Fitness and Performance for 25/26

[Cappy]

Three managerial teams can't be wrong, right?

Tom Little, who Hecky brought in, seems to still be the performance guy, based upon the latest vid in Girona. I don't know enough beyond amateur performance to have an educated opinion, but always wish Tom well, as he and his missus were both in my year at my school. But I'm very worried after last season about the ability of our key players to see out a game, at the level of performance I felt was required. Indeed I was perhaps biased in the seasons prior to not acknowledge concern.

I don't know how to take this. Part of me definitely says, 'yay, a new manager with a serious focus on athletic performance obviously rates him, so that's good, as I want him to do well'. But another part says, 'ah shit the old guy is still there, and we 'failed' with him previously'.

(If you're wondering, I recognise his voice in the vid)

 

[Gimli]

Might be me reaching for the obvious conclusion from last season but genuinely think fitness (or lack thereof) cost us last season, both on a macro level in terms of performances (and I think statistics back this up) from an hour onwards but also on the micro in terms of individual games and individual players not being able to make it through a 90 - play off final being a case in point it was like Shaun of the Dead looking at our team in the last 15 - We did have red on us after all…

 

[Cappy]

What I don't know is whether certain styles of managers completely overrule the fitness/high performance guys. i.e "you say x y z, but I want a b c because it worked for me in the 80s and 90s". Hecky and Wilder both seem old skool, whatever we take that to mean. Obviously my hope is this is the manager Tom has been waiting for, who trusts the science and we get these boys on a 90+ high-performance trajectory

 

[Nick Jansky]

(If you're wondering, I recognise his voice in the vid)

I think that was actually Sellés. But easy mistake to make.

 

[Frank the tank]

Can't help but feel leaving your recruitment till the last .minute with players not having had a full.pre season doesnt help
Campbell for example should have been brought in much earlier but wasn't and this meant him.training on his own for months
No wonder then that he wasn't firing in all cylinders fitness wise

 

[SwissBlade]

What I don't know is whether certain styles of managers completely overrule the fitness/high performance guys. i.e "you say x y z, but I want a b c because it worked for me in the 80s and 90s". Hecky and Wilder both seem old skool, whatever we take that to mean. Obviously my hope is this is the manager Tom has been waiting for, who trusts the science and we get these boys on a 90+ high-performance trajectory

We won 28 games along with Burnley and Leeds just pipped us on 29 wins, Sunderland won 21 games, so we were doing something right.

There’s a contradiction when you say when you lump Hecky and Wilder together as "old skool", both worked with player data and used the modern principles which every club uses. Wilder was extremely opposed to expanding the use of additional subs when we were first back in the Premier league as he knew how much of an advantage that would give sides in the top division against us. The additional time being added on also made things increasingly difficult in the top division, Hecky and Wilder both finding this out.

What Wilder did last season was to utilise the squad better, he brought in more players to cover positions and the great debate over Brooks and JSR is an example of this, having two players in the same position, capable of being interchangeable without dropping the levels required.

The problem we had, perhaps more than other sides was with players dealing with recovery or intensity over sustained periods where we had lots of games. I don't think there was any issue with the ability to finish games, we made some predictable substitutions

Edit: pressed post too soon

 

[Bladesman]

Might be me reaching for the obvious conclusion from last season but genuinely think fitness (or lack thereof) cost us last season, both on a macro level in terms of performances (and I think statistics back this up) from an hour onwards but also on the micro in terms of individual games and individual players not being able to make it through a 90 - play off final being a case in point it was like Shaun of the Dead looking at our team in the last 15 - We did have red on us after all…

Last season Wilder seemed to get on top of most of the bad injury problems we had under Hecky BUT the stamina wasn't there in some players to do a full 90 minutes. Too many players were flagging after 60 minutes under Wilder but he was usually wise enough to sub them off.

The two serious injuries we got last season were very unlucky on field injuries.

 

[dexter101]

Thanks for sharing, I find these things interesting!

No knowledge on this at all but I think there is a difference between Hecky's team, Wilders team and next seasons team.

My gut feeling is he is there to prepare them as the manager prescribes? Potentially with the squads we saw Hecky having to take fitness risks because of lack of signings and the PL. Wilder maybe felt he had to cotton wool the players more (long term Hamer injury, would it have been more detrimental than him only making it through 60 minutes of each game)

Selles we are expecting the players to work harder, this means, fitness levels have to be higher and how we manages that will be interesting.

I am just hoping...

