000

24 Brighton 46 4 8 11 21 34 3 9 11 18 37 -32 38 ®£35,000

 

05

 

 

22 Gillingham 46 10 6 7 22 23 2 8 13 23 43 -21 50 ®£25,000

23 Nottm Forest 46 7 10 6 26 28 2 7 14 16 38 -24 44 ®£925,000

24 Rotherham 46 2 7 14 17 34 3 7 13 18 35 -34 29 ®Total: £0

 

I hope this puts into context the sort of squad that went down, just because we remember them as shit it was still unheard of to have that much investment at the time and be relegated,

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Because there's a decent chance West Ham won't keep him. I'm not actually that enthralled by the idea but it's an awful lot better than some of the names we've had so far.

I would be more than happy to see Sam Allardyce take over here, but I can't envisage him wanting to manage a Championship side.

[HankMarvin]

All quiet on the Western Front

 

 

[Nalis]

Can't believe this threads still going strong there no way they'll sack Pearson now.

Me neither, I just came here to see why...

[maxwelld_]

We should have acted earlier and got Pulis. That was a no brainer, and he would have come as well. Big mistake.

Agree totally . Would more than likely be mid table now with him at the helm

[inckley fox]

That person was basically saying he should be sacked whether there is someone better out there or not. I wouldn't run my company like that, I wouldn't want the club to run it like that. It stinks of desperation, short termism and no plan. I want the club, if they are going to make a change to think carefully not only about today and survival, but tomorrow and where we could be.

 

I've always been long term over short term, that's always how I've been. I also don't buy the "they couldn't do much worse" stuff, yes they could. Lots of teams have got worse after sacking their manager chasing the dream.

 

Okay, that makes sense. But I'm saying you never know who the 'best alternatives' are - they're frequently people who don't look like particularly good alternatives to the rest of us.

 

And I'm not entirely sure what the long-termist would prefer right now - a manager who might well do a better job at keeping us up now or, alternatively, learn more quickly than Pearson and become a better bet should we return a year or two down the line. Or stick with a manager who seems hopeless in the short term, decent in the medium-term (i.e. the Championship) and then fairly useless again in the long term, if we get back up.

[Babylon]

Okay, that makes sense. But I'm saying you never know who the 'best alternatives' are - they're frequently people who don't look like particularly good alternatives to the rest of us.

I appreciate that, but rather than stick a pin in a board of random names, I would rather we research candidates from this country and others thoroughly, just as we would do a player. What I 100% don't want to do is rip everything up and start again.

 

So I'd like someone who fits in with the best parts of Pearson, such as creating a team spirit, sports science, scouting set up, perhaps style of play so that we're not having to change the whole team to fit into a new style and so on.

 

Obviously there are no guarantees either way, but I'd prefer a more logical process behind it than... "well we'll give him a shot, what's the worst that could happen"

 

 

I'm not entirely sure what the long-termist would prefer right now - a manager who might well do a better job at keeping us up now or, alternatively, learn more quickly than Pearson and become a better bet should we return a year or two down the line. Or stick with a manager who seems hopeless in the short term, decent in the medium-term (i.e. the Championship) and then fairly useless again in the long term, if we get back up.

 

If we can find a candidate that we think is better than Pearson, based on his record.  Who fits a certain criteria so that he blends in with what we already have, then I would have no problem with a change.

 

I know it wouldn't happen, but someone like Fat Sam would be perfect. Pearson was a pupil of his and I believe their styles of management would have similarities. I think Pearson took much of his forward thinking with regards the likes of sports science from Sam, who has been a long time champion of it.

 

Steve Walsh scouted for him at Newcastle (where Pearson met him), and I wouldn't be shocked if some of the scout network we use isn't the same as those Sam uses, he's signed several players we've had long term interest in and been linked with others.

 

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about and I'm sure there would be other candidates out there who would also fit in, so to speak.

 

Too often when we've made changes we've flipped from one completely different style of manager to another. Some continuity, such as Swansea have done over the years would for me, stand more of a chance of yielding results.

[cc_star]

I appreciate that, but rather than stick a pin in a board of random names, I would rather we research candidates from this country and others thoroughly, just as we would do a player. What I 100% don't want to do is rip everything up and start again.

 

So I'd like someone who fits in with the best parts of Pearson, such as creating a team spirit, sports science, scouting set up, perhaps style of play so that we're not having to change the whole team to fit into a new style and so on.

 

Obviously there are no guarantees either way, but I'd prefer a more logical process behind it than... "well we'll give him a shot, what's the worst that could happen"

 

 

 

If we can find a candidate that we think is better than Pearson, based on his record.  Who fits a certain criteria so that he blends in with what we already have, then I would have no problem with a change.

