Owners will not take risks with our fanbase

[JoePass]

Totally agree. I think there's a time to get worried and call for a change, but that isn't now. If we continue our poor or even average form between now and the end of the season and finish lower midtable, then perhaps SM isn't the man for the job. But to make that decision after a seven games or so, most of which were against teams that are objectively better than us, seems crazy.

Also, people who call for a manager's head after a few weeks don't think through what that would actually look like to the outside world. It would be like the Notts of old, hiring and firing managers out of desperation because we're not getting promoted quick enough. We'd look like a complete basket case. Quite frankly, it would be embarrassing and a massive red flag for anyone looking at taking the job on next. I'd be very, very worried if our owners did what so many people are asking for.

Given that he's going to be given more time by our very rational owners, why don't we all try and support him. We'll know more about whether he's the man for the job or not in a few months, when we've played more games.

Totally agree.

[durhampie]

You mean by the recruitment team keep pulling you up on this.

Talking of performance LW us in a play off place again remember that too as its a fact.

No point talking about we'd have lost these games under LW lets deal with facts ONLY.

LW must have had some say in the re-signing of those who played in the NL. It was quite obvious that some of those were not going to be good enough in the EFL.. Surely HE must have known. We are now reaping the results of those signings.. LW was more than happy to go into the league with them, infact he played them virtually every week knowing they were a disaster waiting to happen... Then slings his hook..

[drillerpie]

LW must have had some say in the re-signing of those who played in the NL. It was quite obvious that some of those were not going to be good enough in the EFL.. Surely HE must have known. We are now reaping the results of those signings.. LW was more than happy to go into the league with them, infact he played them virtually every week knowing they were a disaster waiting to happen... Then slings his hook..

We may have actually reaped rewards from that. One of the most convincing explanations I can think of for our drop off in form is that we kept mostly the same players playing with the same patterns while other teams had to wait for their players to gel.

Now they have gelled and we have team with a few NL standard players, we have a problem, but maybe it allowed us to get plenty of points on the board early on.

[legs77]

LW must have had some say in the re-signing of those who played in the NL. It was quite obvious that some of those were not going to be good enough in the EFL.. Surely HE must have known. We are now reaping the results of those signings.. LW was more than happy to go into the league with them, infact he played them virtually every week knowing they were a disaster waiting to happen... Then slings his hook..

He would have had some influence but again the model is about a recruitment team not one person picking the signings.

With 10-12th highest budget what exactly were you expecting ? Its also worth remembering as head man LW has less than 2 years experience.

The fact remains which you have cherry picked and ignored is he was in a play off position.

As for slinging his hook well he had a better offer so what is the problem ? You seem VERY KEEN to tell our UNDER CONTRACT players Nemane Morias Randall they should go so you have it both ways.

[SmiffyPie]

Bit of a double edged sword this recruiting team/LW debate don't you think? Everyone and their blind cat could see the issues looming defensively if we got promoted (let's not argue about that one peps so it was IMO). That asks the question who was responsible for failing, or not trying to replace those players that shall remain nameless? Either the Bros said not to recruit and replace (£££ implications) or LW asked and the recruiting team couldn't find anyone or LW said not to bother it didn't matter? I tend to think it was a board decision and LW just had to get on with it (reinforced by his criticism of the defence just as he was about to move to pastures greener and probably felt free to have a grumble).

[legs77]

Bit of a double edged sword this recruiting team/LW debate don't you think? Everyone and their blind cat could see the issues looming defensively if we got promoted (let's not argue about that one peps so it was IMO). That asks the question who was responsible for failing, or not trying to replace those players that shall remain nameless? Either the Bros said not to recruit and replace (£££ implications) or LW asked and the recruiting team couldn't find anyone or LW said not to bother it didn't matter? I tend to think it was a board decision and LW just had to get on with it (reinforced by his criticism of the defence just as he was about to move to pastures greener and probably felt free to have a grumble).

Its not a debate for me im having to say several times this is the model and its a collective decision.

Some are lumping it all on LW just because he left for a better job.

We signed Langstaff/Scott when we had no head coach so there is proof of how its all done.

It is clearly a board decision as again this is exactly what Brentford/Brighton do.

Frank/De Zerbi = head coach

Klopp/Arteta = manager - They are key men in signings.

[tommopie8]

I don't think we ought to change manager despite my critical post - we've made our bed and now we lie in it.

I don't think they'll change manager mid-season unless we're threatened with relegation in any season. Let alone one they've just appointed.

