Summer Clearout Who Would You Let Go?

[the_anticlough]

I’d rephrase the question to get a similar answer: which of these players is not good enough to get us promoted?

Yes, it's a really good way to look at it. The long NL years, plus following NBA (where it's done all the time), encourages you to gauge the level of the players on your team like this

We knew it at the time and so it was proved, we had so many promotion-level players last year.

Ruben was a borderline Championship/L1 player
Maca threatens L1
Baldwin at his best is well beyond L2. Palmer/Cameron/Jones/Bostock were all above NL level therefore promotion level.
(just like Schmeichel in the Munto team belonged in the Prem)

With that, you don't need the others to be at the same high level. As long as they don't drag you down so you can't achieve your goal

This year though?

We have a smattering of above the level players.
A few more who can feature at the top end of L2.
A few who are not out of place in L2. And a few too many question marks...

When players move on, levels are quickly revealed. Ruben becomes a star man of a L1 play-off team. We've had players leave us only to turn up next at Kidsgrove, Buxton, Nuneaton, Boston

We don't have a promotion-worthy squad at the moment. We're not far off but it needs work and some changes.

[durhampie]

I know some are under contract but if it was a perfect world:

Stone
Nemane
Cameron
Brindley
Baldwin
Morias
Randall
O Brien
McGoldrick (possibly)
Slocombe

You forgot Bostock..

[queenslandpie]

Maybe not if you take the 147 previous games for Wealdstone into account, where he had a 30% win rate. And that's in a league where we got more than 100 points. I am not seeing the logic of his appointment, which, incidentally, was not made by the bros but our other director, Richard Montague of Football Radar. Like his selection of Morias, his judgement is not infallible.

Not really. He had a part time team way above its natural level and adopted a style of play we play. It's a logical appointment. allbeit under whelming yes. To question him after 3 games is ludicrous though. Just give him some time and see how he gets on. Not a good start granted but far far too early to judge.

[Bohinen]

Not really. He had a part time team way above its natural level and adopted a style of play we play. It's a logical appointment. allbeit under whelming yes. To question him after 3 games is ludicrous though. Just give him some time and see how he gets on. Not a good start granted but far far too early to judge.

I am not judging him over 3 games. I am judging him before we recruited him, for whatever reason that was. The Wealdstone success story (13th) is the Emperor's New Clothes.

[drillerpie]

Expecting lightning to strike twice with this sort of punt seems mighty hubristic.

We got lucky with LW for sure. I think they only considered him out of desperation, after numerous others had turned the job down. He did actually have a reasonably decent unbeaten start though - won his opening game, drew the next three (the last of those being *that* Chesterfield game) and then went on a winning streak. Had he had the sort of start Maynard has had, things may have worked out quite differently.

Seeing that we didn't have anybody lined up this time around, despite knowing LW would likely leave for many many weeks beforehand, it could well be that Maynard wasn't first choice either.

It probably is unfair to judge Maynard after 3 games, but looking at the other names who made a bad start and factoring in most of those walked into a club down at the bottom of the table as opposed to a play off position, it's definitely not a promising start.

I'm sure he'll do OK-ish once we run into those fixtures against lower-mid table opponents but can't see him being a success. I'd anticipate we're gong to waste 18 months on him similar to Burchnall, though in this case it'll end by "mutual consent" rather than him being poached by another club.

Isn't that just another way of saying lots of people judged LW way too early and got egg on their face?

Also, saying that a employing a manager who nobody wanted and getting an exciting promotion season out of him then a load of compensation when he goes was lucky, is not a very charitable interpretation of what happened. That was exactly what they were aiming to do and what they are aiming to do with Maynard.

For sure it hasn't been a promising start - it's the opposite of promising, especially in light of the Gillingham game (the other two performances were OK IMO) - but not that bad either considering our poor form in the last part of LW's reign. 1 point from 9 is a bad return but I think you have to compare it to the last 12 games of LW's tenure which yielded about a point a game according to the stats mentioned on here (assuming they are correct).

Cherry picking a 5-0 win out of that to say we were in good form when LW left (as Bohinen did) seems unfair, as (again assuming that stat is true) we were averaging just above relegation form for over a a quarter of a season. Similarly, cherry picking Maynard's win rate at a club where the manager is competing at a big disadvantage every week is also unfair, hence me asking what win rate would've been acceptable at Wealdstone. What win rate would LW, or Warnock, or Pep have managing a part time team with very low crowds?