 

I know it wouldn't happen, but someone like Fat Sam would be perfect. Pearson was a pupil of his and I believe their styles of management would have similarities. I think Pearson took much of his forward thinking with regards the likes of sports science from Sam, who has been a long time champion of it.

 

Steve Walsh scouted for him at Newcastle (where Pearson met him), and I wouldn't be shocked if some of the scout network we use isn't the same as those Sam uses, he's signed several players we've had long term interest in and been linked with others.

 

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about and I'm sure there would be other candidates out there who would also fit in, so to speak.

 

Too often when we've made changes we've flipped from one completely different style of manager to another. Some continuity, such as Swansea have done over the years would for me, stand more of a chance of yielding results.

 

Sense!

 

This is what I hope for us, whatever division we're in.

[HankMarvin]

The year we were relegated we spent 4.6 million 1.5 on Steve Howard who funnily enough you mention in that Pearson done well to finish 5th 2 years later, plus fryatt and hobbs who went on to play in premier league, Gallagher was a former premier league player .

I say? or the link to this website in 2007 suggests, its not my opinion it was fact!!

Optimism based on investment not just from this site but the media also with the 4th highest transfer budget that year we certainly wasn't being tipped to get relegated,

1 West Brom 46 12 8 3 51 27 11 4 8 37 28 +33 81 ©15m

2 Stoke 46 12 7 4 36 27 9 9 5 33 28 +14 79 (P)£3,500,000

3 Hull 46 13 7 3 43 19 8 5 10 22 28 +18 75 (P)£1,450,000

4 Bristol C 46 13 7 3 33 20 7 7 9 21 33 +1 74 100k

5 C Palace 46 9 9 5 31 23 9 8 6 27 19 +16 71£750,000

6 Watford 46 8 7 8 26 29 10 9 4 36 27 +6 70 £4,850,000

7 Wolves 46 11 6 6 31 25 7 10 6 22 23 +5 70 £2,175,000

8 Ipswich 46 15 7 1 44 14 3 8 12 21 42 +9 69 £2,000,000

9 Sheff Utd 46 10 8 5 32 24 7 7 9 24 27 +5 66 200k

10 Plymouth 46 9 9 5 37 22 8 4 11 23 28 +10 64 0

11 Charlton 46 9 7 7 38 29 8 6 9 25 29 +5 64 £3,225,000

12 Cardiff 46 12 4 7 31 21 4 12 7 28 34 +4 64 0

13 Burnley 46 7 9 7 31 31 9 5 9 29 36 -7 62 £2,050,000

14 QPR 46 10 6 7 32 27 4 10 9 28 39 -6 58 £5,750,000

15 Preston 46 11 5 7 29 20 4 6 13 21 36 -6 56 100k

16 Sheff Wed 46 9 5 9 29 25 5 8 10 25 30 -1 55 0

17 Norwich 46 10 6 7 30 22 5 4 14 19 37 -10 55 250k

18 Barnsley 46 11 7 5 35 26 3 6 14 17 39 -13 55 0

19 Blackpool 46 8 11 4 35 27 4 7 12 24 37 -5 54 300k

20 Southampton 46 9 5 9 26 27 4 10 9 30 45 -16 54 3,2m

21 Coventry 46 8 8 7 25 26 6 3 14 27 38 -12 53 500k

22 Leicester 46 7 7 9 23 19 5 9 9 19 26 -3 52 ® 4.6m

23 Scunthorpe 46 7 8 8 31 33 4 5 14 15 36 -23 46 ® 0

24 Colchester 46 4 8 11 31 41 3 9 11 31 45 -24 38 ® 600k

07

22 Southend 46 6 6 11 29 38 4 6 13 18 42 -33 42 ®0

23 Luton 46 7 5 11 33 40 3 5 15 20 41 -28 40 ®100k

24 Leeds 46 10 4 9 27 30 3 3 17 19 42 -26 36 ®*£1,350,000

06

22 Crewe 46 7 7 9 38 40 2 8 13 19 46 -29 42 ®£74,000

23 Millwall 46 4 8 11 13 27 4 8 11 22 35 -27 40 ®£125,000

24 Brighton 46 4 8 11 21 34 3 9 11 18 37 -32 38 ®£35,000

05

22 Gillingham 46 10 6 7 22 23 2 8 13 23 43 -21 50 ®£25,000

23 Nottm Forest 46 7 10 6 26 28 2 7 14 16 38 -24 44 ®£925,000

24 Rotherham 46 2 7 14 17 34 3 7 13 18 35 -34 29 ®Total: £0

I hope this puts into context the sort of squad that went down, just because we remember them as shit it was still unheard of to have that much investment at the time and be relegated,

Slighty disappointed you have both gone considerably quiet given your post count

[AKCJ]

We should have acted earlier and got Pulis. That was a no brainer, and he would have come as well. Big mistake.

