So I posed this slightly controversial question on the FL board, but thought it might be worth a poll. Following Leicester's comprehensive thumping of an in-form Derby team last night, alongside a steady but unspectacular Reading, it got me to thinking. Which of our previous Nigel's do YOU think is the better manager?
Pierson for me . It was only because of Lowes childishness that his contract was not renewed ( Because Crouch asked him to keep NP ) . Don't get me wrong , Adkins was Brilliant for us , but I sometimes still wonder where we would be if Lowe had kept Pearson !
I don't see much from Pearson that says he's more than just a standard Championship manager. He's getting the job done largely because he has the strongest side.
Pearson should have been kept on at Saints, and seems to fit well with Leicester. Had two successful spells there. But, Nige (Adkins that is), for me, is a great manager, great guy and I will be forever grateful for his spell here, and can look back at it with very fond memories indeed.
Not having that NA is ****....may be Championship level, but that doesn't equate to him being rubbish. Adkins has achieved good results with several clubs on low budgets (not Saints obviously) so he is my definition of a good manager. Some top managers have always had it easy...never working with poor players and never having strict budget restraints.
Yeah, bit strong there Beefy!!! Would tend to agree though that they're both top level Championship managers, perhaps slightly lacking in the nous necessary for PL.
NP is a better manager with the defence in mind which is what we needed at the time, NA is a more attack minded manager which we probably needed to get out of the CL. NP has had better finance over the last 3 years yet it was NA that got the promotion to the PL
