Wild thing

[Shania]

You are making a wildly unsubstantiated claim there. What is your evidence for this?

Wycombe exist on a merry-go-round of loan players. These are basically kids that the parent club wants to toughen up in the League One school of hard knocks. I can't see any evidence of any of them substantially kicking on after being sprinkled with Wild Thing dust.

The average age of Wycombe's own players is late 20s, their M.O. seems to be picking up players in their 30s on free transfers¿¿ having a last hurrah before hanging up their boots.

Finally, I went back 5 years and could only find ONE player that Wycombe had sold for money - the idea that Ainsworth polishes young t3rds into saleable assets is clearly incorrect.

My guess is that young urban multi-ethnic players would find Ainsworth's ageing "Rock God" stoner schtick somewhat cringey and laughable. I don't see him swooping in and turning our bunch of wasters around at all. In fact, I reckon he'd make us worse in the long run.

Mehmeti and Eze. Besides: I said he might be etc...etc. so give it a rest will you!! On a third note: What has multi-ethnic players got to do with anything.

[QPROslo]

For a very long time I was a fan of Warburton. He stopped the rot under McClaren and results improved a lot. During the calendar year of 2021 we were in promotion form. But the way the wheels fell off during the last three months of 21/22, admittedly with injuries to players such as Willock, Dieng and Dickie, was very worrying and I reluctantly accepted that it was best not to prolong his contract. But this wasn't black and white. Over the entire three years period he stayed with us he did more than enough to merit a new contract.

I could understand changing Warburton for Beale - a young and upcoming manager with very good references from Chelsea, Liverpool, Rangers and Aston Villa. He fitted what we wanted to be - a club that develops players based on a certain style of play.

But I cannot for my life understand that it makes sense to replace Warburton with Ainsworth. In my mind it is not just a big step down, but a move that is against everything we want to be.

I understand the need to replace Critchley, particularly if he had lost the dressing room. I am sure Ainsworth can fire up the players and get the necessary points on board to avoid relegation this season.

But what about the longer perspective? Our job is to develop and sell younger players. It is the only way we can build a good financial platform for promotion. By sale is meant sale to Premier League - players that command £10m or more. To develop players for PL, we need to have a style of play that resembles PL. Ainsworth style is hoof ball. No PL club will scout for talent in a hoof ball team. It is so obvious.

As Sheep refers to, Wycombe has just had one successful sale over the last five years under Ainsworth - selling a player to Bristol City. Apart from maybe keeping us up this season, there is nothing that makes Ainsworth a good fit with what we need. It cries panik to me. It is a short term fix but not a strategic move.

A DOF is put in place to oversee a long term plan, so that we do not get victim to changing managers with different ideas, changing half the squad every year to fit their style of play. But when the DOF makes a U-turn and go from possession based style of play to hoof ball over night we do not need that DOF. Simple as that. I have defended Les on several occasions, but this one is unforgiving, if the media reports are true.

I loved Ainsworth as a players and I am desperate to see QPR succeed, but this looks to be a horrible signing.

I sincerely hope I am completely wrong.

[ChairboyHP]

You are making a wildly unsubstantiated claim there. What is your evidence for this?

Wycombe exist on a merry-go-round of loan players. These are basically kids that the parent club wants to toughen up in the League One school of hard knocks. I can't see any evidence of any of them substantially kicking on after being sprinkled with Wild Thing dust.

The average age of Wycombe's own players is late 20s, their M.O. seems to be picking up players in their 30s on free transfers¿¿ having a last hurrah before hanging up their boots.

Finally, I went back 5 years and could only find ONE player that Wycombe had sold for money - the idea that Ainsworth polishes young t3rds into saleable assets is clearly incorrect.

My guess is that young urban multi-ethnic players would find Ainsworth's ageing "Rock God" stoner schtick somewhat cringey and laughable. I don't see him swooping in and turning our bunch of wasters around at all. In fact, I reckon he'd make us worse in the long run.

