Next Manager/ Season

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, Zatman said:

sure Brian Clough attacked a fan on the pitch, a lot worse than anything Pearson did

But Brian Clough was an unbelievably good manager.

Nigel Pearson isn't.

Why are people still not understanding this point?

Edited April 17, 2016 by Stevo985

[TRO]

19 minutes ago, Cliffy Biro said:

Who cares who it will be honestly? Lerner has appointed what 5 managers now or is it 6 ive lost count. Each one of them equally shit.

Why does him now appointing another one after taking us to the championship now suddenly now supposedly give me hope for the future? We will be very lucky to stay in the division next year the state were in i honestly believe that.

A lot of people have this romantic view hat going down is maybe what we needed and we can "rebuild" and what other 'for effect' word you want to use. I obviously have my preferences but under Lerner we arent going anywhere fast no matter who is the manager.

another very good angle to come from....I too think the **** is not over yet, not by a long chalk.

[Stevo985]

36 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

 

Some people are clearly missing the point.

 

No one, from what I've seen, is saying that Pearson's character is the sole reason we don't want him. It's that he's not that good a manager, and therefore his negatives aren't worth the hassle for a pretty average manager with a pretty average record.

**** exactly this.

This is the point everyone is saying.

If Nigel Pearson was the next Brian Clough then nobody would care. But he isn't. 

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

15 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Ranieri bought them pizza, became the avuncular figure that looked after them and has them top of the league.

The irony is, a year or so ago everyone on here was laughing off or slating the suggestion of Ranieri.....

[terrytini]

Pearson.

Once and for all.

Nobody, hardly anybody, is saying we must have him.

Nobody is saying either his record OR his character are anything great or without fault.

The only thing causing so much to be said in his defence, is the two unfair claims people, some of whom seem to actually hate the guy, keep swapping between.

1. His record. Whichever way you look at it it is certainly no worse than any other candidate.

2. His character. Whichever way you look at it no reasonable and fair minded person can say the incidents so often referred to are either especially unusual ( in some cases) or especially bad, ( in others) or especially frequent.

Not that he is definitely stable. Not that he is definitely a good manager. Not that he must get the job.

Just be a bit more balanced, a bit not e fair minded.

After all, you may have to be singing his name soon, and you wouldn' t want to be thought of as fickle or a hypocrite ? 

That's all, just be more balanced.

And no he isn't my first or choice. 

[OutByEaster?]

9 minutes ago, TRO said:

But no one can be 100% sure any manager will do it.

I'm not sure there's a manager been born that can do the job that needs doing here.

 

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

2 minutes ago, terrytini said:

Pearson.

Once and for all.

Nobody, hardly anybody, is saying we must have him.

Nobody is saying either his record OR his character are anything great or without fault.

The only thing causing so much to be said in his defence, is the two unfair claims people, some of whom seem to actually hate the guy, keep swapping between.

1. His record. Whichever way you look at it it is certainly no worse than any other candidate.

2. His character. Whichever way you look at it no reasonable and fair minded person can say the incidents so often referred to are either especially unusual ( in some cases) or especially bad, ( in others) or especially frequent.

Not that he is definitely stable. Not that he is definitely a good manager. Not that he must get the job.

Just be a bit more balanced, a bit not e fair minded.

After all, you may have to be singing his name soon, and you wouldn' t want to be thought of as fickle or a hypocrite ? 

That's all, just be more balanced.

And no he isn't my first or choice. 

Well said.

[Stevo985]

1 minute ago, terrytini said:

 

After all, you may have to be singing his name soon, and you wouldn' t want to be thought of as fickle or a hypocrite ? 

The only way anyone would be fickle or a hypocrite in that situation would be if they were saying they wouldn't support Pearson or the team with him in charge.

Which as far as I'm aware nobody is.

It does not make you fickle or a hypocrite to not want a manager at this stage, but then get behind and support him if/when he's appointed.

[OutByEaster?]

1 minute ago, terrytini said:

After all, you may have to be singing his name soon, and you wouldn' t want to be thought of as fickle or a hypocrite ? 