Hecky's- injury prone
Wilder's- not fit enough
Selle's- Goldilocks (fit but not injured!)

 

[Cappy]

I think that was actually Sellés. But easy mistake to make.

In case people take your comment seriously...that's 99.9999% Tom's face, and definitely his voice

 

[Cappy]

We won 28 games along with Burnley and Leeds just pipped us on 29 wins, Sunderland won 21 games, so we were doing something right.

There’s a contradiction when you say when you lump Hecky and Wilder together as "old skool", both worked with player data and used the modern principles which every club uses. Wilder was extremely opposed to expanding the use of additional subs when we were first back in the Premier league as he knew how much of an advantage that would give sides in the top division against us. The additional time being added on also made things increasingly difficult in the top division, Hecky and Wilder both finding this out.

What Wilder did last season was to utilise the squad better, he brought in more players to cover positions and the great debate over Brooks and JSR is an example of this, having two players in the same position, capable of being interchangeable without dropping the levels required.

The problem we had, perhaps more than other sides was with players dealing with recovery or intensity over sustained periods where we had lots of games. I don't think there was any issue with the ability to finish games, we made some predictable substitutions

Edit: pressed post too soon

I definitely hear what you're saying, and remind everyone that I want Tom to be the guy for us, but I went to 45 total SUFC games last season, and with my amateur eye in-person, and not necessarily studying replays, I just felt that later in games we fell away from the opposition. I think there may be a stat that shows in the last last 15 minutes of games, we were 18th in the league during the regular season? If that isn't correct, it's not far off.

To repeat, I'm happy to be wrong about the individual

 

[Cappy]

We won 28 games along with Burnley and Leeds just pipped us on 29 wins, Sunderland won 21 games, so we were doing something right.

There’s a contradiction when you say when you lump Hecky and Wilder together as "old skool", both worked with player data and used the modern principles which every club uses. Wilder was extremely opposed to expanding the use of additional subs when we were first back in the Premier league as he knew how much of an advantage that would give sides in the top division against us. The additional time being added on also made things increasingly difficult in the top division, Hecky and Wilder both finding this out.

What Wilder did last season was to utilise the squad better, he brought in more players to cover positions and the great debate over Brooks and JSR is an example of this, having two players in the same position, capable of being interchangeable without dropping the levels required.

The problem we had, perhaps more than other sides was with players dealing with recovery or intensity over sustained periods where we had lots of games. I don't think there was any issue with the ability to finish games, we made some predictable substitutions

Edit: pressed post too soon

Could JRS and Brooks perform at a high level, consistently, over 90 mins for a significant part of the season?

 

[Cappy]

Last season Wilder seemed to get on top of most of the bad injury problems we had under Hecky BUT the stamina wasn't there in some players to do a full 90 minutes. Too many players were flagging after 60 minutes under Wilder but he was usually wise enough to sub them off.

The two serious injuries we got last season were very unlucky on field injuries.

Did we perform at a high level for 90 mins in the playoff final in your opinion?

 

[SwissBlade]

What I don't know is whether certain styles of managers completely overrule the fitness/high performance guys. i.e "you say x y z, but I want a b c because it worked for me in the 80s and 90s". Hecky and Wilder both seem old skool, whatever we take that to mean. Obviously my hope is this is the manager Tom has been waiting for, who trusts the science and we get these boys on a 90+ high-performance trajectory

To continue on from my previous post....

Wilder certainly didn't ignore the science and worked with players to ensure that they were given less game time to ensure that they were ready for the next game, as far as possible and this is particularly noticeable in the likes of Burrows, Peck, O'Hare, Anel and Robinson. I'd include Hamer in that as well as he certainly was available game in game out, but there were issues which manifested later in games, something which seemed to be carried over from when we signed him.

We had two major injuries to Blaster and Souttar, but also Moore, Souza, Davies and Campbell all had fairly lengthy periods out which obviously impacted us through the middle of the pitch as well.

Recruitment wise we've made a habit of picking up players later in windows or the have arrived without being fully fit and ready to go... Souza, Hamer, Holding, Davies all fit this description.

Im interested to see how Selles approaches things, Wilders approach was different to Heckys interms of the squad he invested in last summer and his in game management of players, it was certainly a more modern approach in this respect. I think the similarity with Wilder and Hecky was the high intensity in training, they both seemed to prefer this, certainly Wilder did in his first spell, but i don't know how this changed post covid given how we came back after the covid lockdowns

 

[Bladesman]

Did we perform at a high level for 90 mins in the playoff final in your opinion?