Wycombe have, and have had plenty of "young urban multi ethnic players", they've all bought in to his message. We've had almost no loan signings on the last 3 years as well since the new owners

He's not been able to get too many young talented players simply as we've not had the budget, the times he's spent money it's almost always worked. Ikpeazu we sold on for a decent profit, Hanlan who starts for us now.

Mehmeti was from non league, Forino as well who I'm sure we'll get a good fee for soon enough.

Yes he's signed old players, or players who have had a dip in their careers, but needs must. And what's wrong with signing players who are cheap who perform week in week out?

Wing this season for us is a prime example. A level up of a player with a better budget would still work.

Thoroughly hope the move falls through, or we at least keep his assistant as manager

[Kingaustin]

For a very long time I was a fan of Warburton. He stopped the rot under McClaren and results improved a lot. During the calendar year of 2021 we were in promotion form. But the way the wheels fell off during the last three months of 21/22, admittedly with injuries to players such as Willock, Dieng and Dickie, was very worrying and I reluctantly accepted that it was best not to prolong his contract. But this wasn't black and white. Over the entire three years period he stayed with us he did more than enough to merit a new contract.

I could understand changing Warburton for Beale - a young and upcoming manager with very good references from Chelsea, Liverpool, Rangers and Aston Villa. He fitted what we wanted to be - a club that develops players based on a certain style of play.

But I cannot for my life understand that it makes sense to replace Warburton with Ainsworth. In my mind it is not just a big step down, but a move that is against everything we want to be.

I understand the need to replace Critchley, particularly if he had lost the dressing room. I am sure Ainsworth can fire up the players and get the necessary points on board to avoid relegation this season.

But what about the longer perspective? Our job is to develop and sell younger players. It is the only way we can build a good financial platform for promotion. By sale is meant sale to Premier League - players that command £10m or more. To develop players for PL, we need to have a style of play that resembles PL. Ainsworth style is hoof ball. No PL club will scout for talent in a hoof ball team. It is so obvious.

As Sheep refers to, Wycombe has just had one successful sale over the last five years under Ainsworth - selling a player to Bristol City. Apart from maybe keeping us up this season, there is nothing that makes Ainsworth a good fit with what we need. It cries panik to me. It is a short term fix but not a strategic move.

A DOF is put in place to oversee a long term plan, so that we do not get victim to changing managers with different ideas, changing half the squad every year to fit their style of play. But when the DOF makes a U-turn and go from possession based style of play to hoof ball over night we do not need that DOF. Simple as that. I have defended Les on several occasions, but this one is unforgiving, if the media reports are true.

I loved Ainsworth as a players and I am desperate to see QPR succeed, but this looks to be a horrible signing.

I sincerely hope I am completely wrong.

Love reading your posts always bang on the money and I agree with you

[ConorQPR2000]

I feel Ainsworth, whilst to many it seems an out of sorts appointment, is probably the best option at this moment.

Also a lot are commenting about his style of play, but for me I dont really care as long as it gets results, as a club we always tend to do well when we play front foot football, I remember Warnock played a similar style and look where it ended up.

I think GA will do just about enough to keep us up, we only need 3 wins from the next 12 to secure our spot in the Championship for next season.

A big shakeup is needed in the summer, and I just hope we give him the space to develop his ideas and hopefully we can all get behind him, perhaps its what we need now.

[djp]

A lot is being said about the style Ainsworth would bring, I don’t believe it is as “hoof ball” as most like to think on here. But saying that give me hoof ball and chance to score goals rather than playing 90% of the game in our half across our back 4.

[topperharley]

For a very long time I was a fan of Warburton. He stopped the rot under McClaren and results improved a lot. During the calendar year of 2021 we were in promotion form. But the way the wheels fell off during the last three months of 21/22, admittedly with injuries to players such as Willock, Dieng and Dickie, was very worrying and I reluctantly accepted that it was best not to prolong his contract. But this wasn't black and white. Over the entire three years period he stayed with us he did more than enough to merit a new contract.

I could understand changing Warburton for Beale - a young and upcoming manager with very good references from Chelsea, Liverpool, Rangers and Aston Villa. He fitted what we wanted to be - a club that develops players based on a certain style of play.

