Some fans always seem to go to the attitude / commitment direction over the idea that the player has a niggle/injury.
Always find that odd, as for anyone who played even at the lowest level, the amount of times you'd turn up a bit clattered, it's not surprising that pros are often playing through things.
Was it McCarthy that Ainsworth said had played for ages with an injury?
He was signed as an out of contract emergency cover defender, and barely played 45mins in a go for us over 2/3 months. We frequently played full backs there instead of him.
He played well enough, but with 2 starter centre backs probably missing 40-50 games between them, it'd be a heck of a risk to have the next guy in line with such a record.
I understood he'd signed with us with a view to getting back to fitness, was never likely to be beyond the end of this season. I don't think he particularly has a bad injury history does he? Just had a long spell out with a very nasty one. I'd be surprised if we could afford a fit Willis.
I think it’s confirmed that Wing and Freeman were offered contracts but do not want to play for us next season. Also appears that GMac and Taf were already under contract for next season.
I suspect the others released would have liked to play for us next season?
Sure they all have regular chats over many weeks, read the game time and importance they are given, and their agents give approximate financial requirements.
By the time you get to the end of season discussions there are probably very few shocks and where maybe a player was a little out of favour or was on, or wanting big money compared to other options they probably didn't need to hold detailed discussions or get as far as offers.
Some might have wanted to stay but only if guaranteed or at least indicated that they'd be regulars , or would only have considered it for more money, whereas others might already have interest from elsewhere.
Sounds like Freeman would have stayed if it was indicated that he'd be a regular and we wouldn't be going after a direct Anis/Chem replacement. If Willis was fit and ready to play but wasn't being picked recently then it's very unlikely we'd have been offering more than a bit part role in way short of what he'd earned in the past , alternatively perhaps they had discussions way back and we were never going to match the money he wanted long term and that's why he hasn't featured much.
You'd think a lot of the youngsters have just not been thought likely to make it and cleared out for a new set. As much as it's a development squad you get the impression they know pretty early if some are likely to make it.
If thats the case then why didn'tcWakely get more game time? It makes the club's decision to sit down & talk to him about a new contract even more strange
Also with the way the article was written, I suspect they have already signed / verbal agreed to join another club. As they are Wycombe players until the 30th June & no fee is involved, they can't disclose any part of the deal until 1st July.
From March onwards, all players who are out of contract would have their agent putting out feelers to see where if the grass is greener somewhere else and be talking to a few interested parties. If their head is turned, the battle has already been won.
I believe Wing was tapped up a while ago whereas Freeman didn't think an offer was coming so started to look and Wycombe just came in too late for him
I would imagine the offers made to Gape and Orbita are considerably less than their previous contracts, as of yet no concrete offers from other clubs, so keeping there options open.
Jack Wakeley still in talks, is bizarre and can't make any sense of it.
I can imagine a scenario with Jack Wakely where he has been offered a contract on the same / barely more than the pitiful development squad wage he's on and told he's expected to be cover on the bench if there's an injury crisis, not exactly in the first team plans, and he may well have prevaricated over signing while he looks to see if any National League club will pay him a little more while indicating they're more likely to play him. Another year at the outskirts of the Wycombe squad before being released is not going to do his long term career much good - but it's a viable option if nothing better comes along in the next six weeks.
But are there many affordable U21 centre backs you’d rely on to come in as cover when necessary? @aloysius‘s scenario is the only one that makes sense to me.
Which is why I think Tafazolli has his eyes on a move elsewhere. It would justify the club’s stance on Wakely. We would struggle to recruit 3-4 centre halves in one window, so at least Wakely offsets that pain slightly. I echo @aloysius thoughts too. I would imagine the salary we are offering is extremely low compared to regular first team players.
Last paragraph, @Malone. Not sure of the difference between signing and signing on. Doesn’t matter. Substantive point is that in all probability those wages were beyond us. A mutual acquaintance of GA speculated that one player in particular was on what I think can be described as eye-wateringly high wages. There may have been others.
I think budget constraints will put pressure on the need to show greater faith next season in the potential of a few younger players, including Wakely, Ward, Young and Pattenden.
But we didn't rely on Wakely or even play him in dead games. Would have thought you'd swap for a different prospect there but maybe MB sees something in him with a bit more coaching in certain areas.
