Coach
In recent weeks there has been much discussion about style of play and tactics. Rather than heaping all the blame on the manager,perhaps we should accept that the players he has brought in are of sufficient calibre ,but he has limited motivational experience. In these circumstances, rather than sack him, should we consider bringing in a coach to address these issues ?
0
Comments
At what cost!
About the same as a General Manager?
I don't think GA has any problem motivating them. There's plenty of energy and commitment but, all too often, it descends into headless chicken mode. Oh for a strong, composed, creative central midfielder - a midfield general in fact.
If we don't do something soon the 'cost' will be relegation and loss of revenue.He would not be a General Manager type but someone who actually coaches this group out of their present indecision .A midfield general would be fine but as things are he too could fall into the current malaise
I've long thought that Gareth Ainsworth's next move should be to become a Director of Football at a Championship club rather than a manager at another League Two / One outfit.
The things he's good at all come under that DoF role: player scouting, contract negotiation, player development, liaising with the chairman, interviews with the media, an eye for 'Twitter engagement figures', getting stuck in to the general running of the club.
The things in my mind he's bad at are all the more traditional team management role: picking the best 11, tactical formations, substitutions, overseeing training regimes.
I'd agree in principle with the thesis that we should be spending the money on a better head coach and not on a general manager, getting Gareth to do more of the 'upstairs' work - but clearly he'd never relinquish the day-to-day team management aspects at Wycombe so that would be a waste of money. But if he's ever to move up the divisions, I would suggest taking on a more DoF role here would do his long-term career some good.
@aloysius : I think you've really put your finger on it in your second and third paragraphs. I agree that it would probably be very difficult to implement the division of duties that such an arrangement would imply. Very perceptive though and a great starting point for a debate about how the playing side could be improved without losing such a well liked and respected manager.
Firstly you need to separate general manager from any debate about Gareth ainsworth. Any organisation has to have someone in charge pulling all the various functions together. If we have no one able to combine that function with other reaponsibities and no one willing and able to do them on a voluntary basis, then you pretty much have to have a general manager/Md sort of role.
I don't subscribe to the list of strengths and weaknesses of ga and his coaching team. I see that as a standard reaction to at the moment being a bottom six club. I see ga as a very good manager at this level, let down by an insufficient budget. Realistically he isn't going to exceed reasonable expectations arising from that budget every season.
If however you disagree, then change the manager and see if he makes things better or worse. Wierd half measures simply aren't going to work in the real world.
Whatever the size of the budget, it's still possible to use that well or poorly isn't it?
@devc What's the evidence for GA being "a very good manager at this level"? We had one good season, one where we stayed up on goal difference, one mediocre and this season not exactly off to a flyer. I'm not saying you're wrong but I'm not seeing much to indicate you're right.
In some ways being a good manager at this level means not getting relegated! As for GA I am just perplexed that budgets aside...we have a team of decent players that seem to lack consistency or inspiration. The result against Crewe showed that even with the same players out injured we can match anyone in the league...so why don't we regularly? We should not have lost against Barnet...but we did. I am not a @Wwfc2015 'shower of ****e' man...but it's certainly perplexing.
It is of course possible to use any budget well or poorly. With hindsight it is easier to tell which, not always obvious at the time. For example so far this season the part of the budget used for Luke Onien has been extremely poorly used - few would have suggested that he shouldnt have been kept on in the summer though.
doob. GA has never had a competitive budget, meaning he has always had to over-achieve just to survive.
In 12/13 kept the club up arguably against the odds - over-achieve
13/14 almost went down - average/marginal underacheive
14/15 playoffs - massive overacheive
15/16 flirted with playoffs for most of season - substantial overacheive
16/17 early days but currently on expectation.
thats the record of a very good manager for me.
As most of the players came cheap or free doesn't mean you can't turn them in to a good squad,Ithink the latest press releases from management , 1 not worried about away results 2 not worried about the red card,does not help in any way,if the management don't care why should the players!
That point about Luke O'Nien is too stupid for words
The rest just the ramblings of a mad man, as usual
In non-emotional and rational terms assuming we do have a (let's say) 6th from bottom wage bill, you would expect an average manager to use the available resources to finish 6th from bottom. A better than average manager would exceed that position and a worse than average manager do less well, In the first full season GA performed below average - although was very new and still a player manager (I think). The next 2 seasons he performed better than average. Therefore that logically makes him 'good'.
In emotional and non-quantifiable terms the quality of the football he has 'encouraged' has been pretty woeful so that balances the 'good' bit out somewhat for me.
Relatively fair post Booker.
However to my mind, you have unfairly disregarded 12/13 when he took over the club after 7/8 games as I recall bottom of the league and looking doomed and acheived lower mid table - surely that season has to be regarded a success.
