Watt was the big reason for the turn around last season, and we got him because they couldn't handle him in Belgium. The clearly couldn't handle him in England either! So it was hardly down to great strategy.
Our relegation is down to total incompetence by the Belgians since January 2014.
They have been an accident waiting to happen.
Explain a 12th place finish last season!
Explain how Riga won more games than Powell in 2013/14 when he coached 16 and Powell coached 30. And Powell had Kermorgant and Stephens before they bailed.
Explain how we have six academy players in a first 18 which has held its own these last two months when we only used to have three.
None of this is black and white.
Oversimplification for the purposes of propaganda does not serve our club.
NB none of this should be taken as a defense if the decision to appoint Fraeye or fail to replac5e injured players with loans when our club had time to avoid relegation. This season has been a train wreck.
Well, here's my explanation.
1. The regime got lucky last season (imagine if Peeters had been replaced by Fraeye), mainly because Vetokele scored a decent number of goals before getting knackered and then Watt managed a whole three month period without his demons interfering with his undoubted ability. This season we are seeing the fruits of all Meire and Duchatelet's "labours". We can only judge them on what they have provided us this season, as I believe the fragrant and lovely CEO invited us to do.
2. The season before Riga inherited a squad and backroom team that understood the league - I firmly believe that Chris Powell (who had been starved of acceptable resources) would have kept us up.
3. Six Academy players is easy, a paper thin squad, unable to cope with injuries to key personnel; the squad holding it own is partly due to having brought in a coach (that the regime previously believed we did not need) who understands tactics, and partly due to previously injured or lately acquired players becoming fit enough to compete.
Personally, I think it's entirely black and white.
1. A good player scoring goals is "lucky" now? Sorry but I'm calling nonsense. The second half of the season they brought in a second good striker and Tony Watt scored goals then. Also in the second half players like JBG and Cousins started to settle in and play well, Gomez broke through, and Bulot came back from the ACON a man possessed. The players that were signed new to the league started settling, and bringing in Diarra and Johnson were really good signings for that season and brought in BEFORE Jan/Feb (unlike this year), and Eagles was decent. In Luzon they had a manager who was good at geeing the team up. He was tactically limited and naive, but he got the team on a run and they finished well.
I'm not a proponent of the regime, its managerial, or its recruiting policies, but I also think it's unfair that when things go right it's lucky and when things go wrong it's miasmic.
2. I think Riga has proven himself to be a perfectly good coach this time around. Do we put too much emphasis on the manager/head coach position and not give enough credit to coaches? Absolutely. But Riga, unlike Peeters or Luzon is no slouch and he sets his team up well and has a system.
I think SCP is a wonderful man, but watching his team in league one where they ended up winning it at a canter, they looked tactically limited, old fashioned, and a bit naive. It was a flat 4-4-2 who looked confused in possession, and the mode of attack seemed to be getting the ball wide and crossing it in. He definitely did good work, I'm not doubting that, but with the influx of money and quality of players the Championship is becoming a more tactical and technical league, and when you look around there just aren't many jobs for young English/British managers who are former players. The game has moved on since they played.
I also think it's worth noting that Powell, Dyer, and Mathews are all currently out of work. Again, not saying they are terrible coaches, but I fear that they are the types of coaches who the game is passing by.
3. Fox is keeping out a south Korean international, Pope is keeping out Hendo, Solly is keeping out an Italian international, Harriott is keeping out a Danish international and/or our brightest young star. Lookman is obviously a very talented player, and Lennon being 3rd-4th choice CB is good for his development.
If this were September-January I'd absolutely agree with you. When we had Lennon, RCC (though I thought he showed flashes) and KAG, plus Ba and Sarr being thrown in at the deep end, that was a result of a paper thin squad. The academy graduates currently in the side are there on merit and form. I would argue that now, in April, we have a very good balance of young academy players coming through, and experienced players around them.
I don't think this is black and white, I think there are some policies and appointments (or lack thereof--DoF) that are coming up to bite us now, but I would argue that a lot of our failure this season dates back to the summer onward where we didn't recruit enough players, where we had a tactically limited coach who was unproven as to what he would do when his team hit a slide, and then bringing in an absolute amateur replacement in November and letting him stay through much of the January window.
I think you are both right - Watt turned out to be a greater success than could have been envisaged, seeing as we wouldn't have got him if he was a success in Belgium. Riga is a decent manager, but Fraye's appointment killed us and was a disgrace. the squad was imbalanced from the summer. Powell had his limitations but did a great job changing the team in league one and getting us up etc...