Quite a strange situation with Wakely. It's clear both Ainsworth and Bloomfield feel he's got something about him, but likewise both were reluctant to give him minutes beyond the cup competitions.
For me, when I've watched him, he seems to have all the attributes to be a good player. Certainly he's comfortable on the ball and was confident in bringing the ball out of defence. There's no disguising however that we did have a tendency to concede soft goals when he was on the pitch. Will be interesting to see how he develops (or not) next season if he does sign up.
I envy you for your eye (and memory) for detail, @Wycombe85. My broad brush recollection was of a very tall, confident young player with a slightly disconcerting tendency to move well forward with the ball, Forino style, at every opportunity. I don’t recall soft goals being conceded but, if they were, Wakely’s confidence on the ball may, ironically, have been a factor!
I should add before you begin to envy my memory @micra that I don't recall any specific goal being his fault. More of a case that as a team we were conceding soft goals. Walsall & Bristol City (I think he played in both) featured goals conceded from corners where we left players unmarked at the far post. Of course there will have been other factors involved, but despite Wakely himself not playing badly, we just seemed weaker defensively in the games in which he was involved.
I do wonder if it’s the potential shape of the side that’s driving Matt’s thinking here. His successful period at Colchester following a sluggish start followed a move to 3 at the back in a 3-4-1-2 formation.
He was maybe limited from doing likewise at the end of the season by Obita’s injury which meant we had no options for left wing-back.
I’m not personally a massive fan of three at the back, but If he does want to play that way (and it’s only very much speculation on my part) Wakely is particularly well suited given he can play either left or right side and can carry the ball forward confidently.
None of Grimmer, Taf or Forino can really play the left side role (Taf’s left footed but he’s just not quick enough, so has to be in the centre) meaning we’ve only got JJ. Legend though he is, we need someone else as well for that role over a long season and to succeed him.
Wakely’s also big - about 6ft 4, and that could be useful against bigger, more physical sides given Grimmer and JJ are around 6ft or just under.
The other poster was following what is becoming a theme on FB of people constantly saying we can't afford this player, can't afford that player.
So I was showing both in bringing players like Stockdale, Vokes, McCleary, Scowen in originally, and then re-signing them, are examples where we have afforded players you'd have suspected we couldn't before.
Clearly all are different circumstances. It helps when a player has made their huge money elsewhere and playing environment becomes a much bigger desire to get right.
I know Nick F didn’t ‘pull up trees’ when on loan at Orient but he is fully fit now and knows League One and they know his personality, skill set etc. With the ‘O’s’ promotion that could be a neat fit. Wish him well, loved his silky glide ever since I saw him play as a trialist at Slough all those seasons ago.
Three old men* and an old boy though. Willis is 28 and has spent all of his prior career at bigger clubs, I'm sure he thinks he can get back into one of those (and I don't doubt it, he's a quality player). If he was well into his 30s I'm sure we'd have no problem signing him.
*No disrespect meant, but you make different decisions at their ages to when you're in your prime.
Would you describe Nick Freeman as a ball player? He’s a solid dribbler in tight areas. His final pass with cutting edge is good. But I wouldn’t describe him as a playmaker/ball player. In deeper positions I think his passing decisions have been quite erratic / incorrect.
Following a slightly slow start, Wing had established himself as a must start player along with Josh.
Professional football is a short lived career, so I don’t blame him wanting to better himself. He also wanted to get back nearer to his Middlesbrough home.
Good luck to the lad and thank you for some wonderful goals Wingy!!!
Comments
Who's leg got broke in training by Ainsworth?
Was going to say this.
Some fans always seem to go to the attitude / commitment direction over the idea that the player has a niggle/injury.
Always find that odd, as for anyone who played even at the lowest level, the amount of times you'd turn up a bit clattered, it's not surprising that pros are often playing through things.
Was it McCarthy that Ainsworth said had played for ages with an injury?
Can't see this view at all to be honest.
He was signed as an out of contract emergency cover defender, and barely played 45mins in a go for us over 2/3 months. We frequently played full backs there instead of him.
He played well enough, but with 2 starter centre backs probably missing 40-50 games between them, it'd be a heck of a risk to have the next guy in line with such a record.
I understood he'd signed with us with a view to getting back to fitness, was never likely to be beyond the end of this season. I don't think he particularly has a bad injury history does he? Just had a long spell out with a very nasty one. I'd be surprised if we could afford a fit Willis.