If it's Pearson I'll be singing his name like the best of them, once he's Villa manager that's what he is. While he's still a candidate he's open to some criticism, as are the rest of the candidates. If Pol Pot was manager I reckon I could probably fit it into a chant. I'm not a Pearson fan and I think it would be difficult for him here, but if he gets the job, the slate is clean on day one, as it is for Bruce, as it would be for any of em.

 

[DCJonah]

I don't get why anyone is getting worked up. I'm pretty much open to anyone being given the job. 

We're not going to attract a top manager and even if we did get a popular choice, Lambert and Garde have proven it's not going to make much difference. 

I can't think of many managers that I'd be angry about coming in.

[TRO]

19 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I can't think of a team that are successful with the old system of the manager running everything - it just doesn't exist any more.

 

thats what I said " when"  meaning years gone by.

There are simply too many elements that have made the whole thing more complex.....thats a by product of progress, I guess.

[a m ole]

I wouldn't sing his name, but I don't know why that matters. Do I have to automatically like him if he becomes Villa manager?

I'd support the club, it's what I've done for as long as I can remember whether I like the manager or not.

[a m ole]

4 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I don't get why anyone is getting worked up. I'm pretty much open to anyone being given the job. 

We're not going to attract a top manager and even if we did get a popular choice, Lambert and Garde have proven it's not going to make much difference. 

I can't think of many managers that I'd be angry about coming in.

So you wouldn't be annoyed if it was, say, Harry Redknapp?

[TRO]

23 minutes ago, av1 said:

I'd also add that the old system of a manager running everything has contributed to our demise. 

hmmmm  yea, true.

[TRO]

6 minutes ago, a m ole said:

I wouldn't sing his name, but I don't know why that matters. Do I have to automatically like him if he becomes Villa manager?

I'd support the club, it's what I've done for as long as I can remember whether I like the manager or not.

but,you would look kinda foolish, singing to an " Arsehole"

ps sorry, we have to have some fun.....with what we have had to put up with.

Edited April 17, 2016 by TRO

[wazzap24]

49 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

 

Some people are clearly missing the point.

 

No one, from what I've seen, is saying that Pearson's character is the sole reason we don't want him. It's that he's not that good a manager, and therefore his negatives aren't worth the hassle for a pretty average manager with a pretty average record.

Amen to that. 

We have to evaluate candidates and weigh up the good vs the bad. There is no perfect option and it's all about opinions, but the whole point with Pearson is, for a lot of people the bad outweighs the good. 

Any appointment is a risk. Pearson may well be a 'good' manager, but he carries more risk based on the public outbursts. Not just one or two isolated incidents either. 

Imagine if we started badly next season? Say we went the first half a dozen games without a win. What if he starts going into meltdown with the journos or telling the fans to **** off? 

We don't need more division, this club needs uniting. An openly combative character, known for arguing with the media and his own fans. People really want to take a punt with that after the past 5 years? 

Too risky, simple as that. 

 

 

[a m ole]

To not go in circles, and also because I feel I can be a little confrontational in these debates (channeling my inner Nige) - If it's going to be someone out of a job you'd hope it's announced in the next few days, or at least sorted behind the scenes so they can start planning now. If we don't hear anything, I wonder if it's more likely to be someone already employed.

[Mark Albrighton]

2 minutes ago, a m ole said:

If we don't hear anything, I wonder if it's more likely to be someone already employed.

Or maybe we're waiting for someone who's waiting to see what happens with Newcastle 

[TRO]

2 minutes ago, a m ole said:

To not go in circles, and also because I feel I can be a little confrontational in these debates (channeling my inner Nige) - If it's going to be someone out of a job you'd hope it's announced in the next few days, or at least sorted behind the scenes so they can start planning now. If we don't hear anything, I wonder if it's more likely to be someone already employed.

I like your "Pashun"

I think is all to do with any incoming manager wants to know what the budget is for player transactions, before committing.

In view of Remi's episode ( right or wrong) they want some assurances they will have the tools to do the job.

My understanding is.....The main board don't know what that figure is at present....so it could be not until the season closes before we know.

I was rather hoping that was not going to happen....but Hey Ho

[a m ole]

1 minute ago, Shropshire Lad said:

Or maybe we're waiting for someone who's waiting to see what happens with Newcastle 

I hope so and sorta don't. I'd feel slightly deflated about Moyes if he only came to us in absence of a Newcastle offer.