 

Depends when you mean by "earlier".

 

I don't think he'd have come before November.

[AKCJ]

 

The year we were relegated we spent 4.6 million 1.5 on Steve Howard who funnily enough you mention in that Pearson done well to finish 5th 2 years later, plus fryatt and hobbs who went on to play in premier league, Gallagher was a former premier league player .

 

 

 

 

I say? or the link to this website in 2007 suggests, its not my opinion it was fact!!

 

 

Optimism based on investment not just from this site but the media also with the 4th highest transfer budget that year we certainly wasn't being tipped to get relegated,

 

 

1 West Brom 46 12 8 3 51 27 11 4 8 37 28 +33 81 ©15m

2 Stoke 46 12 7 4 36 27 9 9 5 33 28 +14 79 (P)£3,500,000

3 Hull 46 13 7 3 43 19 8 5 10 22 28 +18 75 (P)£1,450,000

4 Bristol C 46 13 7 3 33 20 7 7 9 21 33 +1 74 100k

5 C Palace 46 9 9 5 31 23 9 8 6 27 19 +16 71£750,000

6 Watford 46 8 7 8 26 29 10 9 4 36 27 +6 70 £4,850,000

7 Wolves 46 11 6 6 31 25 7 10 6 22 23 +5 70  £2,175,000

8 Ipswich 46 15 7 1 44 14 3 8 12 21 42 +9 69 £2,000,000

9 Sheff Utd 46 10 8 5 32 24 7 7 9 24 27 +5 66 200k

10 Plymouth 46 9 9 5 37 22 8 4 11 23 28 +10 64 0

11 Charlton 46 9 7 7 38 29 8 6 9 25 29 +5 64 £3,225,000

12 Cardiff 46 12 4 7 31 21 4 12 7 28 34 +4 64 0

13 Burnley 46 7 9 7 31 31 9 5 9 29 36 -7 62  £2,050,000

14 QPR 46 10 6 7 32 27 4 10 9 28 39 -6 58 £5,750,000

15 Preston 46 11 5 7 29 20 4 6 13 21 36 -6 56 100k

16 Sheff Wed 46 9 5 9 29 25 5 8 10 25 30 -1 55 0

17 Norwich 46 10 6 7 30 22 5 4 14 19 37 -10 55 250k

18 Barnsley 46 11 7 5 35 26 3 6 14 17 39 -13 55 0

19 Blackpool 46 8 11 4 35 27 4 7 12 24 37 -5 54 300k

20 Southampton 46 9 5 9 26 27 4 10 9 30 45 -16 54 3,2m

21 Coventry 46 8 8 7 25 26 6 3 14 27 38 -12 53 500k

22 Leicester 46 7 7 9 23 19 5 9 9 19 26 -3 52 ® 4.6m

23 Scunthorpe 46 7 8 8 31 33 4 5 14 15 36 -23 46 ® 0

24 Colchester 46 4 8 11 31 41 3 9 11 31 45 -24 38 ®  600k

 

 

07

22 Southend 46 6 6 11 29 38 4 6 13 18 42 -33 42 ®0

23 Luton 46 7 5 11 33 40 3 5 15 20 41 -28 40 ®100k

24 Leeds 46 10 4 9 27 30 3 3 17 19 42 -26 36 ®*£1,350,000

 

06

 

 

22 Crewe 46 7 7 9 38 40 2 8 13 19 46 -29 42 ®£74,000

23 Millwall 46 4 8 11 13 27 4 8 11 22 35 -27 40 ®£125,000

24 Brighton 46 4 8 11 21 34 3 9 11 18 37 -32 38 ®£35,000

 

05

 

 

22 Gillingham 46 10 6 7 22 23 2 8 13 23 43 -21 50 ®£25,000

23 Nottm Forest 46 7 10 6 26 28 2 7 14 16 38 -24 44 ®£925,000

24 Rotherham 46 2 7 14 17 34 3 7 13 18 35 -34 29 ®Total: £0

 

I hope this puts into context the sort of squad that went down, just because we remember them as shit it was still unheard of to have that much investment at the time and be relegated,

 

 

 

You can spend 2m on shit. It's still shit. Argument over.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Ah I see, now we're struggling we have to rip apart his previous seasons and play them down. "Well we were too big for League One", "most sides have momentum after promotion", "only finished top because other sides had injuries", "Was it really down to Pearson or his coaching staff?"

 

We sorted ourselves out after years of struggle and managed to nearly achieve consecutive promotions. We reached 102 points in a league that supposedly we've little chance of getting out of next season. Pearson brought this coaching staff to the club. If Shakespeare and Walsh are so good hopefully they'll stay with the next regime.