13/14 I think could be put down as an under-acheivement - however i think their are many factors to explain that - some known some I would merely be speculating. In the circumstances i think staying up was something of a miracle.
to describe 14/15 casually as better than average is massively understating reality.
15/16 flirting for most of the season with the play offs is to my mind more than just "better than average"
Logically that makes him more than just good - I think "very good".
True test though will be what happens when he leaves. If finances are the same his successor will have a hell of a job on his hands. I fear GA true worth will only be recognised after he is gone.
@DevC Fair points and to be fair the football in the playoff season was at times really good as well.
I do agree with your more general point that changing a better than average/very good manager for an unknown quantity - and on a bottom six budget isno guarantee of success - unless GA has"lost the dressing room" and I cant see any evidence for that. Yet
You go to a game once in a blue moon. That came around the other week and you described it as the worst game you've ever seen
Imagine watching that most weeks for the whole of 2016 and then claiming we're over-achieving.
We "flirted with the play offs for most of last season" because we had a brilliant start. After Christmas we were awful and eventually fell away. That didn't happen overnight. Those of us watching every week saw it coming a mile off and could have told you months before the end of the season we'd be nowhere near the play offs. As it turned out we didn't even finish top in the top half.
We've continued this form on into the new season having had the summer to make changes to the squad
And for the sake of accuracy by the way, Ainsworth took over when we were 21st, exactly where we are now (earlier in the season then mind). And Waddock of course had a promotion on his cv
My post could have been ma de last season! The only difference the press releases, although the same theme, having the summer break should have seen an improvement but it's no better I hope there is no hidden agenda!!.
I do, it was, Eric. But I don't take the massive leap that that makes the manager anything other than very good.
He took over when the club had 4pts from 7 games. He got 56 from the remaining 39. Have to see that as an exceptional good effort.
Fundamentally it seems to me you expect a minimum top ten outcome every year. If we don't achieve that it is a failure. I think that is an unrealistically high expectation.
I've never said any of those things
Then I struggle to understand what level of results you expect the manager to achieve.
I've not really mentioned results I don't think
But that game you saw and said it was the worst you've ever seen, that's what we see most weeks. And it's been going on for the best part of a year. And it's got to the point where you just don't look forward to going anymore. On Saturday, there was literally nothing to enjoy. Nothing to get excited about. No one thing that you could walk away from the ground and say "oh well, at least that was good"
So I suppose, in terms of expectations, it would be great if there was something to look forward to about watching us play. You don't have to watch us play, and I think it shows in what you're saying. Not having a go at you by the way, but I think is a massively different supporting experience. I think it was Chris who said on here recently that it's much easier to be a Wycombe supporter in recent times if you don't watch many games.
Your last point is probably fair.
This thread is about whether the manager is poor, average, good, very good, perfect.
I think you have to assess that based on results.
If reports are correct we have a bottom six budget, probably bottom three, possibly bottom. I believe that has a major impact on the results and for that matter playing style you can reasonably expect.
You are a strong advocate of the fan ownership model. Fair enough, I respect that opinion and its ideals. Trouble is I think that and the budget it implies is inconsistent on a sustainable basis with the results and playing style you aspire too.
I think Gareth ainsworth is currently the best man to be in charge for the long term best interests of wwfc. To be clear, do you.
Am I in the wrong blog can't get a word in edgeways
My apols Brittany.. It is difficult to reply to every post without writing an essay. To be honest on this occasion I didn't grasp your point. I think it was to do with press releases. Tbh I don't care much about press releases.
I don't really like sacking managers and I really like Gaz as a bloke, but it's got so utterly awful to watch that I think it might be time to make a change
I'd (genuinely) love him to prove me wrong
Actually I have no reason to doubt your genuineness.
Personally I fear that the year GA leaves will be the season the club ends up being relegated. I am not sure it wouldn't all unravel then.
Let's hope for all the right reasons we don't get to find out for a good while yet (or if ga does end up leaving that I am proven hopelessly wrong)
Come on Devon, at least say when you're talking about bottom six, bottom three, bottom of all budgets, that you're not really basing that on "reports" but what you think you remember someone once mentioning after a fans' forum (which to all intents and purposes is an exercise in propaganda).
Budgets, budgets, budgets. If I see another reference to the budget I shall scream and scream until I make myself sick. Individually, the players now at GA's disposal have either played at a higher level than League 2 or have the potential to do so and I have sufficient belief in their commitment and integrity to think that they are not going to sulk and underperform because they are often competing against players who are paid more.
The trouble is that, in most matches, the team has not been as good in terms of performance as the sum of it's parts. This surely reflects shortcomings on the coaching side and I am amazed that no-one else appears to have recognised the validity of the second and third paragraphs of @aloysius's perceptive post earlier today.