My point wasn't really that Maynard is off to a promising start, more that LW got off to a poor start too (a win and three draws by my calculations over a season would have given us 74 points in the NL - I think we can all agree that's poor), faced a lot of the same criticism about his experience and pedigree, and turned out to be good.

[Smigpie]

To be successful at this level it might take a different style of play which in turn needs different type types of players. Take the top seven in our league, all of a similar style of play which is not always easy on the eye but effective, all rugged athletic powerful players that can play And all know their roles, ours is idealistic by comparison and great to watch when it works but we’ve been found out and can’t adapt. Just a thought.

[Notts78]

If one of the best supported Premier League teams (Man Utd/Liverpool/Spurs) were going to poach somebody from an unfashionable championship club (Bristol City/Preston/Rotherham), you'd expect their results to be absolutely outstanding and fighting for auto promotion, not "acceptable" and merely maintaining their position.

Notts literally now average 10 times what Wealdstone do, so in those terms it would be like Liverpool hiring Northampton or Exeter's manager.

This looked like a stupid appointment from the outset and results so far are bearing that out.

Maynard is the 27th new Notts manager in the dugout this century and if he doesn't win at either Newport or Wrexham (a strong possibility) he'll be one of only two of those 27 (and by god there's been some bad ones) who have failed to win any of their opening 5 in charge - Gary Brazil 2nd spell being the other.

Interesting that you have gone with Liverpool, Spurs and Man Utd to make a point. I’ll make one for you and using the 3 clubs you quoted. Klopp aside all 3 of those clubs have had sustained relative failure. All of the clubs have picked up managers with excellent records elsewhere and ultimately failed, and would have cost millions.
Past success/failure is not the only barometer when assessing future performance. Not in my opinion anyway.

[nw6pie]

To be successful at this level it might take a different style of play which in turn needs different type types of players. Take the top seven in our league, all of a similar style of play which is not always easy on the eye but effective, all rugged athletic powerful players that can play And all know their roles, ours is idealistic by comparison and great to watch when it works but we’ve been found out and can’t adapt. Just a thought.

Good point. I think the recruitment team (or person, if it is just Richard Montague) underestimated the importance of exactly that type of player - rugged, athletic, powerful and can play - and overloaded the team with flair players. That worked well for us initially, but once teams sussed out how to play us (Mansfield at home being the most painful example, but also less heralded teams like Walsall), we have struggled.

This is a very odd league, though, with teams swinging from extremes. I thought Newport were absolutely dreadful when we beat them 3-0 in October, for instance - yet now they could go above us if they win on Tuesday. Let’s hope we can kick on again somehow, and that the season doesn’t fizzle out into one of rancour and disappointment.

[drillerpie]

To be successful at this level it might take a different style of play which in turn needs different type types of players. Take the top seven in our league, all of a similar style of play which is not always easy on the eye but effective, all rugged athletic powerful players that can play And all know their roles, ours is idealistic by comparison and great to watch when it works but we’ve been found out and can’t adapt. Just a thought.

It's a thought I completely agree with. I have been saying that for a long time actually.

I think the idea oor owners have works - lots of teams like Bournemouth, Luton, Brighton, Brentford, have climbed the leagues with a passing game and/or stats based recruitment - but you can't have just that. You need to be able to mix it up physically to some extent as well. Only when the gulf in skill is huge do you not need to worry about competing physically. Even at the top level, that's why Barcelona were unplayable for a few years with Xabi, Iniesta, Messi et al in their prime, and after that, not so much.

A guy I work with is a big Ipswich fan so I try to watch them if they're playing and Notts aren't. They have had a similar last 18 months to us - underachieving below their level, employ a young unknown progressive coach, get promotion in style then start the next season well, before having a slump (although not as bad as our slump).

One thing I notice about them is they have skilful players, yes, but they have a couple more physically powerful players than we do. I understand that these are the players everyone wants (skilful and physical) but we need to try and get some in. Hopefully with signings like Jatta, Warner and Robertson we have realised this now.

[OP67]

Stone
Brindley
Cameron (It's the only way to stop managers picking him as Captain!)
Rawlinson
Adebayo Rowling
Chicksen (Prove me wrong Chicks)
Randell
Morias

Most of that lot are either to slow or to injury prone!