But I cannot for my life understand that it makes sense to replace Warburton with Ainsworth. In my mind it is not just a big step down, but a move that is against everything we want to be.

I understand the need to replace Critchley, particularly if he had lost the dressing room. I am sure Ainsworth can fire up the players and get the necessary points on board to avoid relegation this season.

But what about the longer perspective? Our job is to develop and sell younger players. It is the only way we can build a good financial platform for promotion. By sale is meant sale to Premier League - players that command £10m or more. To develop players for PL, we need to have a style of play that resembles PL. Ainsworth style is hoof ball. No PL club will scout for talent in a hoof ball team. It is so obvious.

As Sheep refers to, Wycombe has just had one successful sale over the last five years under Ainsworth - selling a player to Bristol City. Apart from maybe keeping us up this season, there is nothing that makes Ainsworth a good fit with what we need. It cries panik to me. It is a short term fix but not a strategic move.

A DOF is put in place to oversee a long term plan, so that we do not get victim to changing managers with different ideas, changing half the squad every year to fit their style of play. But when the DOF makes a U-turn and go from possession based style of play to hoof ball over night we do not need that DOF. Simple as that. I have defended Les on several occasions, but this one is unforgiving, if the media reports are true.

I loved Ainsworth as a players and I am desperate to see QPR succeed, but this looks to be a horrible signing.

I sincerely hope I am completely wrong.

It is all about the long term. I would be very excited to see Ainsworth back, but like a 5 year old opening toys at Christmas there's a bloody good chance the novelty will have worn off by New Years Day.

Without writing success under Ainsworth off, he has done well at Wycombe, I think he's going to get found out really quickly if he isn't able to make this step up into a job that has quite alot of pressure. Let's face it he isn't under much at Wycombe and probably never has been, no disrepect to them but as an over acheiver he's got the grace of the fans and board. At QPR his club legend status buys him some time, but it's not going to be unlimited.

The point of would he be employed after Warbs is valid. Is the DOF's vision the same as then though? He got burnt by Warbs, a very good coach that obviously had a some back room drama with Les and Co. We've definitely been burnt by Beale, and now following the same ideal he's misfired with NC.

I would much rather we looked further afield or at someone that can really offer more to the back of house operations of the club, than just pick at team and tell them where to run, but if GA gets the job i'd be very happy to chuck support behind him and see what he does with it before judging him or the reasons behind the appointment too quickly.

[QPROslo]

I would like to separate between two issues:

1. What style of play that can give success
2. What style of play that can develop players than can be sold to Premier League clubs

All roads lead to Rome as they say, meaning there are many styles of football that can bring success. I agree that "route 1" style can be very successful if implemented under the right manager with the right set of players. Without having seen Wycombe more than a few times, I get it that they play it long from the back, with high intensity and keep it very simple, with few passes. The team is set up with very physical players. I am convinced this can still work in the Championship, even though it becomes harder the more quality the opposition possesses. To do this successfully we need to do wholesale changes of our squad, as it is brought in to play another style - i.e. with defenders playing out from the back etc.

However, next to playing well and bringing points on board, we are in need of developing sellable assets. This is how small clubs can move up the ladder, i.e. Brentford, Brighton etc. This is my main objection to Ainsworths style. PL clubs look for players that will fit into PL teams. None of those teams are playing the very direct style of Ainsworth. Hence, the players we will recruit and develop will not fit what PL is looking for. That greatly reduces the chance of successful sales.

Warnock had one players with license to do what he wanted - Taarabt. Eze had the same freedom under Ainsworth. It might be the case for Chair as well, if we sign Ainsworth, unless he will be sold in the next transfer window. If Chair isn't here much longer, another player can take up such a role. Hence, we might have one sellable assets even in an Ainsworth team. But my point is that we greatly reduce the chance of developing sellable assets if we change style of play the Ainsworth way.

But can we win with Ainsworth? Surely we can. Will it be pleasant to the eye? No. I am more interested in points than silky play, but first and foremost I would like a club with long term success, as this is 100% dependent on player development and big money sales. That's my main object to Ainsworth.