No, like I say we looked knackered around 60 to 70 minutes.

 

[SwissBlade]

Could JRS and Brooks perform at a high level, consistently, over 90 mins for a significant part of the season?

Did they have to? I'd say that in the majority of games, they'd put their shifts in well before that

 

[Cheeky Blade]

What I don't know is whether certain styles of managers completely overrule the fitness/high performance guys. i.e "you say x y z, but I want a b c because it worked for me in the 80s and 90s". Hecky and Wilder both seem old skool, whatever we take that to mean. Obviously my hope is this is the manager Tom has been waiting for, who trusts the science and we get these boys on a 90+ high-performance trajectory

I don’t know about this time around but training under Wilder mk1 was said to be ‘full on’.

I took this to mean ‘getting stuck in’ rather than any big focus on the science of fitness.

 

[KMC-1889]

It depends how much the fitness coach is able to deploy their talents and how much their opinion is valued by the mgmt. if the manager knew best and told him to just put the cones out and warm the players up then how much influence can he have?

Last season we were told there were players going into ‘Red zones’ and managing minutes so it seems like the fitness team were making the info available and letting the mgmt team decide what to do with it

 

[Cappy]

To continue on from my previous post....

Wilder certainly didn't ignore the science and worked with players to ensure that they were given less game time to ensure that they were ready for the next game, as far as possible and this is particularly noticeable in the likes of Burrows, Peck, O'Hare, Anel and Robinson. I'd include Hamer in that as well as he certainly was available game in game out, but there were issues which manifested later in games, something which seemed to be carried over from when we signed him.

We had two major injuries to Blaster and Souttar, but also Moore, Souza, Davies and Campbell all had fairly lengthy periods out which obviously impacted us through the middle of the pitch as well.

Recruitment wise we've made a habit of picking up players later in windows or the have arrived without being fully fit and ready to go... Souza, Hamer, Holding, Davies all fit this description.

Im interested to see how Selles approaches things, Wilders approach was different to Heckys interms of the squad he invested in last summer and his in game management of players, it was certainly a more modern approach in this respect. I think the similarity with Wilder and Hecky was the high intensity in training, they both seemed to prefer this, certainly Wilder did in his first spell, but i don't know how this changed post covid given how we came back after the covid lockdowns

I agree re Wilder's approach to managing the squad. How he managed navigating the winter period was excellent. Watford away in particular was a great away day given expectation and what came before. My concern, if that's the right word, is the person/group the new manager is relying on to make sure the players are ready and able to perform at a high enough level, for a long enough period

I'm not trying to make a point about how a manager handles the squad, or handles recruitment or selection. This is about how we get a player to perform at his maximum athletic capability, to deliver the biggest positive impact on the pitch. I'm just a bit worried

 

[KMC-1889]

I definitely hear what you're saying, and remind everyone that I want Tom to be the guy for us, but I went to 45 total SUFC games last season, and with my amateur eye in-person, and not necessarily studying replays, I just felt that later in games we fell away from the opposition. I think there may be a stat that shows in the last last 15 minutes of games, we were 18th in the league during the regular season? If that isn't correct, it's not far off.

To repeat, I'm happy to be wrong about the individual

I shared it on X and got an absolute roasting for it, but the league table based on results 75-full time makes absolutely horrendous viewing.

One of my big complaints from last season is how poorly we used and squad and that Wilder couldn’t manage a game within the 90 mins. The running joke of 60 minute champ manager subs or reacting to late to other managers changes.

 

[Cappy]

Did they have to? I'd say that in the majority of games, they'd put their shifts in well before that

For promotion, I think so

 

[Cappy]

I shared it on X and got an absolute roasting for it, but the league table based on results 75-full time makes absolutely horrendous viewing.

One of my big complaints from last season is how poorly we used and squad and that Wilder couldn’t manage a game within the 90 mins. The running joke of 60 minute champ manager subs or reacting to late to other managers changes.