1. A good player scoring goals is "lucky" now? Sorry but I'm calling nonsense. The second half of the season they brought in a second good striker and Tony Watt scored goals then. Also in the second half players like JBG and Cousins started to settle in and play well, Gomez broke through, and Bulot came back from the ACON a man possessed. The players that were signed new to the league started settling, and bringing in Diarra and Johnson were really good signings for that season and brought in BEFORE Jan/Feb (unlike this year), and Eagles was decent. In Luzon they had a manager who was good at geeing the team up. He was tactically limited and naive, but he got the team on a run and they finished well.
I'm not a proponent of the regime, its managerial, or its recruiting policies, but I also think it's unfair that when things go right it's lucky and when things go wrong it's miasmic.
2. I think Riga has proven himself to be a perfectly good coach this time around. Do we put too much emphasis on the manager/head coach position and not give enough credit to coaches? Absolutely. But Riga, unlike Peeters or Luzon is no slouch and he sets his team up well and has a system.
I think SCP is a wonderful man, but watching his team in league one where they ended up winning it at a canter, they looked tactically limited, old fashioned, and a bit naive. It was a flat 4-4-2 who looked confused in possession, and the mode of attack seemed to be getting the ball wide and crossing it in. He definitely did good work, I'm not doubting that, but with the influx of money and quality of players the Championship is becoming a more tactical and technical league, and when you look around there just aren't many jobs for young English/British managers who are former players. The game has moved on since they played.
I also think it's worth noting that Powell, Dyer, and Mathews are all currently out of work. Again, not saying they are terrible coaches, but I fear that they are the types of coaches who the game is passing by.
3. Fox is keeping out a south Korean international, Pope is keeping out Hendo, Solly is keeping out an Italian international, Harriott is keeping out a Danish international and/or our brightest young star. Lookman is obviously a very talented player, and Lennon being 3rd-4th choice CB is good for his development.
If this were September-January I'd absolutely agree with you. When we had Lennon, RCC (though I thought he showed flashes) and KAG, plus Ba and Sarr being thrown in at the deep end, that was a result of a paper thin squad. The academy graduates currently in the side are there on merit and form. I would argue that now, in April, we have a very good balance of young academy players coming through, and experienced players around them.
I don't think this is black and white, I think there are some policies and appointments (or lack thereof--DoF) that are coming up to bite us now, but I would argue that a lot of our failure this season dates back to the summer onward where we didn't recruit enough players, where we had a tactically limited coach who was unproven as to what he would do when his team hit a slide, and then bringing in an absolute amateur replacement in November and letting him stay through much of the January window.
1. Well, I do think it is fair to say that we were lucky that both Vetokele and Watt managed to score goals (in Igor's case, coming from Danish football, he managed to hit the ground running, unlike Vibe at Brentford). If we'd been unlucky, Vetokele would have been injured in August, and Watt would have started a fight as soon as he'd got to the club. And I accept that last season we had more players playing well, but, if you look at Duchatelet era signings, that is not the norm.
I will admit that there have been some permanent signings by the regime that, if they can stay fit, look reasonable or better (and JBG is very good) in the Championship: Vetokele, Diarra, Kashi, Bauer, Teixera, etc. But, on the whole, the recruitment pattern does not ensure adequate cover for key positions. We have had too many panic buys/loans and players brought in from overseas that may have talent, but have to adapt instantly to the English game or get shipped out. Given the squad we had, I think that we were absolutely lucky last season.
2. I didn't think that I had suggested that Riga was a bad coach. However, my point is that, in 2014, with the exception of the network imports, there was a settled squad and coaching set up with which to work, and that can only have helped in my opinion.
I have to admit that, in my mind, there's nothing wrong with playing a 4-4-2 system, with wingers crossing the ball in (provided they are accurate). It may be that, in the Championship, teams are moving away from it, but I think that's more to do with not having players who can play the system (it seems to work OK for those teams that can). In my view, SCP, if backed, would have been able to succeed in 2014 and beyond - I do believe that both last season and this, our team would have had better balance.
And, fair enough, young British managers don't seem to be getting the jobs in English football, but I believe that's down to fashion more than ability. The thing is that young managers are still learning on the job, and I believe that SCP was smart enough and reflective enough to keep learning and improving. And we would be better for it.
3. I rate Morgan Fox highly, as that most rare thing in modern football, a defender who defends. As for Chris Solly, provided he can run, there is no better player in his position than him. I think, however, that neither Marco Motta nor Yun Suk Young are full backs as much as wing backs, and they were brought to the club for attacking rather than defensive attributes. So, it's not really that Solly and Fox are keeping them out of the team/positions. In any event, how many of the 6 Academy graduates were either on loan or injured before December?
Solly, however, also exemplifies what I had said. He is a player who, following injury, is now fit enough to play. If you take a look at Fanni and co., it was several weeks after signing (when we needed players ready for the fight) before they could play, and even then they have only begun to get into form in the last few weeks.
Players like Makienok are not playing, in the main, because the return is not what we need. If anything, I feel really sorry for him because, in a 4-4-2 he'd get many more goal scoring chances.