And before someone asks: Can't Ainsworth play the style Les and the board want him to play, i.e. a possession based style? No. When a manager has worked ten years to perfect a certain style of play, it is bloody hard, if not impossible, to change to a very different one. Adjustments are ok, all managers do that, but a complete change of philosophy and style? No. It is like starting from scratch as an unproven manager. That won't happen to any seasoned manager.

[FurtiveFox]

Ignoring QPR connections GA has basically done for Wycombe what we need someone to do for us and he has done it consistently for 11 years now. Who lasts 11 years as a manager anywhere these days? He clearly knows how to organise a team and get the best out of players and to do it on a very tight budget. If we were looking to give a manager a chance from the lower leagues he would be a very good candidate. Add in his Rs connections and I doubt we could get anyone more motivated. Disadvantages are lack of experience at this level and possibly how some players may react to that. He has a reputation for hoof ball but who knows what his style of play would be with better players at his disposal.

Other possibilities I see mentioned are the likes of Wilder and Jones. If we get the versions of them that did so well at this level great. However the only reason they are available is they flopped elsewhere so far from without risk. See how Boro are flying under Carrick, bottom three under Wilder despite squad at his disposal.

Any appointment we make will have risk. We are in a pretty desperate state and I can see a lot of managers not fancying it. For me GA ticks a lot of the boxes we need. Whether he can pull it off nobody knows. With the current state of the club I wouldn't be convinced Pep could pull it off. I would though be happy enough with the appointment and to see what he can do. Get through this season and big rebuild. Hopefully he might even be able to help us get a few bargains from the lower leagues.

[ConorQPR2000]

Sky reporting a deal is very close for Ainsworth now.

Recon it will be announced today.

[topperharley]

I would like to separate between two issues:

1. What style of play that can give success
2. What style of play that can develop players than can be sold to Premier League clubs

All roads lead to Rome as they say, meaning there are many styles of football that can bring success. I agree that "route 1" style can be very successful if implemented under the right manager with the right set of players. Without having seen Wycombe more than a few times, I get it that they play it long from the back, with high intensity and keep it very simple, with few passes. The team is set up with very physical players. I am convinced this can still work in the Championship, even though it becomes harder the more quality the opposition possesses. To do this successfully we need to do wholesale changes of our squad, as it is brought in to play another style - i.e. with defenders playing out from the back etc.

However, next to playing well and bringing points on board, we are in need of developing sellable assets. This is how small clubs can move up the ladder, i.e. Brentford, Brighton etc. This is my main objection to Ainsworths style. PL clubs look for players that will fit into PL teams. None of those teams are playing the very direct style of Ainsworth. Hence, the players we will recruit and develop will not fit what PL is looking for. That greatly reduces the chance of successful sales.

Warnock had one players with license to do what he wanted - Taarabt. Eze had the same freedom under Ainsworth. It might be the case for Chair as well, if we sign Ainsworth, unless he will be sold in the next transfer window. If Chair isn't here much longer, another player can take up such a role. Hence, we might have one sellable assets even in an Ainsworth team. But my point is that we greatly reduce the chance of developing sellable assets if we change style of play the Ainsworth way.

But can we win with Ainsworth? Surely we can. Will it be pleasant to the eye? No. I am more interested in points than silky play, but first and foremost I would like a club with long term success, as this is 100% dependent on player development and big money sales. That's my main object to Ainsworth.

And before someone asks: Can't Ainsworth play the style Les and the board want him to play, i.e. a possession based style? No. When a manager has worked ten years to perfect a certain style of play, it is bloody hard, if not impossible, to change to a very different one. Adjustments are ok, all managers do that, but a complete change of philosophy and style? No. It is like starting from scratch as an unproven manager. That won't happen to any seasoned manager.

It's a very reasonable opinion to have. Should probably apply the for the DOF job when it comes up.......

