Current Player Ben Nelson

Steve Gilbert said:
While I think Nelson is a better player than Moore I also think Moore is a good player. Would he be my captain? No but he is good at what he does and knows his limitations.
There is nothing wrong with thinking both players are good enough for this level. I actually think when it comes to CB's we are very strong with Helik, Moore, Nelson and Brown as options.
Click to expand...
I think when Nelson goes back we’d be wise to find someone dynamic that would complement the other 3 whoever they’re partnered with. I’m not talking crazy speed but someone a bit more athletic and powerful off the mark - a bit different to the current crop.

Brown is the current standout but to be honest I think if we’re going to push on from being a team fighting at the bottom we’ll need to reach a level where Brown’s selection isn’t the certainty it currently is.

Say we aim for the top half next season, it’s only Ter Avest, Cumming, Brannagan (and the best versions of Romeny and Goodrham that we’ve seen) that get in my starting XI as it stands. Perhaps Currie as well but that’s a blind pick based on the rave reviews coming his way. Around that you’d have squad players you wouldn’t doubt like Brown, Vaulks, Placheta. But we have a mega summer ahead if we stay up to avoid another season like this one.
 
Swaby39 said:
I think when Nelson goes back we’d be wise to find someone dynamic that would complement the other 3 whoever they’re partnered with. I’m not talking crazy speed but someone a bit more athletic and powerful off the mark - a bit different to the current crop.

Brown is the current standout but to be honest I think if we’re going to push on from being a team fighting at the bottom we’ll need to reach a level where Brown’s selection isn’t the certainty it currently is.

Say we aim for the top half next season, it’s only Ter Avest, Cumming, Brannagan (and the best versions of Romeny and Goodrham that we’ve seen) that get in my starting XI as it stands. Perhaps Currie as well but that’s a blind pick based on the rave reviews coming his way. Around that you’d have squad players you wouldn’t doubt like Brown, Vaulks, Placheta. But we have a mega summer ahead if we stay up to avoid another season like this one.
Click to expand...
I think Vaulks gets in alongside Brannagan as they have shown what a good partnership they are. Still unsure about Ter Avest. I would also say Mills has a very good chance of being a starter next season.
Romeny needs to perform well consistently if we wants to get into a mid table Championship side, same for Tyler but hopefully we will see Tyler back to his best next season.
 
He’s a great player who’s comfortable on the ball, good balance and will definitely go on to brighter and better things if he can remain injury free.
 
Foley said:
Statistically we have had 10 clean sheets this season (11th best in the Division)
Generally we have been really good when conceding corners, dead balls ( and yesterday long throws).
I would suggest that generally our back 5 have been good Championship players this season ( whoever has played).

Next season we need to be more creative and need a bit more quality in the team.
Click to expand...
Brilliant stat I think midfield is the missing part ,not a strong enough engine room plus the missing no9 let's hope we stay up first.
 
Steve Gilbert said:
He has played 235 in just under 6 seasons, I wouldn't say that is an injury prone player.
Click to expand...
He's likely to get more issues with his hip going forward I think.

I think Helik is quicker than Moore and more aggressive but Moore is the better defender for me, everything is calmer, his clearances stay cleared, there's very little chance he slices one or spoons it in the air. I think it's similar to the Ter Avest v Long/Kioso, he's not as aggressive when he challenges for the ball and therefore not as eye catching but he knows what he's about and very rarely over commits and gets caught as we've seen with Helik. Both of them are decent at this level and the last 20 minutes or so yesterday Helik was an absolute monster when Watford went direct.
 
Steve Gilbert said:
I think Vaulks gets in alongside Brannagan as they have shown what a good partnership they are. Still unsure about Ter Avest. I would also say Mills has a very good chance of being a starter next season.
Romeny needs to perform well consistently if we wants to get into a mid table Championship side, same for Tyler but hopefully we will see Tyler back to his best next season.
Click to expand...
I don’t rate Vaulks. I’d like to think we get some more experience in the door this summer so that we aren’t so reliant on him for know how. I like his character a lot but beyond that I’m struggling to make a case for giving him a certain spot next season. That said, I certainly wouldn’t be showing him the door as he’s got uses and may have a better season if the wider group got better.

Too soon for Mills. Top half Championship regular winger? Not for me. Still looks like a L1 winger to me but he’s been out a long time and no doubting the potential to be Championship one day so I understand the signing. If we had a good summer I could see him going out on loan until Jan to make up for some lost time.
 
