Question

[Mr X]

question:

 

Lowe was unable to accept that surviving on the last day was good enough for pearson. What if history repeats itself and we are heading for a similar position this season? will jan be his next managerial culling?

[the stain]

Sweet merciful heavens...

[Mr X]

sorry

[Master Bates]

Nigel Pearson won manager of the month, true story

[Saint2Hotty]

Who cares? Lets worry about this IF it happens.

[trousers]

question:

 

Lowe was unable to accept that surviving on the last day was good enough for pearson. What if history repeats itself and we are heading for a similar position this season? will jan be his next managerial culling?

 

No, it will more likely be Feb than Jan.....

[John B]

No, it will more likely be Feb than Jan.....

 

Who cares

[trousers]

Who cares

 

People that reply "who cares"?

[Snowballs2]

Lowe ate my hampster !!!

[trousers]

Lowe ate my hampster !!!

 

Was it a picnic hampster?

[John B]

People that reply "who cares"?

 

Sorry I meant to reply who cares to the original poster.

 

 

These hypothetical scenarios which are usually of the negative variety seem to me to be a waste of time

 

However this article from the BBC seems to have West Ham modelling them selves on SFC

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/w/west_ham_utd/7597876.stm

[SaintDonkey]

Lowe has never stated that Pearson's performance had anything to do with his contract not being renewed. The reasons for getting Poortvliet and Wotte in rather than retaining Pearson were down to financial not footballing reasons.

 

One day I hope you get over yourself and stop the senseless anti-Lowe trolling. If you must criticize him then do it for something he's actually done rather than this made up nonsense, god knows there's enough real things to criticise him for.

Edited 4 September, 2008 by SaintDonkey
typo

[Arizona]

Lowe has never stated that Pearson's performance had anything to do with his contract not being renewed. The reasons for getting Poortvliet and Wotte in rather than retaining Pearson were down to financial not footballing reasons.

 

One day I hope you get over yourself and stop the senseless anti-Lowe trolling. If you must criticize him then do it for something he's actually done rather than this made up nonsense, god knows there's enough real things to criticise him for.

 

Doesn't mean it's true though. Infact, lets be honnest, it isn't.

 

There is no way Newcastle's assistant manager was one more than the combined wage of Wotte and Poortvliet. Even if it was, it certainly wouldn't be enough to justify firing him. The appointment of JP and Wotte was about Lowe doing it his way. Lowe approached them several years ago, but alledgedly couldn't get the backing of the boardroom (or most of the fans) now it seems he has got his way.

 

I am not an anti Lowe troll etc. I think he has done a decent enough job under tough circumstances this time round (so far). However the one thing I do hold against him was that decision.

[buctootim]

You can say "There is no way Newcastle's assistant manager was one more than the combined wage of Wotte and Poortvliet". Doesn't mean it's true though. In fact, lets be honest, it isn't.

[NickG]

didn't particularly want another change but lets see if JP is succesful first, we will never know how NP would have done so thats all hypothetical

[Snowballs2]

Was it a picnic hampster?

 

Are you a basket case?

[Arizona]

You can say "There is no way Newcastle's assistant manager was one more than the combined wage of Wotte and Poortvliet". Doesn't mean it's true though. In fact, lets be honest, it isn't.

 

Ok so you are saying that Pearson, who was an assistant at Newcastle and has only ever managed Carlisle full time, cost a lot more than Wotte, who was assistant at Feyenoord, Den Haag and the Dutch U-21 coach in the past, and Poortvliet, who cost £60,000 to release from his contract at Helmond, combined?

 

Sorry, but there is no way that's the case.

[Thedelldays]

Ok so you are saying that Pearson, who was an assistant at Newcastle and has only ever managed Carlisle full time, cost a lot more than Wotte, who was assistant at Feyenoord, Den Haag and the Dutch U-21 coach in the past, and Poortvliet, who cost £60,000 to release from his contract at Helmond, combined?

