Signings - This season

[Jampie]

I think we've got a bit of a perception problem, too.

We almost never sign players who can truly hit the ground running, and almost never sign players who are at their full potential yet. We almost always sign players who we think can significantly improve. Based on that, if I look at all recruitment under the brothers since they bought the club, in general they've done an absolutely fantastic job and I really don't remember a time when recruitment was better.

Right now the squad is a bit weak. That's really bad timing. But it's likely that even with no new signings the current squad will become a L2 killer. Still some newbies finding their feet and yeah, absolutely, odds are one or two recent signings don't work out. That's a WAAAY better ratio than the previous several owners'.

So overall I'm not concerned about the long term, although promotion this season is looking somewhat far-fetched at this stage. Which is disappointing because it was looking within reach not so long ago.

[queenslandpie]

I think we've got a bit of a perception problem, too.

We almost never sign players who can truly hit the ground running, and almost never sign players who are at their full potential yet. We almost always sign players who we think can significantly improve. Based on that, if I look at all recruitment under the brothers since they bought the club, in general they've done an absolutely fantastic job and I really don't remember a time when recruitment was better.

Right now the squad is a bit weak. That's really bad timing. But it's likely that even with no new signings the current squad will become a L2 killer. Still some newbies finding their feet and yeah, absolutely, odds are one or two recent signings don't work out. That's a WAAAY better ratio than the previous several owners'.

So overall I'm not concerned about the long term, although promotion this season is looking somewhat far-fetched at this stage. Which is disappointing because it was looking within reach not so long ago.

Logical and well considered insights. I don't mind if we don't go up. I don't think we are ready to. The rebuilding required for L1 would be astronomical.

[freemuzzy]

After the criticism earlier in the season I took for daring to say Montague has yet again saddled us with some poor signings, I thought I'd give my thoughts on this year's crop as they stand.

EXCELLENT Good enough for league 1 and above

Abbott ( Oh he isn't ours ! )

GOOD - League 1 building -

Bass, Bedeau , Platt , Jatta, Ness

OK - League 2 Squad only -

Tsaroulla, Johnson ( not ours )

BACK UP LEAGUE 2 - Nothing more

Gordon, Grant, Hinchy, McDonald

POOR - Should never have been signed ! -

Brown, Martin, Cundy, Edwards

UNDECIDED YET - But certainly not convinced -

Traore, Jarvis, Whitaker

So 18 players signed - Only 6 good enough for League 1 ( 1 not even ours )

Upto 12 Not good enough beyond league 2

Not a great ratio.

Those who called me a " Bed wetter " and other derogatory comments, please feel free to argue the case differently now.

I think most of these categorisations are fair - though as someone else stated Gordon is a recent promotion winner from this league so his assessment may be a bit harsh. He?s rarely been played in his actual position and when he has is told to stop putting crosses in for our giant striker, and instead recycle possession and bore them into submission. Also think Martin was a worthwhile punt on a short term deal who had some good moments in the end.

The broader issue in my view is which player has the manager improved in his year here? Who has he taken from a relatively low starting point and integrated into the team.

The model - which has generally worked very well - has never relied on readymade players; Langstaff and Rodrigues weren?t readymade players. Would they have been considered poor signings/recruitment under a more limited Head Coach? Rodrigues struggled under Ardley and Langstaff had had one strong season at the level below, but was anything but a proven striker. My guess he?d have been back at Gateshead within six months had Maynard been our Head Coach at the time.

Having played in the L1 playoffs last season, Grant looked like an exciting signing but has largely been disappointing. Similar (so far) with Jarvis. The Recruitment is not black and white - it is only as good as the Head Coach being able to make it work.

[drillerpie]

I think most of these categorisations are fair - though as someone else stated Gordon is a recent promotion winner from this league so his assessment may be a bit harsh. He?s rarely been played in his actual position and when he has is told to stop putting crosses in for our giant striker, and instead recycle possession and bore them into submission. Also think Martin was a worthwhile punt on a short term deal who had some good moments in the end.

The broader issue in my view is which player has the manager improved in his year here? Who has he taken from a relatively low starting point and integrated into the team.

The model - which has generally worked very well - has never relied on readymade players; Langstaff and Rodrigues weren?t readymade players. Would they have been considered poor signings/recruitment under a more limited Head Coach? Rodrigues struggled under Ardley and Langstaff had had one strong season at the level below, but was anything but a proven striker. My guess he?d have been back at Gateshead within six months had Maynard been our Head Coach at the time.

Having played in the L1 playoffs last season, Grant looked like an exciting signing but has largely been disappointing. Similar (so far) with Jarvis. The Recruitment is not black and white - it is only as good as the Head Coach being able to make it work.