Stats can be difficult to get buy-in. If I had no other context, I could say, well if you were winning 2-0 at 75 mins during every game but won each game 2-1, then your post-75 mins stats would be awful, yet you'd win the league. I feel, with a logical hat on, that people who want to argue a point might take that approach. I don't care what teh truth is, I just wanna know what it is, and my uneducated eyes are worried about how we end games

 

[KMC-1889]

Stats can be difficult to get buy-in. If I had no other context, I could say, well if you were winning 2-0 at 75 mins during every game but won each game 2-1, then your post-75 mins stats would be awful, yet you'd win the league. I feel, with a logical hat on, that people who want to argue a point might take that approach. I don't care what teh truth is, I just wanna know what it is, and my uneducated eyes are worried about how we end games

The problem with that logical argument is that Leeds and Burnley were still top of the table by absolutely miles, and we were 18/19th. Whether you agree with the methodology of the league table or not it’s a good way to demonstrate why they got promoted and we didn’t.

 

[Cappy]

The problem with that logical argument is that Leeds and Burnley were still top of the table by absolutely miles, and we were 18/19th. Whether you agree with the methodology of the league table or not it’s a good way to demonstrate why they got promoted and we didn’t.

And that is the point I might not have made very well, but wanted to. Thanks

 

[Ron_Justice]

Would it not be the case that all backroom staff are, to a greater or lesser degree, depending on the manager in question, simply executing on a managers plan?

It's widely acknowledged that CW has his finger prints all over everything. I'm not suggesting he prescribed the medical/sport science regimes but he will 100% have had an opinion about how best to use said data. Like all managers. The 'greater or lesser' degree will be the factor that would perhaps see a manager relinquish control, to be led by the science v's someone who only looks for the metrics that they themselves feel are important.

My hope if that RS is of the school that lets the science lead the way.

 

[Cappy]

Would it not be the case that all backroom staff are, to greater or lesser degree, depending on the manager in question, simply executing on a managers plan?

It's widely acknowledged that CW has his finger prints all over everything. I'm not suggesting he prescribed the medical/sport science regimes but he will 100% have had an opinion about how best to use said data. Like all managers. The 'greater or lesser' degree will be the factor that would perhaps see a manager relinquish control, to be led by the science v's someone who only looks for the metrics that they themselves feel are important.

My hope if that RS is of the school that lets the science lead the way.

Yes. I have held crazy senior position in management, and the primary thing I remind myself of, every day, is there are people who know better than you, underneath you. Make sure you hear them! It may seem 'gay' but that's the single 'motivational phrase' thing I have on my desk

 

[Ron_Justice]

Yes. I have held crazy senior position in management, and the primary thing I remind myself of, every day, is there are people who know better than you, underneath you. Make sure you hear them! It may seem 'gay' but that's the single 'motivational phrase' thing I have on my desk

100%. The best managers are those that know their limitations and surround themselves with people better at their jobs than them. It takes a strong Ego to surrender control while maintaining the course.

 

[Nick Jansky]

Would it not be the case that all backroom staff are, to greater or lesser degree, depending on the manager in question, simply executing on a managers plan?

It's widely acknowledged that CW has his finger prints all over everything. I'm not suggesting he prescribed the medical/sport science regimes but he will 100% have had an opinion about how best to use said data. Like all managers. The 'greater or lesser' degree will be the factor that would perhaps see a manager relinquish control, to be led by the science v's someone who only looks for the metrics that they themselves feel are important.

My hope if that RS is of the school that lets the science lead the way.

At the leading PL club that I have been spending time at in the last year or so the manager takes instruction, not advice, from the Sports Science team on every aspect of each player’s fitness and conditioning on a daily basis. The manager is happy with this because the results over the last couple of years speak for themselves.

If the manager gets the final say fitness, conditioning and performance won’t be as good as they could be.

 

[SwissBlade]

I definitely hear what you're saying, and remind everyone that I want Tom to be the guy for us, but I went to 45 total SUFC games last season, and with my amateur eye in-person, and not necessarily studying replays, I just felt that later in games we fell away from the opposition. I think there may be a stat that shows in the last last 15 minutes of games, we were 18th in the league during the regular season? If that isn't correct, it's not far off.

To repeat, I'm happy to be wrong about the individual

I'm not disputing that performance levels dropped later in games.

But what i will say is that with many players they were given 60 mins per game, with others rotating in.

The stats may show that we dropped off towards the end of games, but often, games had been won already, so the changes to preserve players had often been made

 

[SwissBlade]

For promotion, I think so

I think the point i'm making is that they'd already done their job and so were often replaced as part of team management rather than because they couldn't last the games

 

[Nick Jansky]

100%. The best managers are those that know their limitations and surround themselves with people better at their jobs than them. It takes a strong Ego to surrender control while maintaining the course.

Spot on. But I think it takes an ability to see a big ego for what it is (the sign of a scared individual) & swallow it.