Swaby39 said:
I don’t rate Vaulks. I’d like to think we get some more experience in the door this summer so that we aren’t so reliant on him for know how. I like his character a lot but beyond that I’m struggling to make a case for giving him a certain spot next season. That said, I certainly wouldn’t be showing him the door as he’s got uses and may have a better season if the wider group got better.
Click to expand...

I like him, but I've never known a player signpost their pass more than Will Vaulks. He decides what he's going to do with it 20 minutes before it comes to him.

There was one at West Brom where he cranked his leg up ready for the 'sweep' and may as well have held up a sign to say 'I'm swiping it over here'.

Epitomised by one frustrating moment yesterday where he had far more space than he realised in the centre circle but had already made his mind up to sweep it backwards - a player with greater awareness (i.e. Brannagan) makes a better decision.

That said, he is generally tidy, a workhorse, and reads the game pretty well. I would be quite happy for him to be a 'semi-regular' again next season - but with greater rotation depending on the opponent.

Above all else he is a model professional and he deserves great credit for his off-field work too, seems like a really decent guy. If we were compiling a list of 'surplus to requirements next season in The Championship' then Will Vaulks would be pretty far down it.
 
Helik, Moore and Brown all seem of a fairly similar level to me, suitable for either the top of League One, or a lower half Championship team. They all have different strengths and weaknesses, different things that they can do better, but I don’t think that you can say for certain that any one of those three are loads better or worse than the others. My preferred partnership in a two would probably be Helik and Brown.

As for Vaulks, I’m still not sold on him as a Championship player. He’s not as bad as he appeared at the start of the season, but I think people are being fooled by him going from absolutely horrendous to being just average, or slightly above average - he seems to put in a lot of 6/10 performances, and it’s rare that Brannagan isn’t clearly better in a game. Vaulk’s passing range isn’t incredible, he lacks a little bit of pace, he can occasionally be bullied off the ball - and his absolute love of a backpass to the keeper will always cost you a few goals a season. I’d happily keep him if we were in League One, he’d be one of the better CMs in the league, but I think an upgrade is possible for the Championship.
 
Isle of Wight Yellow said:
Helik, Moore and Brown all seem of a fairly similar level to me, suitable for either the top of League One, or a lower half Championship team. They all have different strengths and weaknesses, different things that they can do better, but I don’t think that you can say for certain that any one of those three are loads better or worse than the others. My preferred partnership in a two would probably be Helik and Brown.

As for Vaulks, I’m still not sold on him as a Championship player. He’s not as bad as he appeared at the start of the season, but I think people are being fooled by him going from absolutely horrendous to being just average, or slightly above average - he seems to put in a lot of 6/10 performances, and it’s rare that Brannagan isn’t clearly better in a game. Vaulk’s passing range isn’t incredible, he lacks a little bit of pace, he can occasionally be bullied off the ball - and his absolute love of a backpass to the keeper will always cost you a few goals a season. I’d happily keep him if we were in League One, he’d be one of the better CMs in the league, but I think an upgrade is possible for the Championship.
Click to expand...
Vaulks is a water carrier and the way he plays allows Brannagan to be more creative. It is no coincidence that Brannagan plays better when Vaulks is in the team.
You need a Vaulks type player in the side at this level. They won’t stand out in most games but they will consistently do a job for you.
 
Steve Gilbert said:
Vaulks is a water carrier and the way he plays allows Brannagan to be more creative. It is no coincidence that Brannagan plays better when Vaulks is in the team.
You need a Vaulks type player in the side at this level. They won’t stand out in most games but they will consistently do a job for you.
Click to expand...
That’s interesting since McGuane was given relentless pelters on here for doing exactly that, but it was deemed negative, safe and useless. But he was far superior to Vaulks in other areas of the game. I don’t think it helps Brannagan at all, it asks more of him than necessary.

It is an important role and I’m surprised that having had the pleasure of watching Josh McEachran that people still don’t recognise a good one when they see it - or a not so good one. Even on legs that hardly bend at the knee he could get on the ball, move teams around and play that pass that totally spun a midfield - or was at least brave enough to try it. He was elusive with his movement and could disguise what he was going to do. We’re missing that in a big way.