I think they are valid questions. There are question marks over roles and positions. Josh Martin was generally poor as a wing back or wide player but was great for one game through the middle and with his pace gave us a real game changing outlet. He was sent back to the wing and then let go.

Jarvis is not as fast but could be similar. Playing wide for Notts County seems to be quite a hard job as you get the ball after it has been slowly worked wide and you are most probably working with the touchline right behind you and double marking in front of you.

[IPieWithMyLittleEye]

My understanding (according to those within football) is a successful transfer policy is a strike rate of 1 in 3?

To decide what is successful we then need to decide how we are judging success. Are we looking at players to take us up the leagues immediately (as you are) or are we looking at players who could be viewed as an investment over the long-term.

Traore, Jarvis, Hinchy and Grant are all firmly in the investment category, the success of these transfers can only be properly judged over the longer term. We need to be patient with them. Most footballers don't peak until their mid to late 20's, there plenty of potential improvement in these 4, plus Traore is trying to settle in a different country.

What the transfer policy has done well is when speculating on players it is important we don't get saddled with their wages long-term if it doesn't work out. In that regard Brown, Martin and Whittaker aren't shockers and can be viewed as a long term trial.

[Could'vebeenacontender]

I disagree on the assessment of Edwards
He only had one bad game in my opinion and that was after coming back after a long injury layoff
He brings energy and never hides during games

[M0ufMk3]

I think they are valid questions. There are question marks over roles and positions. Josh Martin was generally poor as a wing back or wide player but was great for one game through the middle and with his pace gave us a real game changing outlet. He was sent back to the wing and then let go.

Jarvis is not as fast but could be similar. Playing wide for Notts County seems to be quite a hard job as you get the ball after it has been slowly worked wide and you are most probably working with the touchline right behind you and double marking in front of you.

What I saw of Jarvis yesterday was someone who looked easy on the ball and moved with it well only to find there was nobody there when he needed them. To your point Driller, I agree that one thing he absolutely did not look like was a wing back but he did look like someone who could play a bit. [I admit to not having seen much of him though.]

[jacobncfc]

With the injuries we?ve got at the minute in attacking and creative areas, we should be giving Jarvis a go
through the middle I think.

[jackal2]

Seems to me we're being a bit harsh on Whitaker who was not in the game at all yesterday but has shown he can affect games through goals or assists.

We're never going to give good marks to transfer policy when we've got loads of players out injured and just got completely outplayed. In general though I can't remember a time when our players were in such demand from other clubs since the Munto era, which was paid for with fake money, or before that the Warnock era, so it's not like we need to rip everything up and start again.

Totally agree. No club is going to hit a strike with every signing, but we sign many more genuinely good players now than we did under any other regime going back at least as far as the Allardyce and Warnock eras in the 1990s. I also think that some of the players that have been marked down in the OP are actually decent or could come good, in the case of the new signings, but the team needs to play at a much higher tempo and show far more positivity to bring their talents out.

Several posters seems to be identifying the January transfer window as the moment things went wrong, and I agree that our form has dropped off a cliff from late January onwards, but I don't think it's because all our players have suddenly turned crap overnight, or that Crowley's departure was the be-all-and-end-all, indeed imagine the amount of pratting about and posing he would do in a team in a team that plays as slowly and takes as many touches as it does now. I'm concerned about whoever is (or isn't) training these players in recent weeks. needs

[Bohinen]

Totally agree. No club is going to hit a strike with every signing, but we sign many more genuinely good players now than we did under any other regime going back at least as far as the Allardyce and Warnock eras in the 1990s.

I would question that. If you look at that list of signings, there would be quite a big wage bill associated with it, and the club does run at a loss. Better run clubs are achieving far more with fewer resources. There have been times in the past when we have had a very low budget and couldn't afford the quality of players required.

When we had money, or fake money, it was spent well, even under Munto. Schmeichel was way too expensive for a League 2 club and Sol Campbell was a ridiculous publicity stunt, but Bishop and Ravenhill were normal and good signings, and Ben Davies was exceptional yet still affordable. Even Hughes was good business, it makes sense to recruit the best forward you can afford, even if you skimp on back-up strikers rather than recruit four, all of whom are not good enough.

We seem to have recruited three or four wingers in the hope they might be convertible to the wing-back position without really considering their defensive attributes, and then, of course, they have to play on their wrong side, but that's down to the manager. And lastly, there's the sick bay, the policy of buying injury-prone players is not working. Yes, I know the Jones argument, but even he's not contributing right-now and we haven't had value from him this season.