How crazy was it that, Luzon having identified a desperately needed, creative wide player in Henry, that we didn't sign him? Other than JBG, what genuine playmaker do we have? What weight did we put on his shoulders?
We don't play the kind of football to get the best of Makienok, and he lacks the pace to make many chances by himself. Harriott and the raw talent of Lookman have that pace, and can be both exhilarating and infuriating (at the same time), but their presence in our attack says plenty about the paucity of options available (for which I absolutely blame the regime).
That said, I am delighted that they are playing well, we currently have a more than decent first team and a good coach/manager. But there is precious little strength in depth. If anyone approaches our games with confidence, they have more faith than me.
The team has suffered because of inadequate planning and a lack of footballing strategy. I think that that is absolutely black and white and responsibility lies with RD. Player and coaching recruitment have been appallingly badly managed.
For the last two summers, we have effectively found ourselves with a new team for each season. It wouldn't be so bad if there was a style of play common to each coach, but there is such a level of disconnect that nobody has the first clue what CAFC they will see.
@NornIrishAddick Thanks for taking the time to elaborate. Your points are very well articulated.
1) Your point about Igor hitting the ground running is a good one and certainly not the norm. As far as Watt turning up and not starting a fight it's literally the least I would expect in an ideal world, but obviously we don't live in an ideal world. Same could also be said for recruiting players who we think could hit the ground running, but that is obviously not something this regime is good at, and to be fair, it can be hard to gauge even for top teams and top players. But I see what you mean, and there is definitely some luck in there knowing that our scouting and signing approach seems to be scattergun at best.
2) My criticism of 4-4-2 was a bit of a red herring and quite lazy. My point was more about an old fashioned way of playing that is less controlled or cerebral than you might find with other managers. I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this, but when you look at the number of foreign managers from all over the globe who have come in and been successful in England, the number is very high. But when you turn that over and look at British managers who have gone abroad and been successful, well, you could saw McClaren had his moments in Holland though from what I read people at Wolfsburg and in German football were thoroughly unimpressed.
Beyond that you have Moyes, who did not do well at Sociedad. I won't really count Gary Neville for various reasons. Beyond that, well there just aren't many examples. And I don't think that's because of a fashion or a trend. It's something that has been steadily growing for over a decade now. I think it's because English/British football fell well behind in the late 80s-early 2000s in terms of tactics, techniques, and professionalism and it's my belief that there is an entire lost generation out there who will need to work very hard and probably go abroad or be very open minded in order to become managers. I think the modern club game is more cerebral and tactical than it ever has been, and while it took a while, it really has become the norm in the Premier League.
Powell absolutely seems like one of the few who could break that mold, but I think there are a couple of problems there. The first is that he went from coaching to managing very quickly. Not without good reason, but I firmly believe that had he spent more time as a coach under Sven he would have gone into management better prepared. Secondly, and more importantly, there aren't a lot of people to learn from. One big opportunity is having a backroom staff with different footballing backgrounds and experiences, but he didn't do that. There's only so much hard work can do when what is really needed is new ideas and different approaches.
Sorry the above got so long, hopefully it's clear my issues isn't with SCP so much as it's institutional. And I do think there is time for managers to change and adapt and I really hope it's something Powell is doing in his time off.
3) I think we largely agree here, not sure how well I articulated my point. I absoltuely agree that the transfer policy is poorly run. I somewhat disagree with impact vs. timeline if you will, what mistakes when built up to where we are, but one thing is clear is that we've made the same mistakes for 2+ years, and things are getting worse not better.
Also agree on Mak. I only have highlights to go on from Saturday but every attacking move seemed to start with a touch or flick or pass from him. He also played a lovely left-footed cross to Harriott when Harriott blazed over.
Our relegation is down to total incompetence by the Belgians since January 2014.
They have been an accident waiting to happen.
Explain a 12th place finish last season!
Explain how Riga won more games than Powell in 2013/14 when he coached 16 and Powell coached 30. And Powell had Kermorgant and Stephens before they bailed.
Explain how we have six academy players in a first 18 which has held its own these last two months when we only used to have three.
None of this is black and white.
Oversimplification for the purposes of propaganda does not serve our club.
NB none of this should be taken as a defense if the decision to appoint Fraeye or fail to replac5e injured players with loans when our club had time to avoid relegation. This season has been a train wreck.
I can't find the link now, but at the start if this season, someone posted a link to an excellent website which ran a detailed statistical analysis of all the teams from last season for metrics like chances for an against, goals scored and conceded per chance etc etc.
It concluded that, based on our overall performance, we over achieved in terms of league position. In fact, by their analysis, by rights we probably should have finished very close to or in the bottom 3. That would fit with the general perception that even during that unbeaten run at the start of the season we were rarely the better side even in games where we picked up points. I think our 12th place finish had a lot to do with a hot streak a piece from Igor and Watt and was always unlikely to be replicated this season unless our overall performances improved and so it has proved.