I always think of him when I look at our midfield now and the complete absence of somebody moving side to side looking for the ball under pressure and knows what to do with it when received. Vaulks is a hot potato midfielder and there’s a place for him in the squad but I expected a lot more when we got him.
 
Steve Gilbert said:
Vaulks is a water carrier and the way he plays allows Brannagan to be more creative. It is no coincidence that Brannagan plays better when Vaulks is in the team.
You need a Vaulks type player in the side at this level. They won’t stand out in most games but they will consistently do a job for you.
Click to expand...
That feels pretty close to the classic ‘People just can’t see what Liam Kelly does’ - a way of negating any criticism of a player’s poor performances, while making yourself seem better than the average fan because you have the insight to see things that they can’t. Well, count me in as one of the people who can see that the Emperor is in fact naked, while you and a few others shout loudly that you can see his wonderful new clothes.

I’m more than happy to have a Vaulks type player in the side, I just would like one who is a little more dynamic, and doesn’t make mistakes directly leading to us conceding 5-10 goals a season. And I disagree that water carriers are always ignored - yes at a much higher level, but plenty of people recognised how good Makalele was Madrid, or Kante was at Chelsea.

And as for Brannagan, I’d argue that if you could clone him and tell one to sit a bit more, one to roam a bit more, you’d have a much, much better midfield than Brannagan and Vaulks. Now obviously he’s our best player, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with looking to upgrade on someone who’s had a long patch of being absolutely terrible (but who will probably benefit from that run being at the start of the season - in the same way that McGuane suffered when he was here from being clear MOTM every game and the best player on the pitch for the first 10-12 games of the season, before dropping away - football fan’s recency bias is huge, you’re far better off starting badly and coming good, or alternating between good and bad) and now a longish patch of being slightly above average, with the odd good game thrown in. And, speaking of McGuane (with the qualifier of being at a lower level of course) - his best was better than anything Vaulks has ever done for us, and his tail off was nowhere near as low as some of Vaulk’s performances have been. Funny how different players are viewed.

But as I’ve said, I’d happily have him as a guaranteed starter in the unlikely event that we drop down to League One, and as a squad player in the Championship - I just think it’s a position that we could look to upgrade.
 
Isle of Wight Yellow said:
That feels pretty close to the classic ‘People just can’t see what Liam Kelly does’ - a way of negating any criticism of a player’s poor performances, while making yourself seem better than the average fan because you have the insight to see things that they can’t. Well, count me in as one of the people who can see that the Emperor is in fact naked, while you and a few others shout loudly that you can see his wonderful new clothes.

I’m more than happy to have a Vaulks type player in the side, I just would like one who is a little more dynamic, and doesn’t make mistakes directly leading to us conceding 5-10 goals a season. And I disagree that water carriers are always ignored - yes at a much higher level, but plenty of people recognised how good Makalele was Madrid, or Kante was at Chelsea.

And as for Brannagan, I’d argue that if you could clone him and tell one to sit a bit more, one to roam a bit more, you’d have a much, much better midfield than Brannagan and Vaulks. Now obviously he’s our best player, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with looking to upgrade on someone who’s had a long patch of being absolutely terrible (but who will probably benefit from that run being at the start of the season - in the same way that McGuane suffered when he was here from being clear MOTM every game and the best player on the pitch for the first 10-12 games of the season, before dropping away - football fan’s recency bias is huge, you’re far better off starting badly and coming good, or alternating between good and bad) and now a longish patch of being slightly above average, with the odd good game thrown in. And, speaking of McGuane (with the qualifier of being at a lower level of course) - his best was better than anything Vaulks has ever done for us, and his tail off was nowhere near as low as some of Vaulk’s performances have been. Funny how different players are viewed.

But as I’ve said, I’d happily have him as a guaranteed starter in the unlikely event that we drop down to League One, and as a squad player in the Championship - I just think it’s a position that we could look to upgrade.
Click to expand...

Bravo 👏🏼
 
Swaby39 said:
That’s interesting since McGuane was given relentless pelters on here for doing exactly that, but it was deemed negative, safe and useless. But he was far superior to Vaulks in other areas of the game. I don’t think it helps Brannagan at all, it asks more of him than necessary.

It is an important role and I’m surprised that having had the pleasure of watching Josh McEachran that people still don’t recognise a good one when they see it - or a not so good one. Even on legs that hardly bend at the knee he could get on the ball, move teams around and play that pass that totally spun a midfield - or was at least brave enough to try it. He was elusive with his movement and could disguise what he was going to do. We’re missing that in a big way.