What makes you say that? Looks like he's only ever played 3 games above league 1 level.
(Assuming wiki is correct as there's no record the last 2 years but assume that was the start of his injury spell).
The last 2 years we've signed or signed on a number of players whose wages you'd have thought were beyond us, but weren't.
I'm sure he wants to chance his arm back in the Championship.
There does seem to be an assumption that players leaving are not wanted by us rather than do not want to play for us next season.
shame to see some go but they have gone and some new ones will come in. Some will be stars some will disappoint. The annual cycle.
I think it’s confirmed that Wing and Freeman were offered contracts but do not want to play for us next season. Also appears that GMac and Taf were already under contract for next season.
I suspect the others released would have liked to play for us next season?
Sure they all have regular chats over many weeks, read the game time and importance they are given, and their agents give approximate financial requirements.
By the time you get to the end of season discussions there are probably very few shocks and where maybe a player was a little out of favour or was on, or wanting big money compared to other options they probably didn't need to hold detailed discussions or get as far as offers.
Some might have wanted to stay but only if guaranteed or at least indicated that they'd be regulars , or would only have considered it for more money, whereas others might already have interest from elsewhere.
Sounds like Freeman would have stayed if it was indicated that he'd be a regular and we wouldn't be going after a direct Anis/Chem replacement. If Willis was fit and ready to play but wasn't being picked recently then it's very unlikely we'd have been offering more than a bit part role in way short of what he'd earned in the past , alternatively perhaps they had discussions way back and we were never going to match the money he wanted long term and that's why he hasn't featured much.
You'd think a lot of the youngsters have just not been thought likely to make it and cleared out for a new set. As much as it's a development squad you get the impression they know pretty early if some are likely to make it.
If thats the case then why didn'tcWakely get more game time? It makes the club's decision to sit down & talk to him about a new contract even more strange
Also with the way the article was written, I suspect they have already signed / verbal agreed to join another club. As they are Wycombe players until the 30th June & no fee is involved, they can't disclose any part of the deal until 1st July.
From March onwards, all players who are out of contract would have their agent putting out feelers to see where if the grass is greener somewhere else and be talking to a few interested parties. If their head is turned, the battle has already been won.
I believe Wing was tapped up a while ago whereas Freeman didn't think an offer was coming so started to look and Wycombe just came in too late for him
I would imagine the offers made to Gape and Orbita are considerably less than their previous contracts, as of yet no concrete offers from other clubs, so keeping there options open.
Jack Wakeley still in talks, is bizarre and can't make any sense of it.
Maybe it’s just the case that Matt has a higher opinion of Wakely than Gareth did and can see him coming through.
If so, slightly surprising he didn’t give him any game time in the last two dead rubbers.
I can imagine a scenario with Jack Wakely where he has been offered a contract on the same / barely more than the pitiful development squad wage he's on and told he's expected to be cover on the bench if there's an injury crisis, not exactly in the first team plans, and he may well have prevaricated over signing while he looks to see if any National League club will pay him a little more while indicating they're more likely to play him. Another year at the outskirts of the Wycombe squad before being released is not going to do his long term career much good - but it's a viable option if nothing better comes along in the next six weeks.
Wakely is over the U21 limit, which makes the possibility of keeping him all the more peculiar.
But are there many affordable U21 centre backs you’d rely on to come in as cover when necessary? @aloysius‘s scenario is the only one that makes sense to me.
Which is why I think Tafazolli has his eyes on a move elsewhere. It would justify the club’s stance on Wakely. We would struggle to recruit 3-4 centre halves in one window, so at least Wakely offsets that pain slightly. I echo @aloysius thoughts too. I would imagine the salary we are offering is extremely low compared to regular first team players.
Last paragraph, @Malone. Not sure of the difference between signing and signing on. Doesn’t matter. Substantive point is that in all probability those wages were beyond us. A mutual acquaintance of GA speculated that one player in particular was on what I think can be described as eye-wateringly high wages. There may have been others.
I think budget constraints will put pressure on the need to show greater faith next season in the potential of a few younger players, including Wakely, Ward, Young and Pattenden.
But we didn't rely on Wakely or even play him in dead games. Would have thought you'd swap for a different prospect there but maybe MB sees something in him with a bit more coaching in certain areas.
