My dad used to do a lot of work with the youth team during pre-season, back when Liam and Jeff were coming through the ranks, and still keeps in contact with a lot of the lads. His association with the club goes way back and has always known a fair bit surrounding how the club internally operates but is still rather crypticabout exactly goes on - even to me. I was ranting away to him about the NP sacking but he didn't sound too bothered and still thinks we're going to have a very successful season. In response I asked him how the leader of the great escape, the mastermind behind the tactics and player belief could possibly be replaced. He is confident that actually (unsuprisingly) the club success was a team effort and in fact NP was just a very small cog in the machine. In fact I have been led to believe that the change in formation, player signings (Walsh and Rudkin) and even the team belief was instilled through a collaboritive team effort with huge influence from the likes of Phillips, Rudkin, Shakey and Walshy to name a few. I have been led to believe that formations, players and recruitment did not fall solely to NP. I believe that one issue that arose around the time of the NP sacking was Nigel being "given direction" on how the club should move forward based on these numerous influences and that may have been something that NP disagreed with. Although this is quite a wooly explanation, and limited, it makes me feel confident that maybe it doesn't massively impact the hunt for the next manager. What people want in a new manager may not neccesarily be the same as what the club wants/needs. The new manager needs to be somebody that is willing to take onboard the expertise around them and actually realise that the position of the LCFC manager isnt neccessarily the man running the show. I'm not saying we need a sheep to lead but if this is true and, hyperthetically, Cambi was the inspiration and tactical genius, Walsh was responsible for the player recruitment and in fact some of the first team coaches like Phillips were monumental in the player developement - then maybe this isn't the biggest catastrophe I felt it was. I think the point to get accross here is whether its Lennon, Big Sam or even Arry who take charge (worst case scenarios) - LCFC could be in for a very good season regardless of this bombshell. In my mind the best way forward for the club would be to appoint Shakey as manager, offer Cambi a player/coach or player/assistant role and say to the lads carry on as you were. People will argue "shakey and walsh are loyal to NP" of course they are! But who in the world would turn down a contract (NP was on £1million a year) to step up to the manager role with all the support he has in place in order to "be loyal" and follow his mate around for the rest of his life as an Assistant earning roughly a third of said manager?? Just a thought, and i was actually very suprised as to how little input NP actually had to the great revival... maybe others would disagree.
I am sure they will. Both Shaky and Walsh were termed Assistant Managers. If we want that continuity then they may be appointed as joint managers with clear definition of their management duties. We could certainly do a lot worse eg our 'Arry. Good post Smokin PS - it is bad for your health - try vaping, VapingAces has a ring to it.
Only problem is that a new manager would want his own team so all these guys could be replaced. I think the entire backroom staff was appointed by NP and they might have the all for one, one for all mentality he seems to have and all leave if one or two of them are released.
... one springs to mind ... and for the avoidance of doubt and to diffuse any conspracy theories ... SmokingAces is not my alias ... nor have I ever met him or her
I agree with this statement 100% which is why I made the original post; I think LCFC have a very, very good setup within and you never know who really called the shots on certain things (even staff appointments). Whilst I will always regard NP as a City legend I am inclined to think he took all of the credit for what was in fact a phenomenal team effort last year. That is why I am trying to make the point that yes there are some terrible managers who are in the running for the position BUT if they are brought in with the support that NP had then maybe the role of "manager" may not as much of a role as us fans see it. With all the accusations flying round that Nige was a bully or stubborn or whatever... maybe that was his role. Maybe he never was the brains behind our amazing resurgence but actually the guy took no sh*t, he communicated ideas/plans well, had the respect of the dressing room and fellow staff and actually took it on the chin in the public spotlight to relieve the pressure on the team. Now this is not what most people perceive as the typical football manager but if it allows us to reignite the form of last season I would happily have Lennon, Cotterill or even Arry (makes me nauseous even saying it) in charge. In this given scenario it would just make more sense; do you really think the business savvy Thai's would have sacked NP if they knew they would have to start again? Or, as I believe, do they realise that LCFC is a collaborative, team project that actually the new man coming in only fulfills a smaller role than we gave the predecessor credit for...
This explanation might go some way to answering why Pearson said he couldn't put his finger on what had been the reason for the change in the results at the end of the season, which I thought was a bizarre statement to make when it seemed quite obvious to everyone else. Perhaps it was nothing to do with him.
I'm led to believe it was the players (and probably some of the coaching staff) who wanted to play a more attacking fast paced game to try and rescue the position last season. For all the supposed loyalty to Pearson the players hadn't shown it in the preceding 20 games.
Has far as I am concerned it was Huth, Albrighton and Combasso that saved our season! if that was down to the players and coaching staff then fair comment,but I do know that we played a lot of bad games this season, up until we changed the formation.
Come on guys it was down to NP. Yes we have to move on now, we dont have a choice, but we should take nothing away from the outstanding managerial achievement
e The truth ed, is that none of US will ever know for sure (not unless someone publishes an autobiography etc ... and even then it will not be definitive as it will reflect the views and interest of that individual)... My own view, for what it is worth, is that everybody involved played some part ... the management team will have picked the side ... but IMHO the real credit ultimately comes down to the players e.g does Esteban Cambiasso really need managerial guidance to perform as he does week-in week-outl? .. not for me ... but there will have been tactics, discussions and game plans without doubt ...
Its only fair that Pearson takes the credit when we achieve something because hes the one that has to deal with the **** when its all going wrong, whether it was down to him specifically or not.
... that's a very good point ... but events post his sacking are rather strange e.g reported bids for players etc ...
Yeah but all the players who are in the team and playing under him all speak incredibly highly of him, genuinely so, and it is clear that he did an outstanding job. Another great way to tell is to look at what a manager leaves behind - sunderland etc have been left with a car-crash of a squad, but we are in a strong, strong position to build.
This is true. But the manager HAS to get the overall credit because he signed most of the players, picked the players that turned things around and choose the formations; whatever anyone else wants to believe he had final say. Pearson is the type of manager that wouldn't allow anyone to influence his thinking (he prefers players/staff that think his way) so it was down to him overall. As Wizard says, managers take the rap when things go wrong (and usually lose their jobs too), so you have to give them credit when they get it right - no matter what you may think of them as people.