If an enthusiastic amateur football statistician can identify that trend from last season, then Roland's Belgian Laptop Geniuses ought to have been able to as well. Instead we started the season with a squad that I'm sure most of us felt was inferior to last season's. Having got lucky on a 50-1 shot last season, we decided to gamble the winnings on a 100-1 and unsurprisingly lost.
Did Powell ever have the chance to adapt? He built a team to get out of League One as soon as possible, rather than one looking to play good football which would hopefully in time take us up. In the Championship the money dried up and he only made signings to keep us going, players like Fuller, Dervite and Wilson for example in the first season, Church, Sordell, Wood etc after that.
Had he had more technical players such as JBG, Bulot and even CBs like Gomez and Ben Haim I think the football under him would have improved. I'm sure we'd have also been nowhere near this position if he had £9m+ to spend.
I think Riga is a decent coach - it was the owner who decided not to keep him on which incensed me so much I got into some arguments on here and left the forum for a while. The owner would have appointed the Upjest manager if it weren't for his own staff telling him it wasn't a great idea, and the owner appointed Fraeye. Now if anybody wants to argue that this isn't incompetent, good luck! But the owners management of Riga doesn't score him any positive marks IMO. He was/is the best manager imposed on us and he got rid of him, then was forced to appoint him above his first choice!
He's managed to negotiate better authority over player recruitment than anyone else so far with RD and has done pretty well given the time he has had in his second stint.
I reckon he could, if given the same authority after his first stint have had us pushing for play offs. Who knows, all conjecture now as we head to division 1.
Did Powell ever have the chance to adapt? He built a team to get out of League One as soon as possible, rather than one looking to play good football which would hopefully in time take us up. In the Championship the money dried up and he only made signings to keep us going, players like Fuller, Dervite and Wilson for example in the first season, Church, Sordell, Wood etc after that.
Had he had more technical players such as JBG, Bulot and even CBs like Gomez and Ben Haim I think the football under him would have improved. I'm sure we'd have also been nowhere near this position if he had £9m+ to spend.
He had a year and a half at Championship level. The first year he finished 9th, as if often (and rightly) brought up by those who rate him. The second year we were in the relegation zone and played some awful stuff, albeit on the road to an FA cup quarterfinal and we had games in hand.
I would say that the reason Roland let him go most likely wasn't sound--i.e. he wouldn't play network players. But that doesn't necessarily mean it was the wrong decision. I don't know how he would have done having players like JBG, Bulot, Buyens, Tucudean thrust upon him. And if he was given some say in signings, I fear we would have ended up with the likes of Karl Henry, Richard Stearman, etc. instead of Tex, Kashi, etc. Of course we'll never know, though I think it's pretty safe to say that it was never going to work between Roland and SCP because SCP wanted control over transfers. In my opinion, that's an outdated way of doing things. that doesn't make the alternative (Roland's) way right, it's just as I said before I think he's part of something of a "lost generation."
I don't think CP would need the historic levels of control over player recruitment that Harry Rednspp (as a bad example) or Alex Ferguson (as a good example) had.
As first team coach you want to be able to set up to different styles of play with your main attacking style flexed at home games and an attacking defensive style for away fixtures.
First and foremost though you want to have a core team and work ethic that accommodates both.
Whether CP was that flexible is open to question.
But I don't think Powell would have had too much problem with recruitment to a plan with the decisions made ultimately by others. From his comments he objected to being sent players out of the blue who he was asked to play when they didn't fit his system (or were shit).
When you mentioned Redknapp my first thought was "Chris Powell is far too honorable a man to allegedly take a bung or allegedly conduct tax evasion."
It may well be the case that Powell, and potentially others of his background and generation rise to the challenege and improve when given better players. Of all the of the former players in management of his age and era, I think he has the intelligence, work ethic, and humility to really succeed in the long run. He's 3-4 years into coaching and management, time is very much on his side and my ideal situation would be one where he goes off and improves his trade and his methods and comes back to us and leads up to success.
Did Powell ever have the chance to adapt? He built a team to get out of League One as soon as possible, rather than one looking to play good football which would hopefully in time take us up. In the Championship the money dried up and he only made signings to keep us going, players like Fuller, Dervite and Wilson for example in the first season, Church, Sordell, Wood etc after that.
Had he had more technical players such as JBG, Bulot and even CBs like Gomez and Ben Haim I think the football under him would have improved. I'm sure we'd have also been nowhere near this position if he had £9m+ to spend.
He had a year and a half at Championship level. The first year he finished 9th, as if often (and rightly) brought up by those who rate him. The second year we were in the relegation zone and played some awful stuff, albeit on the road to an FA cup quarterfinal and we had games in hand.