Quite a strange situation with Wakely. It's clear both Ainsworth and Bloomfield feel he's got something about him, but likewise both were reluctant to give him minutes beyond the cup competitions.
For me, when I've watched him, he seems to have all the attributes to be a good player. Certainly he's comfortable on the ball and was confident in bringing the ball out of defence. There's no disguising however that we did have a tendency to concede soft goals when he was on the pitch. Will be interesting to see how he develops (or not) next season if he does sign up.
I envy you for your eye (and memory) for detail, @Wycombe85. My broad brush recollection was of a very tall, confident young player with a slightly disconcerting tendency to move well forward with the ball, Forino style, at every opportunity. I don’t recall soft goals being conceded but, if they were, Wakely’s confidence on the ball may, ironically, have been a factor!
I should add before you begin to envy my memory @micra that I don't recall any specific goal being his fault. More of a case that as a team we were conceding soft goals. Walsall & Bristol City (I think he played in both) featured goals conceded from corners where we left players unmarked at the far post. Of course there will have been other factors involved, but despite Wakely himself not playing badly, we just seemed weaker defensively in the games in which he was involved.
I do wonder if it’s the potential shape of the side that’s driving Matt’s thinking here. His successful period at Colchester following a sluggish start followed a move to 3 at the back in a 3-4-1-2 formation.
He was maybe limited from doing likewise at the end of the season by Obita’s injury which meant we had no options for left wing-back.
I’m not personally a massive fan of three at the back, but If he does want to play that way (and it’s only very much speculation on my part) Wakely is particularly well suited given he can play either left or right side and can carry the ball forward confidently.
None of Grimmer, Taf or Forino can really play the left side role (Taf’s left footed but he’s just not quick enough, so has to be in the centre) meaning we’ve only got JJ. Legend though he is, we need someone else as well for that role over a long season and to succeed him.
Wakely’s also big - about 6ft 4, and that could be useful against bigger, more physical sides given Grimmer and JJ are around 6ft or just under.
The other poster was following what is becoming a theme on FB of people constantly saying we can't afford this player, can't afford that player.
So I was showing both in bringing players like Stockdale, Vokes, McCleary, Scowen in originally, and then re-signing them, are examples where we have afforded players you'd have suspected we couldn't before.
Clearly all are different circumstances. It helps when a player has made their huge money elsewhere and playing environment becomes a much bigger desire to get right.
The 3 at the back seems to suit so few of our players.
Probably ideal for JJ, left sided of the 3, although doesn't have much pace like Taf.
And Obita too, who like Mickey Bell is neither the best defender or attacker, but a really good wingback.
McCarthy hasn't been on top form on the right side though, and you really do need wingbacks to be strong for it to work.
Also, we can barely keep our main two centre backs fit, so fielding 3 each game can be a stretch.
Although Grimmer has developed into a bit of a right sided centre back. So lots to muse on.
I know Nick F didn’t ‘pull up trees’ when on loan at Orient but he is fully fit now and knows League One and they know his personality, skill set etc. With the ‘O’s’ promotion that could be a neat fit. Wish him well, loved his silky glide ever since I saw him play as a trialist at Slough all those seasons ago.
Three old men* and an old boy though. Willis is 28 and has spent all of his prior career at bigger clubs, I'm sure he thinks he can get back into one of those (and I don't doubt it, he's a quality player). If he was well into his 30s I'm sure we'd have no problem signing him.
*No disrespect meant, but you make different decisions at their ages to when you're in your prime.
It does seem slightly curious that we're looking to move to a more ball playing system, yet the biggest ball player of them all in the squad has left.
Although personally I'd always seen him as a solid something different squaddie rather than starter.
And Bloomy must be gutted about Wing as he'd basically made him our playmaker.
Would you describe Nick Freeman as a ball player? He’s a solid dribbler in tight areas. His final pass with cutting edge is good. But I wouldn’t describe him as a playmaker/ball player. In deeper positions I think his passing decisions have been quite erratic / incorrect.
Following a slightly slow start, Wing had established himself as a must start player along with Josh.
Professional football is a short lived career, so I don’t blame him wanting to better himself. He also wanted to get back nearer to his Middlesbrough home.
Good luck to the lad and thank you for some wonderful goals Wingy!!!