I think almost every team who get's a new manager, especially after a manager the players probably didn't like leaves, raise there game.
What I don't want is Unsworth to be judged on one game, even if we play well and beat Leicester, it means nothing, it doesn't make him a good manager.. Same if we lose.
I just hope we don't jump the gun and appoint Unsworth based on a few good games. And I hope we don't right him of if we have a few bad results.
Unsworth true ability (which nobody on this planet knows) will only be seen once the honeymoon period is over. Or after sufficient time to work with the team if there is no honeymoon period.
Shakespere was given the nod based on the team raising there game after Ranieri went, when that worn off he was found out. On the flip side there have been plenty of top managers who have had shakey starts after being given a chance and gone on to big things.
To say Unsworth's ability as a top flight football manager will be based on the Leicester game is ridiculous. The board need to have already made the call and either give Unsworth the season regardless of results. Or appoint someone else when we are ready, also regardless of Unsworths results.