 

Sorry, but there is no way that's the case.

you simply have no idea if it is true or not...maybe they are marginally cheaper but have a far superior track record at doing what they are doing with the young lads in the squad

[Wes Tender]

It might have been Lowe's dream to go down the road of having managers like Wotte and Poortvliet running the club in the Dutch style, utilising home grown players brought up through the ranks of the academy, foregoing the need to import players from other Clubs or leagues. He might have had this dream for some years and the golden opportunity to put it in place may have only just presented itself as a result of us being pushed into a corner by our dire financial circumstances.

 

Whether it is true that JP and Wotte indeed cost less combined than Pearson is only rumoured. The fact that Pearson was Crouch's appointee probably makes it all the more delicious to Lowe that he was able to spite him by terminating Pearson's services.

 

But as it is purely and solely Lowe's experiment, he and he alone either gets the plaudits or the brickbats for its success or failure. Nobody knows how Pearson would have fared under the same circumstances, but it is at least indicative that not only had he shown some promise here, turning around our demoralised team, but seemingly getting a Leicester team that ought to also be demoralised following their relagation, off to a flying start.

 

I was of the opinion with Pearson that he was destined for greater things in the English game and I still stand by that. It could well be that JP and Wotte also have a future in the English game. We will have to wait and see what the season brings to both Leicester's manager and our management team. We may be playing them again next season, but whether that is because Leicester have been promoted, or we have been relegated remains to be seen.

[Long Shot]

Doesn't mean it's true though. Infact, lets be honnest, it isn't.

 

There is no way Newcastle's assistant manager was one more than the combined wage of Wotte and Poortvliet. Even if it was, it certainly wouldn't be enough to justify firing him. The appointment of JP and Wotte was about Lowe doing it his way. Lowe approached them several years ago, but alledgedly couldn't get the backing of the boardroom (or most of the fans) now it seems he has got his way.

 

I am not an anti Lowe troll etc. I think he has done a decent enough job under tough circumstances this time round (so far). However the one thing I do hold against him was that decision.

 

True words - one other reason Pearson never stood an earthly was because he was a Crouch/McMenemy appointment.

[GreenTreeFrog]

Doesn't mean it's true though. Infact, lets be honnest, it isn't.

 

There is no way Newcastle's assistant manager was one more than the combined wage of Wotte and Poortvliet. Even if it was, it certainly wouldn't be enough to justify firing him. The appointment of JP and Wotte was about Lowe doing it his way. Lowe approached them several years ago, but alledgedly couldn't get the backing of the boardroom (or most of the fans) now it seems he has got his way.

 

I am not an anti Lowe troll etc. I think he has done a decent enough job under tough circumstances this time round (so far). However the one thing I do hold against him was that decision.

 

But he NEVER AT ANY POINT said appointing Poortvliet was about saving money on wages. In fact if you go back and read his original comments he said that with success bonuses the Dutch pair would be on more than Pearson was on. Hardly a saving then unless he is planning on failure.

 

The ‘misunderstanding’ comes from the fact Lowe said the decision not to continue with Pearson was ‘partly financial.’ Again looking back to those comments he immediately went on to explain what he meant by that. Basically he believes traditional managers need lots of money to buy new players or get in expensive loans (as Pearson did by bringing in 5 loan players but mainly only using two).

 

Those that look at Leicester City’s results as proof of how good Pearson is seem to ignore the fact they are far better than the rest of the league and were joint favourites to get promoted. Of course ‘he’ is going to get them promoted but almost any half decent manager should be capable of the same given the competition and resources.

 

I have not intention of getting into a Pearson v Poortvliet (or Lowe) discussion but whatever your thoughts on Lowe he did not get rid of Pearson because ‘he cost too much in wages’.

 

Also Pearson was not ‘fired’ he was on a short term and well paid contract that had ended but was not renewed.

[OldNick]

 

I have not intention of getting into a Pearson v Poortvliet (or Lowe) discussion

 

.

We have to try and forget NP.He did ok and will probably get Leicester promoted (sadly) as I like to see MM fail more than anything else.

