People who never wanted Pearson....

[BramcoteRam84]

I supported Pearson appointment but I'm stunned he was so dogmatic about 4-4-2. Any manager in any walk of life knows incremental change especially when a team is performing reasonably well is the route to go. He could have played 433 until he had the players for 442. Pearson has shown his limitations.

[Van der MoodHoover]

I think to the OP that there were a number of different camps in the last managerial change debate. It wasn't as simple as pearson vs anti-pearson.

Speaking personally,  I didn't express a preference for nigel pearson,  I was more a Warburton person. And I didn't buy the almost messianic zeal with which some of the proponents of nigel pearson tried to make the case for him being successful at Derby. 

But I would not categorise myself as being "anti" pearson and I took no pleasure in seeing him struggle and fail to ignite our squad for whatever reason. 

If as seems likely he is gone then all I hope is that those doing the hiring take some learning points from a recruitment gone badly wrong and make sure that they do a better job this time around.

[jono]

Well I thought he'd be great. A "muscular" type of no nonsense leader without the clodding of a Macarthy. Just the man to put some steel in our back bones yet retain our adventurous spirit. I also like wing play so was more than enthusiastic about 4411/442 ... Ha ha ha 

Well that's how it worked in my ace Ventura football pundit fantasy. Things don't always work out how you planned them 

how much more wrong can you get  

[Will Hughes Hair]

Just like Mel I wanted and believed in him right up until he tried to rub his knuckles on on my folically challenged pate. Bloody comedian.

[Philmycock]

Eddie will dig deep, and find you, and he will kill you

[Will Hughes Hair]

6 minutes ago, philmycock said:

Eddie will dig deep, and find you, and he will kill you

Only if he can catch me.  And to be fair I fancy my chances.

[Dethorn]

11 hours ago, HantsRam said:

I think to the OP that there were a number of different camps in the last managerial change debate. It wasn't as simple as pearson vs anti-pearson.

Speaking personally,  I didn't express a preference for nigel pearson,  I was more a Warburton person. And I didn't buy the almost messianic zeal with which some of the proponents of nigel pearson tried to make the case for him being successful at Derby. 

But I would not categorise myself as being "anti" pearson and I took no pleasure in seeing him struggle and fail to ignite our squad for whatever reason. 

If as seems likely he is gone then all I hope is that those doing the hiring take some learning points from a recruitment gone badly wrong and make sure that they do a better job this time around.

Good point - in fact of those available I was not sure I wanted any of them, I think I leaned toward Rodgers in the begining but when it looked like that wouldn't happen I would have thrown my support behind whoever despite not really being overly keen.

[Shang]

I didn't want him at the club but when he got the job I backed him completely.

[Ewe Ram]

18 minutes ago, Shang said:

I didn't want him at the club but when he got the job I backed him completely.

I posted on another thread that I was waiting for him to give me reason to change my mind about him. I was/am anti him and I'm actually sad that he didn't do anything to prove me wrong. 

On the player power debate I observe that in every workplace the 'foot soldiers' have the power. Bosses can preach anything they like but the people at the sharp end have to do the business, football is no different. The skill is in getting those people to do things your way. 

[mrdave85]

I was never ecstatic about his appointment but I thought if he had been given the time he would have got us promoted. I know the 9 league games he had didn't exactly prove that theory but I'm certain it would have turned around under him. I was never sure of him as a person but I remember an article (maybe the Guardian) stating that he acted that way to remove the spotlight from his players, thus LCFC could just show what they were about and avoid relegation, I'm not entirely sure I believe that but hey, it's one style of management.

I think a proportion of fans now 'expect' us to be challenging for promotion each season, too many saw how good it was under Mac and now think that's the norm, forgetting where we came from after that season (Don't get me wrong, I love DCFC being touted each season, I just don't think it should be a given).

IMO whoever comes in won't ever get the time they need because of this. MM said he was fully behind PC, he got sacked, he said the same about NP. We'll never know if he meant it because of this suspension.

