Fan Letters: Nigel Pearson next Sunderland manager? Hughie says he’s “the only man for the job”!

Dear Roker Report,

Here we go again. The Management carousel is in full swing, and names are being bandied around all over the place.

I have said this before in numerous posts, and I will say it again; in my own humble opinion, the only man for the job is Nigel Pearson. He is an old style disciplinarian who will ensure the players know they are absolutely privileged to play for such a club as Sunderland. Look, it’s time we stopped treating these pampered young men like they are china porcelain. They want, and need, a kick up the backside, and reminded of how lucky they are to make a good living kicking a ball around the field for 90 minutes a week.

My past letters to Roker Report will show I have mentioned as such in the past. We NEED someone who is fired up from the touchline. We NEED someone who ensures his players go for every ball. We are Sunderland, and we completely give it all up for footballers who prove they want to wear the red and white shirt until their last breath. Nigel Pearson will make sure we have those kind of players.

Sod all the mamby pamby approach. Let’s get back to what we are all about, and that is sticking it right up the opposition’s backsides. No more gormless educated responses. Deep down we all know what we are about. We are Sunderland, and we perform better when we get completely and utterly stuck right in. Come on, let’s be honest for once.

Hughie

Ed’s Note [Damian]: Quite coincidentally Hughie I tend to agree with you.

Several times in the past few years I’ve floated Pearson as a potential lifesaver. No one can deny that he forged a PL winning team, but beyond that his style of management is perhaps what we’ve been missing in recent times, as you say.

His reputation was absolutely savaged by his son’s disgusting behaviour, and I do hope he got round to chinning the little b*stard. You can’t choose your family, as they say, but you can choose what to do with them. I think it’s difficult for any club - ours in particular, these days - to confront the idea of a “scandalous” manager. We have a penchant for them at Sunderland, but I get the feeling that was something we were simply terrified of not so long ago, precisely because we were always entrenched in it.

Hopefully it’s time to move on from non-football issues when it comes to the crop of managers we’re weighing up. It isn’t as if Pearson’s most recent employment covers him in glory, but if anyone knows how to give the benefit of the doubt, it has to be Sunderland AFC. We could do much worse, and we have.

Photo by Michael Regan/Getty Images

Dear Roker Report,

Glad to see the back of Ross but again are we going to be a laughing stock again.

As a club a few weeks ago every one was on a high about big investment news coming into the club but low and be hold it looks like that will not happen. Months ago I said the current regime are professional bullsh*tters only interested in getting every penny out of their investment.

The regime came across as a breath of fresh air but as I said they weren’t fooling me, which you did not agree with how wrong you are. Another good investment deal lost due to greed on the clubs value for goods sake he got it for a steal. The fans suffer again what team would get 30 thousand plus to watch league one sh*te we have been watching at championship prices.

The current board are out of their depth the club was always to big for them but again the fans are the ones been let down. The next few weeks for Sunderland football club are crucial; the bullsh*t will be spouted around for the vacant job - Allardyce Keane etc... l hope we smiling in a few weeks but I am afraid it seems we are back to square one.

Mark Wild

Ed’s Note [Damian]: I would be a little mad if I wasn’t worried that all of your fears will come to pass, Mark, but one of the beautiful (and infuriating) parts of being a football supporter is the freedom to accept whatever happens, purely because you cannot control it. It’s often tiring and embarrassing - it’s very rarely invigorating - but it isn’t really our problem at the end of the day.

Whatever happens, happens. There’s still no definitive evidence to suggest that the takeover won’t go through, and if it didn’t it would be far too simplistic to simply blame it on the incompetence of the owners that set the deal up in the first place. For all we know we’ll be sitting pretty in two weeks. If we aren’t, I’m confident the current owners dedicate their attentions to promotion and securing some other form of investment. When the whistle blows the weekend after it all goes down, we’ll all still be wearing red and white. As tremendous as it would be to have that Man City money, nothing will change that.

Photo by Ian Horrocks/Sunderland AFC via Getty Images

Dear Roker Report,

We have had 3 “International/USA Investors” since SD came on the scene. I do not believe anything he says. He just wants to cash in the Parachute Payments he wangled. Any real investor, doing due diligence will uncover what has happened and the massive shortfall these payments have made in our finances. I think when the accounts are scrutinised and the “ ins/outs” are seen, including the real investment made by SD it will shock people. Both he and Methven took a massive punt on us going up last season and then selling at a greater value. They’ve lost and unless they find a genuine investor I fear for the club I love.

Sam Lucas

Ed’s Note [Damian]: As I’ve just mentioned, there really is no need to fear the demise of the club. You had good cause to feel it under Short, but not this time round. Any debt that would have buried us a la Bury is gone and even if we’re not great on the pitch, the books are balanced and we needn’t think about impending doom.

Personally, I still think you’re firing out conspiracy theories without any logical process to reach the conclusion. They absolutely will make a profit regardless of who takes over - that’s their prerogative. There’s nothing untoward about that, and there’s no evidence of foul play. To suggest Stewart Donald’s motives are sinister remains as baseless an argument as when it was first presented.