[Saint_clark]

Whilst I agree that this is pointless, it will certainly be interesting if Lowe acts the same way if we survive with a couple of games to go or on the last day.

Will it be a massive underachievement again? Or will it show how brilliant he was to bring in someone who could get a bunch of kids to survive in this league?

I know which Scooby will be going for....

[Professor]

Interesting that if Saints do badly, the fault lies with the Chairman who appointed the manager, but if Leicester do well, the credit goes to the manager that Saints let go, and not to the Leicester Chairman who has pumped large sums of money into the club.

[Amesbury Saint]

Leicester Chairman who has pumped large sums of money into the club.

 

will we see a SFC chairman pump money into our club?

[Arizona]

But he NEVER AT ANY POINT said appointing Poortvliet was about saving money on wages. In fact if you go back and read his original comments he said that with success bonuses the Dutch pair would be on more than Pearson was on. Hardly a saving then unless he is planning on failure.

 

The ‘misunderstanding’ comes from the fact Lowe said the decision not to continue with Pearson was ‘partly financial.’ Again looking back to those comments he immediately went on to explain what he meant by that. Basically he believes traditional managers need lots of money to buy new players or get in expensive loans (as Pearson did by bringing in 5 loan players but mainly only using two).

 

Those that look at Leicester City’s results as proof of how good Pearson is seem to ignore the fact they are far better than the rest of the league and were joint favourites to get promoted. Of course ‘he’ is going to get them promoted but almost any half decent manager should be capable of the same given the competition and resources.

 

I have not intention of getting into a Pearson v Poortvliet (or Lowe) discussion but whatever your thoughts on Lowe he did not get rid of Pearson because ‘he cost too much in wages’.

 

Also Pearson was not ‘fired’ he was on a short term and well paid contract that had ended but was not renewed.

 

I was refering to Donkey's comment that Pearson was removed (okay, I retract the word fired) because of financial, not football reasons.

 

I do not think we are any better off financially with JP and MW than NP. I also think it's wrong to say Pearson would have wasted money on the team. He brought in Perry, Lucketti and Wright who did an excellent job. Okay Pericard turned out to be crap, but there isn't a manager out there who hasn't made a bad signing. Out of the signings JP has brought in, you can pretty much guarantee at least a couple will underperform.

 

Also, I am not basing my judgement of Pearson on what he does at Leicester. I am basing it on what he has done for us, which was taking a team in freefall and instantly making them hard to beat with midtable form, spending no money on transfers in the process.

 

I will leave my contribution at that,seeing as Pearson/JP is heavily influenced by Lowe in/out and many posters will never see eye to eye on some issues.

[buctootim]

Ok so you are saying that Pearson, who was an assistant at Newcastle and has only ever managed Carlisle full time, cost a lot more than Wotte, who was assistant at Feyenoord, Den Haag and the Dutch U-21 coach in the past, and Poortvliet, who cost £60,000 to release from his contract at Helmond, combined?

 

Sorry, but there is no way that's the case.

 

Yes I reckon Pearson was on way more at Newcastle than we are paying JP and Wotte combined. Prem wages at all levels are ridiculous.

 

Four years ago Souness was earning £1.5m pa as Newcastle manager. Its easy to imagine Pearson was on c£450,000 as Assistant Manager and he would have wanted something similar here. By contrast JP bought himself out of his contract for £60,000 - indicating he may have been on as little as £60,000 at Helmond.

 

I reckon JP and Wotte on are on something like £250,000pa combined at Saints.

Edited 4 September, 2008 by buctootim

[aintforever]

Yes I reckon Pearson was on way more at Newcastle than we are paying JP and Wotte combined. Prem wages at all levels are ridiculous.

 

Four years ago Souness was earning £1.5m pa as Newcastle manager. Its easy to imagine Pearson was on c£450,000 as Assistant Manager and he would have wanted something similar here. By contrast JP bought himself out of his contract for £60,000 - indicating he was probably only on around £60,000 at Helmond.

 

I reckon JP and Wotte on are on something like £250,000pa combined at Saints.