 

We won League One and the Championship by being the most consistent side, coping with injuries, suspensions, loss of form and everything else each club has to cope with. This season has been very poor, our tactics, form, style of play hasn't been anywhere near good or consistent enough. Fine, I've no problem with fans saying this season Pearson has failed, struggled, messed up, whatever.

 

Why can't we just say that Pearson did well in the lower divisions and is struggling hugely at the top level? No need to play down previous seasons, just admit that, for all his good work before, this season is proving too much for a variety of reasons.

Very good post Corky.

[Buzzell]

Pearson isn't going anywhere yet lads so....

[Danizen]

Malaga and Inter monitoring the Allardyce situation according to Balague.

"Monitoring the situation" is the lowest grade of all the transfer clichés. I won't take that rumour seriously until they're either "ready to pounce" or "on red alert".

[HankMarvin]

 

You can spend 2m on shit. It's still shit. Argument over.

 

Wow your level of perspicacity blows me away.

 

DJ Campbell Birmingham £1,600,000 20 Jul, 2007 9 appearances received 1.3m 2 years later went onto score 13 goals in the Premier(2 leagues higher than he was utilized at, although NP didnt play him) then moved again to a premier team

Steve Howard Leicester £1,500,000 03 Jan,      2008 49 total appearances under NP  following season

Matt Oakley Derby £500,000 11 Jan, 2008         2008 49 total appearances under NP following season

Stephen Clemence Birmingham £1,000,000      career ending injury

 

"but that investment was shit" "didnt help Nigel"

 

" the team that won league one was mostly put together by Pearson"

"Nigel's team went up"

 

out of these "NP transfer" signings

 

Lloyd Dyer MK Dons  43 Starts

Nicky Adams Bury 4

Michael Morrison Cambridge 33

Aleksander Tunchev CSKA Sofia 19

Chris Powell Charlton 12

Paul Dickov Man City  4

Loan

 

Cleverley 10

Davies 5 

Gilbert 33

 

A lot of people on this site are dazzled by the people with high post counts like there opinions are gospel, and the old clichés come out about the people that only post now and again during certain times is less valued.

 

 

 

 

My point was, that a squad that is automatically considered favorites for promotion before Person even made a signing is a less arduous task, than leading a side that's not expected to do well and had no investment.

 

People go on about winning league one like it was the Champions league in achievements, then throw the Leeds card out there - neglecting to add they were put into administration.

 

Errr yes... it wasn't a top half quality team that had a blip of a season and went down.

 

We'd not been anywhere near the top 5 or 6 for years. Before the 07/08 season you say there was lots of optimism (blind opimism clearly) we'd finished only finished 15th, 16th and then 19th in 06/07. We'd been slowly slipping down the leagues, appointed several clowns along the way and wasted a load of cash on rubbish.

 

The team that won league one was mostly put together by Pearson, so was the one that finished 5th. They bared little resemblance to the team that got relegated other than a few players.

Ha ha brilliant.

[Guest MattP]

Can't be arsed to get into the debate but we weren't favourites at all for that season in League One. (Although I think Nige did a cracking job, whatever monetary value it had it was broken and demoralised)

Leeds were about 9-4 faves and we were around 3rd in line at about 8's - I remember as I backed us.

The only year we have ever been favourites to win a division in my life time was the 9-2 price we were in the season Sven started with us.

[HankMarvin]

Without sounding pedantic, not sure how you can be 3rd (by your reckoning) favorites for promotion and not be favorites when the prize is for the first 3 teams 

 

maddog, on May 26 2008, 06:10 PM, said:

http://www.willhill....ns.asp?sport=FB



English League One - Outright PriceUnit Stake 
Leeds 7/2 
Leicester 11/2 
Peterborough 8/1 
M K Dons 9/1 
Carlisle 16/1 
Tranmere 20/1 
Southend 20/1 
Huddersfield 20/1 
Colchester 20/1 
Brighton 20/1 
Walsall 25/1 
S****horpe 25/1 
Oldham 25/1 
Swindon 33/1
Northampton 33/1 
Millwall 33/1 
Hereford 33/1 
Hartlepool 33/1 
Bristol Rovers 33/1 
Leyton Orient 40/1 
Yeovil 50/1 
Stockport 50/1 
Crewe 50/1 
Cheltenham 66/1

Expectations are going to be really high again but will we win it?
 

Come on Leicester 

[Guest MattP]

Was just making a point we weren't favourites. Favourites means you were leading the market. Even at 11-2 we'd be odds against for promotion.

What were we last season? 12's?

Pearsons league double was well over a 100/1 shot with the layers.

[HankMarvin]

But we was favorites for promotion? I didn't say to win the league?

[Guest MattP]

Well no Leeds would have been favourites for promotion. (At around 5/4-11/8 from 7-2 odds off the top of my head)