[nw6pie]

Bit of a double edged sword this recruiting team/LW debate don't you think? Everyone and their blind cat could see the issues looming defensively if we got promoted (let's not argue about that one peps so it was IMO). That asks the question who was responsible for failing, or not trying to replace those players that shall remain nameless? Either the Bros said not to recruit and replace (£££ implications) or LW asked and the recruiting team couldn't find anyone or LW said not to bother it didn't matter? I tend to think it was a board decision and LW just had to get on with it (reinforced by his criticism of the defence just as he was about to move to pastures greener and probably felt free to have a grumble).

We were after Jesse Debrah, no? Strange thing is that we didn’t sign an experienced, 24/25-year-old when that didn’t work out and gambled instead on the rookie from Wolves (and, later, Lewis Macari).

[MAD_MAGPIE]

Totally agree. I think there's a time to get worried and call for a change, but that isn't now. If we continue our poor or even average form between now and the end of the season and finish lower midtable, then perhaps SM isn't the man for the job. But to make that decision after a seven games or so, most of which were against teams that are objectively better than us, seems crazy.

Also, people who call for a manager's head after a few weeks don't think through what that would actually look like to the outside world. It would be like the Notts of old, hiring and firing managers out of desperation because we're not getting promoted quick enough. We'd look like a complete basket case. Quite frankly, it would be embarrassing and a massive red flag for anyone looking at taking the job on next. I'd be very, very worried if our owners did what so many people are asking for.

Given that he's going to be given more time by our very rational owners, why don't we all try and support him. We'll know more about whether he's the man for the job or not in a few months, when we've played more games.

I totally agree. To add what I said further up the thread about Stockport and Barrow who are also showing relegation form in the last six games they have not played the current 1st, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th and 16th (currently Newport who are 2nd in the form table) and yet Stockport are 19th, Barrow 22nd and us 21st. Stuart Maynard has had the toughest six games any new manager could have had at this level. I don't think Dave Challinor or Pete Wild jobs are at risk based on the last six games and neither should Stuart Maynard's.

Below is a comparison between LW and SM as well with results against those six teams. They are very close the only difference being the Gillingham game which LW won and SM lost. All the other games had the same outcome results wise and the goals scored and goals conceded are within one goal. That is why it's far too premature and early to be judging SM.

For what it's worth I don't think LW could have done much better as it was proven by the results against these teams in the first half of the season. It really is fine margins.

Luke Williams = P6, W2, D1, L3, GF7, GA9, GD-2, Pts 7

Mansfield 1-4 (Lost) = 0 points
Crewe 0-1 (Lost) = 0 points
Wrexham 0-2 (Lost) = 0 points
Barrow 1-1 (Drew) = 1 point
Gillingham 2-1 (Won) = 3 points
Newport 3-0 (Won) = 3 points

Stuart Maynard = P6, W1, D1, L4, GF6, GA10, GD-4, Pts 4

Mansfield 0-1 (Lost) 0 points
Crewe 1-3 (Lost) 0 points
Wrexham 0-1 (Lost) 0 points
Barrow 1-1 (Drew) 1 point
Gillingham 1-3 (Lost) 0 points
Newport 3-1 (Won) 3 points

[BigFatPie]

I totally agree. To add what I said further up the thread about Stockport and Barrow who are also showing relegation form in the last six games they have not played the current 1st, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th and 16th (currently Newport who are 2nd in the form table) and yet Stockport are 19th, Barrow 22nd and us 21st. Stuart Maynard has had the toughest six games any new manager could have had at this level. I don't think Dave Challinor or Pete Wild jobs are at risk based on the last six games and neither should Stuart Maynard's.

Below is a comparison between LW and SM as well with results against those six teams. They are very close the only difference being the Gillingham game which LW won and SM lost. All the other games had the same outcome results wise and the goals scored and goals conceded are within one goal. That is why it's far too premature and early to be judging SM.

For what it's worth I don't think LW could have done much better as it was proven by the results against these teams in the first half of the season. It really is fine margins.

Luke Williams = P6, W2, D1, L3, GF7, GA9, GD-2, Pts 7

Mansfield 1-4 (Lost) = 0 points
Crewe 0-1 (Lost) = 0 points
Wrexham 0-2 (Lost) = 0 points
Barrow 1-1 (Drew) = 1 point
Gillingham 2-1 (Won) = 3 points
Newport 3-0 (Won) = 3 points

Stuart Maynard = P6, W1, D1, L4, GF6, GA10, GD-4, Pts 4

Mansfield 0-1 (Lost) 0 points
Crewe 1-3 (Lost) 0 points
Wrexham 0-1 (Lost) 0 points
Barrow 1-1 (Drew) 1 point
Gillingham 1-3 (Lost) 0 points
Newport 3-1 (Won) 3 points

He has had a tough start, but I think most people’s issues are specifically with the two home defeats, the two worst home performances of the season in my book. If you don’t think we’d have played better/got better results in those under Williams then I’d disagree, but regardless, his job is to improve us, and so far… he hasn’t.