 

I can't believe there is any way Pearson would turn down £250,000pa to manage a Championship club, especially given that opportunities in high level football management are few and far between. Even if he was on a bit more money thereis no way that cost was the reason he was sacked, the managers salary is not that significant compared to the other costs, especially when the manager is THE most important person at the club.

[buctootim]

I can't believe there is any way Pearson would turn down £250,000pa to manage a Championship club, especially given that opportunities in high level football management are few and far between. Even if he was on a bit more money thereis no way that cost was the reason he was sacked, the managers salary is not that significant compared to the other costs, especially when the manager is THE most important person at the club.

 

I agree. I dont know what went on with Pearson. I was just responding to Arizona's point that he didnt believe the new duo were cheaper to employ.

[Arizona]

I agree. I dont know what went on with Pearson. I was just responding to Arizona's point that he didnt believe the new duo were cheaper to employ.

 

I can't believe we'd loan out Rasiak and Skacel to try and save money, then bring in a manager we can't afford on c£9kpw.

 

Premiership managers are well paid yes, but assistants? I don't think Pearson was that expensive, or that Poortvliet and Wotte are that cheap.

 

At a guess, either option would be in the region of £300,000-£400,000 pa.

[um pahars]

But he NEVER AT ANY POINT said appointing Poortvliet was about saving money on wages. In fact if you go back and read his original comments he said that with success bonuses the Dutch pair would be on more than Pearson was on. Hardly a saving then unless he is planning on failure.

 

I quite agree.

 

IMHO, the change of managerial team was not driven by the need to cut costs, it was driven by a desire by Lowe to implement a new way of working, and Lowe will be judged on that decision (whether it be a success or a failure).

 

I also think that the manager is the single most important person at the Club, and it would be folly to scrimp and save in this area. If anything, it is probably one of a few areas that for me that should be ringfenced when it comes to making cost savings.

 

I would probably forego most other expenditure if it meant we got the right man in as manager.

[saintwarwick]

I can't believe we'd loan out Rasiak and Skacel to try and save money, then bring in a manager we can't afford on c£9kpw.

 

Premiership managers are well paid yes, but assistants? I don't think Pearson was that expensive, or that Poortvliet and Wotte are that cheap.

 

At a guess, either option would be in the region of £300,000-£400,000 pa.

 

Rasiak and Skacel went out on loan in January. When Burley left we went into freefall under Dodd & Gorman so a manager needed to be appointed to stop the rot hence Pearson's short term appointment. Comparing wages is pointless as Pearson was appointed to see the season out which he did.

[GreenTreeFrog]

I quite agree.

 

IMHO, the change of managerial team was not driven by the need to cut costs, it was driven by a desire by Lowe to implement a new way of working, and Lowe will be judged on that decision (whether it be a success or a failure).

 

I also think that the manager is the single most important person at the Club, and it would be folly to scrimp and save in this area. If anything, it is probably one of a few areas that for me that should be ringfenced when it comes to making cost savings.

 

I would probably forego most other expenditure if it meant we got the right man in as manager.

 

Yes, that is exactly how I understand it, and more importantly it is how Lowe explained things.

 

Considering other expenditures the difference (either way) in manager/coach wages are likely to be almost insignificant anyway, the difference is probably less than a few months wages on the likes of Euell or Skacel. But manager wages were never the main issue - we were told it was about getting the very most out of the youth with both coaches working closer than would normally be the case and with little money to spend.

 

Rightly or wrongly he thinks the Dutch duo are more likely to bring success under that system than Pearson. He may be totally wrong but as you say that is what he will, or should be, judged on over the long term.

[GreenTreeFrog]

I was refering to Donkey's comment that Pearson was removed (okay, I retract the word fired) because of financial, not football reasons.

 

I do not think we are any better off financially with JP and MW than NP. I also think it's wrong to say Pearson would have wasted money on the team. He brought in Perry, Lucketti and Wright who did an excellent job. Okay Pericard turned out to be crap, but there isn't a manager out there who hasn't made a bad signing. Out of the signings JP has brought in, you can pretty much guarantee at least a couple will underperform.