I would say that the reason Roland let him go most likely wasn't sound--i.e. he wouldn't play network players. But that doesn't necessarily mean it was the wrong decision. I don't know how he would have done having players like JBG, Bulot, Buyens, Tucudean thrust upon him. And if he was given some say in signings, I fear we would have ended up with the likes of Karl Henry, Richard Stearman, etc. instead of Tex, Kashi, etc. Of course we'll never know, though I think it's pretty safe to say that it was never going to work between Roland and SCP because SCP wanted control over transfers. In my opinion, that's an outdated way of doing things. that doesn't make the alternative (Roland's) way right, it's just as I said before I think he's part of something of a "lost generation."
This has been done to death a million times over but I'm going to indulge myself and write an essay on it anyway.
I've never heard CP say he wanted total autonomy over transfers, but there is a long way from that to the situation he found himself in with players turning up at reception at Sparrows Lane without him even having any pre-warning they were in the taxi, let alone a say in whether we signed them or not. Significantly sub-standard players at that.
Powell had 4 full or part seasons with us:
Season 1 (part season): Brand new to full time management. Backed by the board with January and loan signings. In trying to change us to a less direct side (as we had been under Parky) made one excellent signing in BWP and a few not very good ones (Frank Noble etc). Took us out of the play-off places. Admitted he made mistakes.
Season 2 (full season): Backed again to make a complete overhaul of the squad. Learnt from his previous mistakes. Made lots of very good signings and one inspired one (Yann). Made a few duffers too but they were far outweighed by the good ones. Record breaking season. Not the most outright attacking side in the division, but easy enough on the eye and by far the most complete.
Season 3 (full season): Backed enough to keep the squad together and add a couple of canny buys, but not able to spend anything like the money recent back to back promotion winners Southampton and Norwich had been. Had some patches of good and indifferent form in an overall very even division. Not always overtly attacking but kept the side well out of trouble and ultimately exceeded expectations by nearly sneaking into the play-offs.
Season 4 (partial season): Financial rug completely pulled out from under his feet. Not forced to sell but unable to renew contracts of significant figures from the previous season's squad and had to contend with a quagmire of a home field. Almost started the season with only Yann as a striker so had to sign Sordell and Church at the last moment, more from necessity than anything else. Struggled at times under the circumstances and chose to take the safety first approach of trying to be solid and pick up points that way. Some fans didn't like that but personally I totally understood why he did it. And to be honest, I think most 'quality' mangers would have done the same - the gung ho-ers who try and shoot their way out of trouble usually come unstuck. Managed a cup run, which despite ending very disappointingly (although people tell us RD may not have helped with this), it was more than anyone else had managed in the cup for us for a long time. We were bottom when he left, but by only 2 points having competed for 15 less points than some of our rivals due to the cup run and our mud-bath masquerading a pitch.
He had a mixed record, but with extenuating circumstances for at least some of the bad times. Riga did very little to change the approach after he came in. Maybe he went for it a touch more in some games, but he picked largely the same sides and the same tactics Powell had been using. Riga's greatest strength seems to be man-management as both times he has come in he has done a good job of calming the players following a period of turmoil and got good performances out of some of our more inconsistent players. But Powell's management strength was also his man management. We'll never be able to test the hypothesis but I'm pretty sure he'd have got much the same number of points that season as Riga did because I actually think the two are pretty similar in approach. Ultimately Riga did it and credit for that, this post is not intended to try and down play Riga.
I don't know if your point about the transfers stands scrutiny either. When he was backed in League 1 we got players like BWP, Yann, Hamer, Morrisson, Hollands. I don't see those as being the League 1 equivalents of players like Karly Henry and Richard Stearman - if anything it was Parky who had been signing them. Likewise (of the ones I can remember) if the rumours are to be believed we were looking at players like Soni Aluko and George Friend and possibly even Jordan Rhodes before the money man buggered off. Rhodes is maybe a bit of stretch to believe but Friend and Aluko I can buy. Freind is now doing very well for a promotion chasing Boro and Aluko has faded a bit but had an excellent season that year for Hull and did okay in the Prem for a while. Again, not unambitious journeyman type signings - just UK based players well suited to the Championship.
Really believe that with a patient, sensible chairman willing to spend a bit of money he could have been the new Curbs - in more ways than one because he wasn't always as attacking as some fans wanted but kept us out of bother most of the time, but understood the importance of character and team spirit. Even Curbs had a wobble or two in the mid 90s, when money was scarce, but he was lucky enough to manage in an era when the gap between the haves and have nots was not so wide wide and pre-social media which has led to pressure being on every manager after every single defeat.
Huddersfield have hardly gone from strength to strength since he left, whatever the Town fan who used to come here crowing might tell you.
