|
Post by flouncingarburyboy on Apr 27, 2024 16:39:42 GMT
I'm creating this thread out of a need for catharsis because I keep reflecting on the season that's just been and think I'm struggling to understand it.
At a very simple level I suppose it should be seen as a season of success: confirmation of a fourth successive season in the third tier; higher final league position and more points than 22/23; having to navigate through the turbulence of one managerial sacking and one managerial slithering off; further confirmation on many levels that the way the club is run continues to impress and is absolutely sound; the emergence of younger players such as Jobe and Hoddle into our first team squad; and, the appointment of Monk who I'm increasingly impressed with and seems to have a tactical approach that we might not have seen in his two immediate predecessors.
And yet, as has already been commented upon, it's been a weird season. I've been struck by the number of posters who have commented on the 'disconnect' between players and fans and wondered why and how that had happened. If we take the much discussed Lyle Taylor for example, I agree with ElG's point about him that he would never have been recruited by Bonner. Obviously lots to do with his character but, then again, Taylor would probably have shown no interest in Bonner's Cambridge. The snake used his former managerial experience to bring in players in January. Bonner didn't have that so recruited players who would fit a certain profile and then used his many man-management skills to shape the individuals into a collective. We have obviously lost that particular approach even though I'm aware that many of the players who lots want rid of ....were recruited by Bonner and Strang. So was that 'disconnect' the result of too many one year contracts? too many injury prone players? too many journeymen with League One experience but not necessary quality? And has the feeling of 'disconnect' lessened somewhat because, at the final whistle today, that group has kept us in League One?
Ultimately perhaps we were spoilt by the perfect storm of Bonner and watching our Lockdown Legends get promoted and only being able to see matches through iFollow and having a team of genuine characters, achievers and talent which encapsulated everything we love about Cambridge United.
There, already starting to understand the season a bit better already. As I said, it's catharsis.
|
|
|
Post by saltyvinegar on Apr 27, 2024 18:51:33 GMT
I think Bonner & the team recruited “nicer” players that we felt closer to & it worked for a few seasons but I think that plan was never going to last longer term. It needed a change & even though he was a Snake (spit) he got some crucial points & so did Monk even though there was plenty of scary moments in amongst this time. Even Taylor & Bonne contributed & those sort of mercenary type players will never have a bond with the U’s fans but again their limited contribution was still crucial both in a positive & negative (Taylor) manner as I still believe that we would have been relegated if we hadn’t sacked Bonner as we were in a death spiral
Sorry for the rambling as the alcohol is starting to kick in after a weird season & I keep questioning whether it’s better to have the excitement of potential relegation & promotion scenarios that we’ve had for the last few seasons or be a safer mid table side
Anyway, we need to have a wholesale clear out, thank many players for their loyal service & a full reboot like the Jimmy Bond franchise as we cannot keep scabbing survival in this division
|
|
|
Post by martinjohn on Apr 28, 2024 9:13:23 GMT
Done some number crunching:
Bonner:
19 games. 26% wins, 47% losses. PPG 1.05
The snake:
13 games. 38% wins, 38% losses. PPG 1.38
Monk:
11 games. 18% wins, 45% losses. PPG 0.82
No point including Corr's 3 games.
So there you have it. Monk's record is poor and the poorest of the three. But, that doesn't concern in slightest. He had the hardest job of all three and the most things conspire against him.
|
|
|
Post by El Goodo on Apr 28, 2024 9:21:46 GMT
I think Monk had our "best" win in terms of the relative position of the opposition when we beat Barnsley, but I might be wrong on that.
I'd be interested to see what the relative strength of the opposition in those games for each manager would be too, because my gut feeling is Harris's was probably the "easiest" – Charlton on a poor run although towards the beginning of it, Blackpool were good at that point, Exeter on an awful run, Oxford were good, Orient were OK, Fleetwood awful, Exeter again awful, Burton awful, Shrewsbury bad, Cheltenham OK at that point I think, Portsmouth good, Carlisle awful – & Monk's probably the hardest.