 

[LeedsCityRam]

I'd love to know the identities of the 4 posters who weren't happy with Pearson's appointment. Seems that half the forum is now claiming wisdom after the event.

I was massively in favour of Pearson's appointment. The best indication of a manager's future performance is past performance hence why I'm not keen on rookie managers - although I do recognise there are no guarantees in football. I maintain Pearson's Leicester side in 2013/14 were the best second tier side I'd seen in my lifetime & (their smooth transition to life at the top level(after the first 6 months evidences this) & was sure that given time he could achieve that success here.

That said, I was unimpressed by the lack of actual management skills shown. There were 2 options here really - a) dismantle the squad & bring in players that suited a 4-4-2 and more direct style or b) work with the players here & find the best formation to suit their skill set. Pearson did neither, commenting publicly that he wanted to work with the squad he had but trying to shoehorn them into a 4-4-2 which did not suit them. 

I had no problem with his disciplinarian approach in principle but there are times to utilise that & times not to. To lambast them after the Bristol City & Blackburn game was very poor man management, bearing in mind how mentally fragile they looked. You only had to look at the dejected bodies on the turf after the Blackburn collapse to realise that they needed leadership & a plan, not a verbal flogging.

[cannable]

For me, a manager or head coach should always be appointed on footballing philosophy UNLESS your squad doesn't have one anyway. Forget past success, they need to be the right fit - for example; had Mick McCarthy taken over from McClaren we'd have done appallingly. 

Pearson would have been perfect for Villa were he could build something but we needed somebody who had his team's defending with a high line, pressing high and passing it on the deck. Playing out from the back would have been a bonus. That should have been the remit - if those are your footballing principles chances are you'll succeed with this squad.

I had no feeling either way towards Pearson as I had no idea what he would bring, no idea if he was adaptable. But it was as clear as day to me by Kaiserlauten that he wouldn't get the best out of our players and by Burton I realised that he either had to go or wholesale changes were required. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

There were quite a few who were lukewarm, cold, meh or anti pearson, but the pro pearson group was very convinced and convincing and adament. 

Think a lot of more just "ok, seems the right idea" would have counted as pro atthe time but are happy to be against now. 

[Highgate]

On 9/28/2016 at 09:37, RiddingsRam said:

When Pearson's name was first being bounded about it was dead against it ! But since he got the job I've done nothing but back him , as a loyal fan should . I'm not saying he was ever my first choice , but it's not my choice to make . Ill support whoever the club sees fit to be our manager . 

What if you think the manager is not right for the club and is in fact (unintentionally of course) damaging the club's prospects?  Shouldn't a fan's loyalty to their club supersede their loyalty to a paid employee of that club.?  That's where things become tricky, we all want the same thing in the end, success for Derby County FC.  But as fans we have a wide variety of ideas on how that success should best be achieved.  I don't agree with the notion that wanting rid of a particular manager as soon as possible makes you disloyal to the your club. 

[RiddingsRam]

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

What if you think the manager is not right for the club and is in fact (unintentionally of course) damaging the club's prospects?  Shouldn't a fan's loyalty to their club supersede their loyalty to a paid employee of that club.?  That's where things become tricky, we all want the same thing in the end, success for Derby County FC.  But as fans we have a wide variety of ideas on how that success should best be achieved.  I don't agree with the notion that wanting rid of a particular manager as soon as possible makes you disloyal to the your club. 

If the club was run by muppets then that would be a fair comment , but it's not ! I trust the club to make the right appointment. After all they no a damn sight more about running a football club than I do! Me objecting to a manager being in charge , would just cause upset too myself . So I get on with it back the man in charge and see what happens ! Of course I've got an opinion who I want to be in charge and if that decisions taken ill be even happier ! 

[Kennington Ram]

2 hours ago, LeedsCityRam said:

I'd love to know the identities of the 4 posters who weren't happy with Pearson's appointment. Seems that half the forum is now claiming wisdom after the event.