Comments
I'm not a proponent of the regime, its managerial, or its recruiting policies, but I also think it's unfair that when things go right it's lucky and when things go wrong it's miasmic.
2. I think Riga has proven himself to be a perfectly good coach this time around. Do we put too much emphasis on the manager/head coach position and not give enough credit to coaches? Absolutely. But Riga, unlike Peeters or Luzon is no slouch and he sets his team up well and has a system.
I think SCP is a wonderful man, but watching his team in league one where they ended up winning it at a canter, they looked tactically limited, old fashioned, and a bit naive. It was a flat 4-4-2 who looked confused in possession, and the mode of attack seemed to be getting the ball wide and crossing it in. He definitely did good work, I'm not doubting that, but with the influx of money and quality of players the Championship is becoming a more tactical and technical league, and when you look around there just aren't many jobs for young English/British managers who are former players. The game has moved on since they played.
I also think it's worth noting that Powell, Dyer, and Mathews are all currently out of work. Again, not saying they are terrible coaches, but I fear that they are the types of coaches who the game is passing by.
3. Fox is keeping out a south Korean international, Pope is keeping out Hendo, Solly is keeping out an Italian international, Harriott is keeping out a Danish international and/or our brightest young star. Lookman is obviously a very talented player, and Lennon being 3rd-4th choice CB is good for his development.
If this were September-January I'd absolutely agree with you. When we had Lennon, RCC (though I thought he showed flashes) and KAG, plus Ba and Sarr being thrown in at the deep end, that was a result of a paper thin squad. The academy graduates currently in the side are there on merit and form. I would argue that now, in April, we have a very good balance of young academy players coming through, and experienced players around them.
I don't think this is black and white, I think there are some policies and appointments (or lack thereof--DoF) that are coming up to bite us now, but I would argue that a lot of our failure this season dates back to the summer onward where we didn't recruit enough players, where we had a tactically limited coach who was unproven as to what he would do when his team hit a slide, and then bringing in an absolute amateur replacement in November and letting him stay through much of the January window.
I will admit that there have been some permanent signings by the regime that, if they can stay fit, look reasonable or better (and JBG is very good) in the Championship: Vetokele, Diarra, Kashi, Bauer, Teixera, etc. But, on the whole, the recruitment pattern does not ensure adequate cover for key positions. We have had too many panic buys/loans and players brought in from overseas that may have talent, but have to adapt instantly to the English game or get shipped out. Given the squad we had, I think that we were absolutely lucky last season.
2. I didn't think that I had suggested that Riga was a bad coach. However, my point is that, in 2014, with the exception of the network imports, there was a settled squad and coaching set up with which to work, and that can only have helped in my opinion.
I have to admit that, in my mind, there's nothing wrong with playing a 4-4-2 system, with wingers crossing the ball in (provided they are accurate). It may be that, in the Championship, teams are moving away from it, but I think that's more to do with not having players who can play the system (it seems to work OK for those teams that can). In my view, SCP, if backed, would have been able to succeed in 2014 and beyond - I do believe that both last season and this, our team would have had better balance.
And, fair enough, young British managers don't seem to be getting the jobs in English football, but I believe that's down to fashion more than ability. The thing is that young managers are still learning on the job, and I believe that SCP was smart enough and reflective enough to keep learning and improving. And we would be better for it.
3. I rate Morgan Fox highly, as that most rare thing in modern football, a defender who defends. As for Chris Solly, provided he can run, there is no better player in his position than him. I think, however, that neither Marco Motta nor Yun Suk Young are full backs as much as wing backs, and they were brought to the club for attacking rather than defensive attributes. So, it's not really that Solly and Fox are keeping them out of the team/positions. In any event, how many of the 6 Academy graduates were either on loan or injured before December?
Solly, however, also exemplifies what I had said. He is a player who, following injury, is now fit enough to play. If you take a look at Fanni and co., it was several weeks after signing (when we needed players ready for the fight) before they could play, and even then they have only begun to get into form in the last few weeks.
Players like Makienok are not playing, in the main, because the return is not what we need. If anything, I feel really sorry for him because, in a 4-4-2 he'd get many more goal scoring chances.
How crazy was it that, Luzon having identified a desperately needed, creative wide player in Henry, that we didn't sign him? Other than JBG, what genuine playmaker do we have? What weight did we put on his shoulders?
We don't play the kind of football to get the best of Makienok, and he lacks the pace to make many chances by himself. Harriott and the raw talent of Lookman have that pace, and can be both exhilarating and infuriating (at the same time), but their presence in our attack says plenty about the paucity of options available (for which I absolutely blame the regime).
That said, I am delighted that they are playing well, we currently have a more than decent first team and a good coach/manager. But there is precious little strength in depth. If anyone approaches our games with confidence, they have more faith than me.
