https://www.nottscountyfc.co.uk/news/2021/june/jake-reeves-departs-100521/

I hope they would be ££££££ payable to Notts for the release?

Do you think that Sutton will be his destination?

Certainly a shame to lose him, he's a decent player and covers a lot of ground. However, for me it's not an unreplaceable loss.

There were people calling for Reeves to be put into Doyle's role, but he doesn't have the passing range to be able to do that. He can play as one of the other 2 midfielders with licence to go forward, but again his instinct was to pass sideways and backwards. His main strengths in my mind was that he has lots of legs and technically decent. Those aren't qualities that are that rare at this level, though.

Big rebuild for the midfield this year. So far only JOB offered a contract, Doyle offered assistant manager with limited playing time. 

3 minutes ago, Super_Danny_Allsopp said:

However, for me it's not an unreplaceable loss.

To give this a bit of context. When asked at the start of May, 3 out of 4 of us said we would let Reeves go. 

Fast forward a few weeks after we played well under IB, we were as a whole about 50/50 about keeping him or letting him go. In summary, we weren't too fussed either way. 

I thought Reeves form picked up once he’d got to grips with IB style. I think he was more suited to a three-man midfield and pushing him further forward meant he couldn’t dilly-dally on the ball as much as he did earlier in the season. I think he could’ve more than done a job for us next season.

If Doyle is going to be used a lot less to focus on coaching, then we’ll need at least 3 CMs in now. Possibly even 4 if we’re going to play a 3-man midfield for the majority of the season.

As for which club he's off too. Maybe Sutton, but I can't imagine they'd actually be able to offer that much more than what he was on here though… Colchester, Stevenage and Leyton Orient also possible options if he want’s a move back to London.

Could be a blessing in disguise to be honest. Quite pleased that we can now have an almost complete rebuild in midfield and put more focus into that area. A strong, mobile midfield is half the battle to getting out of this league.

57 minutes ago, Super_Danny_Allsopp said:

To give this a bit of context. When asked at the start of May, 3 out of 4 of us said we would let Reeves go. 

Fast forward a few weeks after we played well under IB, we were as a whole about 50/50 about keeping him or letting him go. In summary, we weren't too fussed either way. 

Nailed it. A player who has performed better in the last ten games, just like the rest of the team (apart from Rawlinson!)

You could blame tactical instructions from Ardley, but really he signed becuase of Ardley as they worked together previously, so he knew what was coming. 

I trust IB has a replacement ready to go. One that is stronger in the tackle and more positive thinking in his play.

 

3 minutes ago, Fozzy said:

Could be a blessing in disguise to be honest. Quite pleased that we can now have an almost complete rebuild in midfield and put more focus into that area. A strong, mobile midfield is half the battle to getting out of this league.

Taller would be helpful too. JOB, Griffiths, Doyle, Reeves. Have to have had the smallest central midfield in the league. 

Announce Sonny Carey please... 

1 hour ago, gtownjohnno said:

Announce Sonny Carey please... 

Will be going higher up the leagues. 

i see it as a loss, i think hes a good midfielder and we need to replace him wisely.

It's escapable that he wants to play in the Football League, I can't fault him for that but at the same time it does feel like a negative mass movement with us losing a lot of key players. A lot of which have settled in and almost become regular faces around Meadow Lane. I felt Jake Reeves would be a ready-made replacement for the long term vision of the club, being exactly the time of player who can take on the touch that Michael Doyle has been doing in recent years.

Jim O'Brien extending his stay would be a positive, as he's an experienced head and someone who can help made players feel welcome.

I have faith that we can recruit well, but I feel this will be a constant issue at this level unless we tie players down earlier when they're happy. You obviously can't escape someone who wants a Football League clause in their contract but building a camp of players who are committed to returning Notts to the Football League would make a huge difference with contending for promotion.

I'm disappointed, but not with Jake Reeves or Notts - more due to the feeling that we don't quite have that steady core of players.

It's a big loss, good player who had a brief struggle with his performances but came out better as did the squad. If any believes this isn't a loss, than I hope they're ready to give any new signings the time to settle.

 

 

Underrated battling midfielder, he can be replaced but he will be a loss.

Lets hope whoever fills his empty position gives 80% of what Jake Reeves did.

If Notts recruits well and offers the new arrivals good contracts, rebuilding shouldn't be that hard but I will state that I feel Jake Reeves will be missed.

Find the right players, 2/3 years should be the standard length.

Giving Reeves a single year, seems this would be the case had Notts not gained promotion. I think only injury prone and aging players should be given a single year, having the option to extend helps the building process. Issue with football today, is the mass overturn of players every single season. Notts built special things in 70s by keeping a settled squad of players.

Time will tell how much of a loss Jake Reeves will be, yet he has been a big part of this past season and Notts needs to recruit steady performers of similar ability.

Shame he's gone, we could have used him next season, but he must be really desperate to play in League Two if he's signed for them. At least he can afford some new trousers now.

As he had a clause in his contract, I highly doubt there was a fee involved. Neal Ardley said he only thought we'd get him if we went up, and this is the price we have to pay for that. 

16 hours ago, DangerousSausage said:

As he had a clause in his contract, I highly doubt there was a fee involved.

Commonly a club and player would agree a release fee, so I would assume it was for something but probably not much.

It's a shame to see him gone as I thought he was a brilliant player for us who helped us a lot.

I've got over it, we still have Rodrigues and he might find himself playing more of a role in midfield than behind the strikers/wing.

I felt sucker punched by his departure and I do think he's a very good player, I just feel now we can sign someone a lot more creative and forward thinking.