I was massively in favour of Pearson's appointment. The best indication of a manager's future performance is past performance hence why I'm not keen on rookie managers - although I do recognise there are no guarantees in football. I maintain Pearson's Leicester side in 2013/14 were the best second tier side I'd seen in my lifetime & (their smooth transition to life at the top level(after the first 6 months evidences this) & was sure that given time he could achieve that success here.

That said, I was unimpressed by the lack of actual management skills shown. There were 2 options here really - a) dismantle the squad & bring in players that suited a 4-4-2 and more direct style or b) work with the players here & find the best formation to suit their skill set. Pearson did neither, commenting publicly that he wanted to work with the squad he had but trying to shoehorn them into a 4-4-2 which did not suit them. 

I had no problem with his disciplinarian approach in principle but there are times to utilise that & times not to. To lambast them after the Bristol City & Blackburn game was very poor man management, bearing in mind how mentally fragile they looked. You only had to look at the dejected bodies on the turf after the Blackburn collapse to realise that they needed leadership & a plan, not a verbal flogging.

You stole my thoughts.

[G STAR RAM]

2 hours ago, LeedsCityRam said:

I'd love to know the identities of the 4 posters who weren't happy with Pearson's appointment. Seems that half the forum is now claiming wisdom after the event.

I thought that too, however I had a long read back through the new manager thread the other day and there were a lot more than 4 that aired reservations about him.

As a few have said, he was not the ideal appointment but once in they gave him their backing.

[Bris Vegas]

Most of my reservations about Pearson came after our first pre-season games where it became fairly obvious he would play a 442 formation but without any changes to the current squad. Knew it was a mistake.

I took plenty of flak for a thread I created after the Brighton game. I was hopeful changes would be made, but the fact we reached the Burton game without any permanent additions nailed it for me.

I'd love to know what was spoken about during Pearson's interview. Surely playing style and systems would have been mentioned, therefore it still amazes me that we made so few changes during the summer.

Either Pearson really had no clue of our squad's capabilities which begs the question of what the hell he was doing for the 12 months prior to taking over - or he was so stubborn and deluded he thought he could just use his winning formula at Leicester here and have the same success.

[BBG83]

2 hours ago, LeedsCityRam said:

I'd love to know the identities of the 4 posters who weren't happy with Pearson's appointment. Seems that half the forum is now claiming wisdom after the event.

I was massively in favour of Pearson's appointment. The best indication of a manager's future performance is past performance hence why I'm not keen on rookie managers - although I do recognise there are no guarantees in football. I maintain Pearson's Leicester side in 2013/14 were the best second tier side I'd seen in my lifetime & (their smooth transition to life at the top level(after the first 6 months evidences this) & was sure that given time he could achieve that success here.

That said, I was unimpressed by the lack of actual management skills shown. There were 2 options here really - a) dismantle the squad & bring in players that suited a 4-4-2 and more direct style or b) work with the players here & find the best formation to suit their skill set. Pearson did neither, commenting publicly that he wanted to work with the squad he had but trying to shoehorn them into a 4-4-2 which did not suit them. 

I had no problem with his disciplinarian approach in principle but there are times to utilise that & times not to. To lambast them after the Bristol City & Blackburn game was very poor man management, bearing in mind how mentally fragile they looked. You only had to look at the dejected bodies on the turf after the Blackburn collapse to realise that they needed leadership & a plan, not a verbal flogging.

I too was happy with Pearson. It showed a change in direction, and another plan (as it didn't look like plan A was going to work).

Mel will now change direction again. If it doesn't work he'll change again. He's like a piss head at the wheel.

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, Super Johnny Russell said:

I too was happy with Pearson. It showed a change in direction, and another plan (as it didn't look like plan A was going to work).

Mel will now change direction again. If it doesn't work he'll change again. He's like a piss head at the wheel.

...with 4 equally pissed up passengers all telling him a different way to drive and then moaning at him when he crashes...