I always think of him when I look at our midfield now and the complete absence of somebody moving side to side looking for the ball under pressure and knows what to do with it when received. Vaulks is a hot potato midfielder and there’s a place for him in the squad but I expected a lot more when we got him.
Click to expand...

Copying Swaby's post.....but equally could have copied IoW Yellow's as well, as I'm responding to you both.....

......I think you're only looking at half the game there.

Yes McEachran, McGuane and Brannagan are better than Vaulks in terms of creativity and passing range. But Vaulks is the best of the four defensively. His defensive positioning is better, his instincts are better, and he's better in the air than any of the others. Of the others, only Brannagan can match him in the tackle. McEachran doesn't play under Rowett because his lack of mobility makes him a liability at Championship level on the defensive side of things - but even Cam & MM are not as good as Vaulks at breaking up play. And you need a midfielder at this level who is skilled in the destructive arts every bit as much as you need creators.

Not saying that Vaulks is perfect (aside from the occasional back pass lapse, I thought he was also at fault - for example - for Hull's first when alongside Matos he switched off at an inopportune time) nor that we can't find an upgrade on him either. But if we do bring in someone to take over from him and play alongside Cam, then how well they physically boss the centre of the pitch and stop opponents from playing should be the #1 recruiting criteria.
 
tonyw said:
Copying Swaby's post.....but equally could have copied IoW Yellow's as well, as I'm responding to you both.....

......I think you're only looking at half the game there.

Yes McEachran, McGuane and Brannagan are better than Vaulks in terms of creativity and passing range. But Vaulks is the best of the four defensively. His defensive positioning is better, his instincts are better, and he's better in the air than any of the others. Of the others, only Brannagan can match him in the tackle. McEachran doesn't play under Rowett because his lack of mobility makes him a liability at Championship level on the defensive side of things - but even Cam & MM are not as good as Vaulks at breaking up play. And you need a midfielder at this level who is skilled in the destructive arts every bit as much as you need creators.

Not saying that Vaulks is perfect (aside from the occasional back pass lapse, I thought he was also at fault - for example - for Hull's first when alongside Matos he switched off at an inopportune time) nor that we can't find an upgrade on him either. But if we do bring in someone to take over from him and play alongside Cam, then how well they physically boss the centre of the pitch and stop opponents from playing should be the #1 recruiting criteria.
Click to expand...
I don’t massively disagree with almost any of this, apart from the assertion that Brannagan isn’t as good as Vaulks at breaking up play - I’ve many, many times in his Oxford career seen Cameron Brannagan smashing into tackles in the middle of the park, more often than not winning the ball, or putting a cheeky foot in around our box and nicking the ball, or making a clever tactical foul, or blocking shots. I’d argue that the reason he hasn’t done it as much as Vaulks this season is simply down to the respective roles that they’ve been asked to play - Vaulks more holding, Cam more breaking/marauding forward - and that’s down to him having the skills and passing range to perform that role when Vaulks doesn’t; rather than him not being able to defend as well as WV.

Put it this way, if we signed someone twice as good as Brannagan to play the more adventurous role, and it was then down to a manager to pick either CB or WV to play the more defensive, holding, destroyer role; I bet most managers would pick Cameron.
 
Steve Gilbert said:
Vaulks is a water carrier and the way he plays allows Brannagan to be more creative. It is no coincidence that Brannagan plays better when Vaulks is in the team.
You need a Vaulks type player in the side at this level. They won’t stand out in most games but they will consistently do a job for you.
Click to expand...

Isle of Wight Yellow said:
I’d argue that the reason he hasn’t done it as much as Vaulks this season is simply down to the respective roles that they’ve been asked to play - Vaulks more holding, Cam more breaking/marauding forward - and that’s down to him having the skills and passing range to perform that role when Vaulks doesn’t; rather than him not being able to defend as well as WV.
Click to expand...
So you now agree with what I was saying about Vaulks being in the side allows Brannagan to be more adventurous due to WV holding that defensive position. If Vaulks wasn't in the side then part of Brannagan's game is taken away as he would have to be more defensive.
 