Well, Corr's was actually definitely the hardest ha.
|
|
danielcufc
First team star
Posts: 8,333
Favourite CUFC player: Dion Dublin
Favourite CUFC match: Peterborough 1, Cambridge 5 London Road 3.1.1989
|
Post by danielcufc on Apr 28, 2024 9:33:24 GMT
I am just glad that 23/24 is over. The sense of relief when I woke up this morning not thinking about going down and permutations about Cheltenham & Burton. Think its 15 weeks until the start of the season so some nice stress free Saturday's - barring the Euro's - before we go again.
One of the strangest seasons for sure. All calm at the start, crazy in the Autumn, calm again Christmas - Feb and then a mental March before getting over the line. Hopefully the powers that be conduct a good review of things. So much is going right off the pitch with increased crowds, stadium plans afoot and great engagement in the community. Just got to be better in the recruitment this summer.
|
|
rocky
Youth team substitute
Posts: 688
|
Post by rocky on Apr 28, 2024 9:39:29 GMT
Mark Bonner set out this season for the squad to scratch out more draws and more clean sheets - both of which were achieved (with aplomb, naturally), despite 4 different managers, a striker injury crisis which screwed up whatever January transfer plans we had in place, followed by a late season defender injury crisis. As frustrated as many of us are with many of the players (and managers), let's chalk that up to progress and hope we can further progress next season.
|
|
|
Post by zx10racer22 on Apr 28, 2024 10:13:56 GMT
I see the progress of a football club as a little bit like building a title winning team within a season.
You won’t play well in every game during a season, but successful teams will dig out a result when they are not at their best.
The season, we were not at our best. It wasn’t a terrible season, but I do think this group of players were capable of more. Yet, we survived, and we get to go again. For me that is a positive outcome. If you can have a “bad season” and still survive, then that bodes well for when you have a good season.
Cheltenham and ourselves or similar size clubs and have had a very similar recent history over the last four seasons. Never more than a few points apart, really.
Next season, we will be in different divisions for the first time in a long time, and it is us who have stayed up. Their fans will give anything to be sat where we are today.
So despite the struggles of awful form at times, the loss of a legend, the snake saga, the fear that we had made a terrible decision in appointing Monk after the disasters at Lincoln and Reading (I am very happy to have since been proven wrong)… overall, I remain a clapper who is happy.
|
|
Andrewlang
Cult hero
Posts: 17,173
Member is Online
|
Post by Andrewlang on Apr 28, 2024 11:00:28 GMT
Initial gut feeling is that is was disappointing overall, though it depends what our aims and targets were I suppose and how those needed to change as the season progressed.
I got the impression we were intending to evolve our playing style a bit but that didn't really happen - it might be quite interesting if someone (FAB) could work out average possession stats for each manager because I get the feeling not much actually changed from manager to manager which perhaps tells you a lot about our quality and bravery on the ball. It was a year long problem that I'm sure we'll look to address next year.
Finishing above the relegation zone (and never being in it) has to be seen as success but perhaps tempered by whatever we set out to achieve when the season started, if Bonner was sacked with a 1.05 average (I think) then I suspect we wanted more than surviving on the last day, but who knows (we finished the season with a 1.04 average just for stat completion sake rather than boring comparison).
As I said in another thread Pot Vale, Fleetwood or even Gump Green last year are an example of how managerial changes can go spectacularly wrong so we really should take into account how disruptive those were and just be grateful, I suppose.
Ultimately who cares. We stayed up. Crowds are up. We completed on the training ground. Monk feels like a good appointment. The board continues to be ambitious and supportive. I'm considering all that a win.