 

[Text removed]

 

I will leave my contribution at that,seeing as Pearson/JP is heavily influenced by Lowe in/out and many posters will never see eye to eye on some issues.

 

My opinions are not based on love or hatred of Lowe/Crouch/Wilde or any politics at the club. I would also add I have no anti Pearson feelings at all but he is in our past and I have more interest in our current set up.

 

My comments about those that look to Leicester City results as proof of Pearson’s ability were not aimed at you, Arizona.

 

My main gripe is with those that keep repeating this myth Pearson was removed as the Dutch were the cheaper option when it has nothing to do with managers wages, but was about ‘the new system’. It may be a mistake but it’s not a mistake about wages.

 

I did not say Pearson would ‘waste money’ or that he had ‘wasted money.’ The point I was hinting at was Pearson brought in 5 loan signings but Pericard, Lucketti and Pearce started a total of 6 games between them. I was wondering if Lowe may have considered that. At the infamous ‘two for the less than the price of one’ interview Lowe said one of the main reasons he decided against ‘a traditional British manager’ was that they need to rely on money to buy new players and bring in expensive temporary loans. I wonder if he may have looked at Pearson’s 5 loan signings and decided he could have got by with some of the youth players we had available and just two or three loanees. Maybe he saw it as a sign of things to come? I don’t know that of course and it could be Lowe just wanted the new guys regardless and nothing was going to stop him.

 

But its not about wages.

[Wopper]

If Lowes dutch dream of total football fails will he resign?

[GreenTreeFrog]

 

Also, I am not basing my judgement of Pearson on what he does at Leicester. I am basing it on what he has done for us, which was taking a team in freefall and instantly making them hard to beat with midtable form, spending no money on transfers in the process.

 

 

 

I have responded to this bit separately as it was not really my main point but as you bring it up, here goes.

 

You say Pearson gave us a team that, results taken over a season, would show ‘mid-table’ form, but that statement is a bit misleading. Results taken over a season (applied to last table) would have saw us finishing ‘mid table’ but also 3 points above 20th and 5 above Leicester. It was a very close league.

 

Did Pearson really take over a ‘team in freefall?’ I know the results were poor but was the spirit really that bad?

 

In D&Gs first league game we lost 1-0 against Norwich but the team missed many chances and hit the post 4 times, we really should have won that game. We then lost Skacel and Rasiak to save money on wages (demoralising to our players maybe?) yet days later the team fought to decent draw away to Palace. Stoke was a story of two halves; the fight back from 3-0 down was well praised and many said the team fought tooth and nail for pride and D&G.

 

So there were some decent performances just before Pearson.

 

D&G got 4 league games only. Results wise compare the games either side of that.

 

Burleys last 4 games 2 points

D&G 4 league games 1 point

Pearsons first 4 games 3 points

 

None of those are exactly impressive. It proves little except that the points haul was similar taken over the short term results.

 

I REALLY AM NOT intending to defend D&G or to criticise Pearson, I just want to put some perspective on it. Yes, he did a decent job, but I don’t think it can be convincingly argued the team spirit was non existent before he arrived and was immediately transformed.

[OldNick]

If Lowes dutch dream of total football fails will he resign?

 

Id be amazed if he did. The club was in a corner, we dont know when interviewed what NP wished for or was prepared to do.

Without spending a lot of money and reducing costs at the same time how could the club have moved forward or survived any differently than they are doing now.

NP did an ok job. We got out of jail last day and Im thankful for that. I expect Leicesters running costs and wage bill are higher than ours at present. He has a team that should have been safe in the CCC and they blew it, it could so easily us or Coventry who went down.

He has started well and good luck to him but perhaps he was judged not to be what we needed at this time.

We would not have the luxury of loaning a Wright at present and his hands would be tied to use the youngsters.Nobody will ever know what would have happened if he has stayed.

[70's Mike]

do not forget Milan is probably digging into his own pockets!

 

big difference