Isle of Wight Yellow said:
I don’t massively disagree with almost any of this, apart from the assertion that Brannagan isn’t as good as Vaulks at breaking up play - I’ve many, many times in his Oxford career seen Cameron Brannagan smashing into tackles in the middle of the park, more often than not winning the ball, or putting a cheeky foot in around our box and nicking the ball, or making a clever tactical foul, or blocking shots. I’d argue that the reason he hasn’t done it as much as Vaulks this season is simply down to the respective roles that they’ve been asked to play - Vaulks more holding, Cam more breaking/marauding forward - and that’s down to him having the skills and passing range to perform that role when Vaulks doesn’t; rather than him not being able to defend as well as WV.

Put it this way, if we signed someone twice as good as Brannagan to play the more adventurous role, and it was then down to a manager to pick either CB or WV to play the more defensive, holding, destroyer role; I bet most managers would pick Cameron.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree - and with your previous sentiment that Brannagan is our best player, and we'd be generally better off if we could just clone him a bunch.

I do think that Cam occasionally misses things defensively - over the course of his long career, we have seen him from time to time fail to track the right runner, or fail to fill the right space during broken passages of play - so I strongly feel that he's best in his current role i.e. a deeper-lying central midfielder with primarily creative responsibilities, playing alongside a first-and-foremost destroyer.

And whilst Vaulks is not the best breaker of play in the league by a long shot, and could be improved upon, he is the best breaker of play that we have to play alongside Cam.
 
Last edited:
Steve Gilbert said:
So you now agree with what I was saying about Vaulks being in the side allows Brannagan to be more adventurous due to WV holding that defensive position. If Vaulks wasn't in the side then part of Brannagan's game is taken away as he would have to be more defensive.
Click to expand...
I never disagreed with the type of player we need in our midfield. I disagreed with the idea that Vaulks has, overall, done a good job of it - or at least a good enough job that we shouldn’t be actively looking to upgrade on him if we do stay in the Championship
 
Isle of Wight Yellow said:
I never disagreed with the type of player we need in our midfield. I disagreed with the idea that Vaulks has, overall, done a good job of it - or at least a good enough job that we shouldn’t be actively looking to upgrade on him if we do stay in the Championship
Click to expand...
If we are in the Championship next season then we should be looking at upgrading all players across the board, obviously you won't be able to upgrade everyone but if a better CDM suddenly becomes within our reach then we should go for it.
 
Will Vaulks is guilty of making an early mistake in his career at Oxford and some made up their mind at that point. In their minds he'll never be good enough no matter what he does, and even great moments will be immediately followed up with a "Coventry Backpass" comment.

It's the Sam Long effect, or for those a little older, Matt Murphy!
 
Steve Gilbert said:
If we are in the Championship next season then we should be looking at upgrading all players across the board, obviously you won't be able to upgrade everyone but if a better CDM suddenly becomes within our reach then we should go for it.
Click to expand...
Everyone always says that when we talk about upgrading players, and it’s of course true - Real Madrid should upgrade on Mbappe and Bellingham, if they could - but it’s more nuanced than just ‘Of course we’ll take better players if we can find them.’

Certain positions need upgrading more than others: I’d take a better keeper than Cumming, a better centre back than Brown and better CM than Brannagan, but I don’t think they’re who we should be focusing on, given as you say, you can’t upgrade on everyone.

Vaulks is someone who has gone from absolutely disastrous, to poor, to average, to slightly above average. As you said, it’s an important position - and therefore one which I think can do better in.
 
Midfield is a position that we will be prioritising should we stay in this league. I think we will see 2 key players arrive in the summer all being well and some popular ones say goodbye.
 
Gregortheox said:
Midfield is a position that we will be prioritising should we stay in this league. I think we will see 2 key players arrive in the summer all being well and some popular ones say goodbye.
Click to expand...
For us to move forward then sentiment cant get in the way. Players like Long, Leigh, Harris, McEachran have all played their part to get us where we are today but we need to improve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Oxford1
  • Locked
BREAKING: Ben Woodburn to join the U's on loan
Replies
4
Views
2K
Northstandboy
Northstandboy
Ben Woodburn
12 13 14
Replies
400
Views
60K
Marked Ox
Marked Ox
Witneyoldfella
What price Nelson
Replies
8
Views
3K
Yellows1
Yellows1
Oldman159
Curtis Nelson to Cardiff
2 3 4
Replies
90
Views
17K
Berliner
Berliner
Nelson's replacement?
7 8 9
Replies
253
Views
45K
PQ
Back
Top Bottom