The team has suffered because of inadequate planning and a lack of footballing strategy. I think that that is absolutely black and white and responsibility lies with RD. Player and coaching recruitment have been appallingly badly managed.
For the last two summers, we have effectively found ourselves with a new team for each season. It wouldn't be so bad if there was a style of play common to each coach, but there is such a level of disconnect that nobody has the first clue what CAFC they will see.
1) Your point about Igor hitting the ground running is a good one and certainly not the norm. As far as Watt turning up and not starting a fight it's literally the least I would expect in an ideal world, but obviously we don't live in an ideal world. Same could also be said for recruiting players who we think could hit the ground running, but that is obviously not something this regime is good at, and to be fair, it can be hard to gauge even for top teams and top players. But I see what you mean, and there is definitely some luck in there knowing that our scouting and signing approach seems to be scattergun at best.
2) My criticism of 4-4-2 was a bit of a red herring and quite lazy. My point was more about an old fashioned way of playing that is less controlled or cerebral than you might find with other managers. I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this, but when you look at the number of foreign managers from all over the globe who have come in and been successful in England, the number is very high. But when you turn that over and look at British managers who have gone abroad and been successful, well, you could saw McClaren had his moments in Holland though from what I read people at Wolfsburg and in German football were thoroughly unimpressed.
Beyond that you have Moyes, who did not do well at Sociedad. I won't really count Gary Neville for various reasons. Beyond that, well there just aren't many examples. And I don't think that's because of a fashion or a trend. It's something that has been steadily growing for over a decade now. I think it's because English/British football fell well behind in the late 80s-early 2000s in terms of tactics, techniques, and professionalism and it's my belief that there is an entire lost generation out there who will need to work very hard and probably go abroad or be very open minded in order to become managers. I think the modern club game is more cerebral and tactical than it ever has been, and while it took a while, it really has become the norm in the Premier League.
Powell absolutely seems like one of the few who could break that mold, but I think there are a couple of problems there. The first is that he went from coaching to managing very quickly. Not without good reason, but I firmly believe that had he spent more time as a coach under Sven he would have gone into management better prepared. Secondly, and more importantly, there aren't a lot of people to learn from. One big opportunity is having a backroom staff with different footballing backgrounds and experiences, but he didn't do that. There's only so much hard work can do when what is really needed is new ideas and different approaches.
Sorry the above got so long, hopefully it's clear my issues isn't with SCP so much as it's institutional. And I do think there is time for managers to change and adapt and I really hope it's something Powell is doing in his time off.
3) I think we largely agree here, not sure how well I articulated my point. I absoltuely agree that the transfer policy is poorly run. I somewhat disagree with impact vs. timeline if you will, what mistakes when built up to where we are, but one thing is clear is that we've made the same mistakes for 2+ years, and things are getting worse not better.
Also agree on Mak. I only have highlights to go on from Saturday but every attacking move seemed to start with a touch or flick or pass from him. He also played a lovely left-footed cross to Harriott when Harriott blazed over.
It concluded that, based on our overall performance, we over achieved in terms of league position. In fact, by their analysis, by rights we probably should have finished very close to or in the bottom 3. That would fit with the general perception that even during that unbeaten run at the start of the season we were rarely the better side even in games where we picked up points. I think our 12th place finish had a lot to do with a hot streak a piece from Igor and Watt and was always unlikely to be replicated this season unless our overall performances improved and so it has proved.
If an enthusiastic amateur football statistician can identify that trend from last season, then Roland's Belgian Laptop Geniuses ought to have been able to as well. Instead we started the season with a squad that I'm sure most of us felt was inferior to last season's. Having got lucky on a 50-1 shot last season, we decided to gamble the winnings on a 100-1 and unsurprisingly lost.
Had he had more technical players such as JBG, Bulot and even CBs like Gomez and Ben Haim I think the football under him would have improved. I'm sure we'd have also been nowhere near this position if he had £9m+ to spend.
Certainly better than Peeters, Luzon and Fraeye.
He's managed to negotiate better authority over player recruitment than anyone else so far with RD and has done pretty well given the time he has had in his second stint.
I reckon he could, if given the same authority after his first stint have had us pushing for play offs. Who knows, all conjecture now as we head to division 1.
I would say that the reason Roland let him go most likely wasn't sound--i.e. he wouldn't play network players. But that doesn't necessarily mean it was the wrong decision. I don't know how he would have done having players like JBG, Bulot, Buyens, Tucudean thrust upon him. And if he was given some say in signings, I fear we would have ended up with the likes of Karl Henry, Richard Stearman, etc. instead of Tex, Kashi, etc. Of course we'll never know, though I think it's pretty safe to say that it was never going to work between Roland and SCP because SCP wanted control over transfers. In my opinion, that's an outdated way of doing things. that doesn't make the alternative (Roland's) way right, it's just as I said before I think he's part of something of a "lost generation."
