The "youth-based philosophy" isn't Knapper's, 1950. Knapper was appointed because his profile best fitted the club's youth-based and data-centric philosophy.
Transfer Rumours New Manager
- Thread starter SuffolkCanary
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
The gamble is on the part of the Board, IMO. Knapper is a gamble, Hoff Thorup is a gamble, and the dependence on youth is a gamble. It might have been prudent to maintain continuity with an experienced head coach while the new SD carries out the recruitment plan and the youth development model is implemented.
Yes, but a gamble with a Head Coach who got us into the playoffs in spite of serious injuries and a complete lack of support in January.
But surely as there were discussions with the new coach months ago and a work permit obtained for him the decision to no longer employ an experienced Head Coach had already been made. I would argue that compromises seldom work.
I am not sure how you can ascertain that a "compromise" has been made. And discussions with a coach months ago? I would guess for Knapper to be doing his job he would be checking the situation of many persons of interest for future developments.
You made a comparison with business operations earlier, but what business would change everything at once? New co-owners coming in, new SD, new manager and new players to replace the six leaving. Don't get me wrong, I hope it works, but if we finish below 6th it will constitute a failed gamble, especially with Leicester, Ipswich and Southampton going up and Burnley, Luton and Sheffield United coming down. Finishing 6th or above will be a success but if we drop down in the table how long will it be before fans start asking how long do we give him?
Only the other day this
And now this
When the wind changes again, you'll no doubt jump to another ill thought through snap conclusion.
And now this
When the wind changes again, you'll no doubt jump to another ill thought through snap conclusion.
Last edited:
Yes, I read that earlier but I've also seen a lot of managers come and go over the last 52 years. They all wanted to put winning first and take City forward. Some did, many did not. Intentions are one thing, what happens on the pitch in 46 games is another. Like I say, I want it to work, but the huge multi faceted gamble makes me more than a little nervous.
What I put up earlier was how I saw things then but as I said in the second ' I am delighted to have been proven wrong ' What is wrong with that? I do not know what I have done to upset you but every time I post lately you are on me like a ton of bricks. I hope it is going to stop.
I can see it both ways. On the one hand, Wagner achieved the realistic objective (playoffs) in a season where three of the top 4 were heavy favourites, because financially Leicester, Leeds and Southampton were in a different league to us already. Given the same squad to run it back next season, I don't doubt he'd make the playoffs again, especially given the relegated teams are unlikely to be as strong, and hopefully Wagner won't be as unfortunate with injuries to Sargent, Rowe, etc.
But Wagner had flaws that don't align with what management want going forwards:
- He was over-reliant on experienced players. Sainz, Idah, Rowe, McCallum were the only U23s in our senior squad to play more than 1000 minutes. Outside of the cup game vs Bristol Rovers, Kellen Fisher has only played 24 mins in 2024, and Gibbs hasn't played more than 24 minutes in a game since December. In the play-offs, he rushed back unfit players he trusted, which hurt us, and was his own fault because he hadn't given other players the opportunity to grow and impress.
- Our results were heavily dependent on Josh Sargent's availability. That spell mid-season without him saw us win just 7 in 20 (all against bottom half teams), losing 10. We can't go into next season knowing the only way we make automatic promotion is if Sargent can play 40+ games, we need a manager who can adapt better.
- Possibly more opinion than fact, but I don't think we've had more than a handful of games under Wagner where we've looked greater than the sum of our parts. Farke, Lambert both built teams that worked with individuals that weren't superstars. In Sargent, Sara, Rowe we had individuals capable of winning a game by themselves, our system didn't maximise what others could offer, and so we suffered as soon as those star players were unavailable, or marked out of a game. Given financial restrictions, I don't think it would be a total shock to anyone if all three were to leave this summer, could Wagner make it work without them?
Yes you made your first comment to which I responded
You then took umbrage at my post, however now it would appear you are of the view that my alternative narrative was perhaps nearer the mark than yours. Hence my comment " When the wind changes again, you'll no doubt jump to another ill thought through snap conclusion".
You say / suggest you have some specialist knowledge around accounting and how organisation function, which you may well have. I would have thought this would lead to you making more nuanced, rationale arguments than you are currently making.
Anyway it's nothing personal, I just don't think emotive, irrational statements that are that ill supported, or indeed not supported at all, and dressed up as fact should go unchallenged.
The club hasn't upset me, but I agree I haven't bought in to its current trajectory. I think in recent times the club has lost it's way a bit and on the available information I'm of the view that the sackings of both Farke and Wagner are not only poor decisions, but out of step with mine and what I thought were the club's values. I never saw the appointment of Smith as an up grade on Farke, although I tried to see the positives and I'm currently struggling to see how the appoint of Thorup increases our changes of gaining promotion next season, over keeping Wagner. Both Farke & Wagner have got teams promoted from the Championship in the past, took teams to the playoffs this season and have Premiership experience, although they are still developing as coaches. What does Thorup have that they didn't ?, most people on this forum had never heard of him before Wagner's sacking. He might come in and do really well and get us promoted, but in my view its a massive gamble.
This board is split between 3 types of "supporter".
From the eternal optimistic RiverEndRick to the Doom goblins .
I always gravitate towards optimism & hope for the best , others seem to revel in misery bordering on depression.
A few weeks ago certain posters did a full 180 on our chances of promotion but shifted the expectation to survival , which we would obviously fail at .
It all becomes very tiresome.
From the eternal optimistic RiverEndRick to the Doom goblins .
I always gravitate towards optimism & hope for the best , others seem to revel in misery bordering on depression.
A few weeks ago certain posters did a full 180 on our chances of promotion but shifted the expectation to survival , which we would obviously fail at .
It all becomes very tiresome.
I believe that Wagner represented the Webber years , he was appointed as an easy option as they knew each other from Huddersfield.
Knapper was close to pulling the trigger when he took over but results & improved & Wagner was given the rest of the season.
Knapper wants a fresh start with his own man & a clear progression path from the academy conveyor belt to the first team .
Wagner's reluctance to play on loan Van Hooijdonk or any of our academy kids meant that our more experienced players were never rested & pushed back half injured .
Without parachute money the club needs to drastically change things & that will unfortunately mean losing our star players to keep the lights on .
The American baseball guy seems to be more interested in marketing than investing in players , his business model doesn't include taking on any of the club's debt or risking his own money .
Knapper was close to pulling the trigger when he took over but results & improved & Wagner was given the rest of the season.
Knapper wants a fresh start with his own man & a clear progression path from the academy conveyor belt to the first team .
Wagner's reluctance to play on loan Van Hooijdonk or any of our academy kids meant that our more experienced players were never rested & pushed back half injured .
Without parachute money the club needs to drastically change things & that will unfortunately mean losing our star players to keep the lights on .
The American baseball guy seems to be more interested in marketing than investing in players , his business model doesn't include taking on any of the club's debt or risking his own money .
I prefer to sometimes get things wrong through my propensity for thinking the best of people, rather than from always thinking the worst of them