Andrew
|
|
|
Post by milesfenton on Apr 28, 2024 11:28:08 GMT
Done some number crunching: Bonner: 19 games. 26% wins, 47% losses. PPG 1.05 The snake: 13 games. 38% wins, 38% losses. PPG 1.38 Monk: 11 games. 18% wins, 45% losses. PPG 0.82 No point including Corr's 3 games. So there you have it. Monk's record is poor and the poorest of the three. But, that doesn't concern in slightest. He had the hardest job of all three and the most things conspire against him. Good number crunching, but "morally" The Snake owns the 3 losses immediately after his departure too, particularly as they coincided with his star signing's suspension too. That would drop his PPG to 1.13, still a marginal improvement on Bonner's but barely (which seems about right). I appreciate there's an element of trying to fit stats to my own ideas there, but oh well. Under Harris we tended to come up short against anyone that was any good, so I very much doubt we'd have fared better than we did with Corr for those 3 anyway. Mainly I think I'm optimistic for the future. I'm in the camp who would have happily stuck with Bonner, but accept that Barry made the decision he did with the interests of the club at heart. Harris always seemed like someone to do well short term and so in that sense was a good appointment, we'll never know if he could have built anything longer lasting. The type of players he'd have wanted started off as praise by some ("Bonner would never have signed Taylor") and ended up as a curse ("Bonner would never have signed Taylor") so I'm actually quite glad we never got to see a side full of so many "interesting" characters all at once. Monk was the opposite, someone with short term doubts but far more long term confidence following a pre-season and transfer window. I was in the 3 game Monk Out camp because it really looked like the short term doubts would be all that mattered, but am delighted to be wrong about that. I think if the profile of his signings can be in more of the Bonner Year 1-2 mould (a mis of young and hungry or older with a point to prove) as well as blooding some of the youth then we could really build something special.
|
|
|
Post by flouncingarburyboy on Apr 28, 2024 11:28:09 GMT
I got the impression we were intending to evolve our playing style a bit but that didn't really happen - it might be quite interesting if someone (FAB) could work out average possession stats for each manager because I get the feeling not much actually changed from manager to manager which perhaps tells you a lot about our quality and bravery on the ball. It was a year long problem that I'm sure we'll look to address next year. I've already started on the match thread starter analysis which I'm very excited about. Results to be posted when done. I'm particularly excited about doing the manager -by- manager bit: who thrived under Bonner, and didn't; who flourished under the snake and didn't; and who has the future in their hands with Monk. Telling I'm sure....
|
|
|
Post by huddsmoose on Apr 28, 2024 11:35:30 GMT
It's really hard to objectively compare managers - Bonner built a 'solid' side aiming to keep more clean sheets and nick more draws but we didn't have enough technical ability or raw athleticism to achieve much else.
Harris was the continuity candidate - another defence first manager who suited the squad fairly well. He also had a chance of a transfer window to fix perceived issues in the team (no strikers).
Monk has had his hands tied compared to Bonner and Harris - not an ideal make up of squad I would assume and no transfer window to fix it. It seems fairly obvious we brought him in to mould the team over the mid to long-term so I'm not sure we can make many assumptions yet about how he'll get on.
|
|
Andrewlang
Cult hero
Posts: 17,173
Member is Online
|
Post by Andrewlang on Apr 28, 2024 11:35:47 GMT
"Good number crunching, but "morally" The Snake owns the 3 losses immediately after his departure too, particularly as they coincided with his star signing's suspension too. That would drop his PPG to 1.13, still a marginal improvement on Bonner's but barely (which seems about right)"
The snake also had an 'easier' run of games, I think.
I mean, he might not have done but that's the narrative i'm believing.
Andrew
|
|
Dylan
First team substitute
Posts: 6,355
Favourite CUFC player: Dion Dublin
Favourite CUFC match: CUFC v AFC Halifax 04.05.14
|
Post by Dylan on Apr 28, 2024 11:51:28 GMT
The snake achieved 1 point from 6 in the home games v Cheltenham and Burton.
This is his key, damning STAT.
|
|
|
Post by kentishu on Apr 28, 2024 11:52:58 GMT
We may look back at this season fondly. It was turbulent for sure, but we stayed up and that's all that really matters. Plus we seem to have found a manager who understands tactics and has integrity, not had someone with both those traits for a while. I hope not to be massively disappointed next season, but I don't think I will be:)
Kentish
|
|
|
Post by zx10racer22 on Apr 28, 2024 13:03:06 GMT
In that sense, the story of the last two seasons has yet to really be written. If we go down next season, the last two years merely delayed a return to L2.
But if we end up building something from here, these last two seasons of struggle could turn out to be hugely significant "victories".
|
|