As first team coach you want to be able to set up to different styles of play with your main attacking style flexed at home games and an attacking defensive style for away fixtures.
First and foremost though you want to have a core team and work ethic that accommodates both.
Whether CP was that flexible is open to question.
But I don't think Powell would have had too much problem with recruitment to a plan with the decisions made ultimately by others. From his comments he objected to being sent players out of the blue who he was asked to play when they didn't fit his system (or were shit).
It may well be the case that Powell, and potentially others of his background and generation rise to the challenege and improve when given better players. Of all the of the former players in management of his age and era, I think he has the intelligence, work ethic, and humility to really succeed in the long run. He's 3-4 years into coaching and management, time is very much on his side and my ideal situation would be one where he goes off and improves his trade and his methods and comes back to us and leads up to success.
I've never heard CP say he wanted total autonomy over transfers, but there is a long way from that to the situation he found himself in with players turning up at reception at Sparrows Lane without him even having any pre-warning they were in the taxi, let alone a say in whether we signed them or not. Significantly sub-standard players at that.
Powell had 4 full or part seasons with us:
Season 1 (part season): Brand new to full time management. Backed by the board with January and loan signings. In trying to change us to a less direct side (as we had been under Parky) made one excellent signing in BWP and a few not very good ones (Frank Noble etc). Took us out of the play-off places. Admitted he made mistakes.
Season 2 (full season): Backed again to make a complete overhaul of the squad. Learnt from his previous mistakes. Made lots of very good signings and one inspired one (Yann). Made a few duffers too but they were far outweighed by the good ones. Record breaking season. Not the most outright attacking side in the division, but easy enough on the eye and by far the most complete.
Season 3 (full season): Backed enough to keep the squad together and add a couple of canny buys, but not able to spend anything like the money recent back to back promotion winners Southampton and Norwich had been. Had some patches of good and indifferent form in an overall very even division. Not always overtly attacking but kept the side well out of trouble and ultimately exceeded expectations by nearly sneaking into the play-offs.
Season 4 (partial season): Financial rug completely pulled out from under his feet. Not forced to sell but unable to renew contracts of significant figures from the previous season's squad and had to contend with a quagmire of a home field. Almost started the season with only Yann as a striker so had to sign Sordell and Church at the last moment, more from necessity than anything else. Struggled at times under the circumstances and chose to take the safety first approach of trying to be solid and pick up points that way. Some fans didn't like that but personally I totally understood why he did it. And to be honest, I think most 'quality' mangers would have done the same - the gung ho-ers who try and shoot their way out of trouble usually come unstuck. Managed a cup run, which despite ending very disappointingly (although people tell us RD may not have helped with this), it was more than anyone else had managed in the cup for us for a long time. We were bottom when he left, but by only 2 points having competed for 15 less points than some of our rivals due to the cup run and our mud-bath masquerading a pitch.
He had a mixed record, but with extenuating circumstances for at least some of the bad times. Riga did very little to change the approach after he came in. Maybe he went for it a touch more in some games, but he picked largely the same sides and the same tactics Powell had been using. Riga's greatest strength seems to be man-management as both times he has come in he has done a good job of calming the players following a period of turmoil and got good performances out of some of our more inconsistent players. But Powell's management strength was also his man management. We'll never be able to test the hypothesis but I'm pretty sure he'd have got much the same number of points that season as Riga did because I actually think the two are pretty similar in approach. Ultimately Riga did it and credit for that, this post is not intended to try and down play Riga.
I don't know if your point about the transfers stands scrutiny either. When he was backed in League 1 we got players like BWP, Yann, Hamer, Morrisson, Hollands. I don't see those as being the League 1 equivalents of players like Karly Henry and Richard Stearman - if anything it was Parky who had been signing them. Likewise (of the ones I can remember) if the rumours are to be believed we were looking at players like Soni Aluko and George Friend and possibly even Jordan Rhodes before the money man buggered off. Rhodes is maybe a bit of stretch to believe but Friend and Aluko I can buy. Freind is now doing very well for a promotion chasing Boro and Aluko has faded a bit but had an excellent season that year for Hull and did okay in the Prem for a while. Again, not unambitious journeyman type signings - just UK based players well suited to the Championship.
Really believe that with a patient, sensible chairman willing to spend a bit of money he could have been the new Curbs - in more ways than one because he wasn't always as attacking as some fans wanted but kept us out of bother most of the time, but understood the importance of character and team spirit. Even Curbs had a wobble or two in the mid 90s, when money was scarce, but he was lucky enough to manage in an era when the gap between the haves and have nots was not so wide wide and pre-social media which has led to pressure being on every manager after every single defeat.
Huddersfield have hardly gone from strength to strength since he left, whatever the Town fan who used to come here crowing might tell you.