[Martinmalta]

I've said this several times ... we are trying to play the Premier way but by doing so, we are signing players that are of big risks due to their injuries. Amos, Richards, Roberts, Clark-Salter, Bolagun are all good and technically gifted, yet can they play all season, do they have fight in them? As things stand, no. So we have to built on what the club can afford. If by that it means lower quality, yet more fighters and fit players, I go for the latter. I think GA cut his cloth from what he had or can afford at Wycombe. And he did ok. We are not much of more affordable club then Wycombe, so I think for the present and immediate future, GA is what we needs. BTW, Chris Wilder would have done a good job as well with our current crop of players.

[djp]

I would like to separate between two issues:

1. What style of play that can give success
2. What style of play that can develop players than can be sold to Premier League clubs

All roads lead to Rome as they say, meaning there are many styles of football that can bring success. I agree that "route 1" style can be very successful if implemented under the right manager with the right set of players. Without having seen Wycombe more than a few times, I get it that they play it long from the back, with high intensity and keep it very simple, with few passes. The team is set up with very physical players. I am convinced this can still work in the Championship, even though it becomes harder the more quality the opposition possesses. To do this successfully we need to do wholesale changes of our squad, as it is brought in to play another style - i.e. with defenders playing out from the back etc.

However, next to playing well and bringing points on board, we are in need of developing sellable assets. This is how small clubs can move up the ladder, i.e. Brentford, Brighton etc. This is my main objection to Ainsworths style. PL clubs look for players that will fit into PL teams. None of those teams are playing the very direct style of Ainsworth. Hence, the players we will recruit and develop will not fit what PL is looking for. That greatly reduces the chance of successful sales.

Warnock had one players with license to do what he wanted - Taarabt. Eze had the same freedom under Ainsworth. It might be the case for Chair as well, if we sign Ainsworth, unless he will be sold in the next transfer window. If Chair isn't here much longer, another player can take up such a role. Hence, we might have one sellable assets even in an Ainsworth team. But my point is that we greatly reduce the chance of developing sellable assets if we change style of play the Ainsworth way.

But can we win with Ainsworth? Surely we can. Will it be pleasant to the eye? No. I am more interested in points than silky play, but first and foremost I would like a club with long term success, as this is 100% dependent on player development and big money sales. That's my main object to Ainsworth.

And before someone asks: Can't Ainsworth play the style Les and the board want him to play, i.e. a possession based style? No. When a manager has worked ten years to perfect a certain style of play, it is bloody hard, if not impossible, to change to a very different one. Adjustments are ok, all managers do that, but a complete change of philosophy and style? No. It is like starting from scratch as an unproven manager. That won't happen to any seasoned manager.

I have thought exactly what you are saying for a long time but I have just about given up on this philosophy, it doesn't work for us as a club. Since 2015 have had JFH, Mcclaren, Warburton, Beale, Critchley all try this approach and not one of them have produced a player that has a Premier League club has wanted, Eze was just lucky and it is reported that Holloway recommended him to the club anyway, dunno whether that is true or not. So after being top of league in October playing tika-taka crap all we got in January was a £3million offer from a Championship club for our only senior Striker, its laughable really.

Holloway didn't follow this approach as JFH sent us in freefall much like Critchley has done, so I believe Ainsworth is being bought in to stop the rot much like Holloway was.

[SheepRanger]

I have thought exactly what you are saying for a long time but I have just about given up on this philosophy, it doesn't work for us as a club. Since 2015 have had JFH, Mcclaren, Warburton, Beale, Critchley all try this approach and not one of them have produced a player that has a Premier League club has wanted, Eze was just lucky and it is reported that Holloway recommended him to the club anyway, dunno whether that is true or not. So after being top of league in October playing tika-taka crap all we got in January was a £3million offer from a Championship club for our only senior Striker, its laughable really.

Holloway didn't follow this approach as JFH sent us in freefall much like Critchley has done, so I believe Ainsworth is being bought in to stop the rot much like Holloway was.

Didnt Southampton also offer £3m for Field?

[Kingaustin]

Least we can all agree it’s awful football and hoof ball . Same at Wycombe completely out his depth . Where do we go from here :(