[Archived] Rovers Young Guns

[den]

Just because McEveley had more first team appearances and we probably earned more revenue off his sale does not necessarily make him a better player than Taylor.

No-one says it did.

McEveley and Taylor were both at Ewood at the same time. Jay was picked for the first team, while Taylor wasn't. Better ask the manager at the time why he picked Jay ahead of Andy. No doubt he thought that Jay was more equipped for first team football, same as me.

[CrazyIvan]

No-one says it did.

McEveley and Taylor were both at Ewood at the same time. Jay was picked for the first team, while Taylor wasn't. Better ask the manager at the time why he picked Jay ahead of Andy. No doubt he thought that Jay was more equipped for first team football, same as me.

Probably because McEveley was bought from Everton and was supposed to be a decent defender whereas Taylor came through the ranks.

[den]

Probably because McEveley was bought from Everton and was supposed to be a decent defender whereas Taylor came through the ranks.

McEveley was released from Everton's academy and joined Rovers academy.

[Exiled in Toronto]

I don't think I've ever seen a player make his debut and he looked 'ready'. Beattie and Dunn, to name two who ended up clocking a good number of Premiership games, both looked little boys lost on their debuts.

Also interesting that Sir AF gave Simpson 8 league starts last year - 8 for the eventual champions - and yet after one premiership game for us everyone's saying he ain't up to it. Maybe Fergie takes 8 games to see what our own experts spot in the warm up.

[American]

And that is a key part of what Den misses. Those 8 starts didn't cost them a thing, and made him a more valuable commodity. Players of his ilk tend to go on loan to Championship clubs where they get lesser experience.

[Hughesy]

Simpson's debut was very promising for me. Yes he got lost in space one or two times, but he was up against Arsenal and overall I felt he equiped himself very well. The lad has pace, isnt afraid to get stuck in, and also can pass/ cross a decent ball.

Treacy is also showing signs of improvement which will be an interesting one to follow.

I think under Ince, Youth will be given much more of a chance to blossom, abit like at Boro

[den]

And that is a key part of what Den misses. Those 8 starts didn't cost them a thing, and made him a more valuable commodity. Players of his ilk tend to go on loan to Championship clubs where they get lesser experience.

Your views on Andy Taylor American?

Tell you what , you and Rover6 list Andy Taylor's qualities, that make him a Premier league full back and how you base those opinions, seeing that neither of you can have seen much of him?

[joey_big_nose]

For me Treacy has to start. Pedersen was actually reasonable against Arsenal - his delivery was a lot better - but we need more pace.

[American]

Your views on Andy Taylor American?

Tell you what , you and Rover6 list Andy Taylor's qualities, that make him a Premier league full back and how you base those opinions, seeing that neither of you can have seen much of him?

I like how you never address the point. The point I was making was less about the specific player and more about the philosophy.

Then again, you think most players are crap, so why should we be playing anyone except RSC?

[den]

I like how you never address the point. The point I was making was less about the specific player and more about the philosophy.

Then again, you think most players are crap, so why should we be playing anyone except RSC?

There is a point. Rover6 was specifically talking about Andy Taylor, who wasn't good enough for the prem.

As for the specific philosophy, would you want all the academy lads playing in the first team to potentially increase their value, or not? If not, why Andy Taylor? What does he have that others don't? What's unique about Taylor?

[DingleBaiter]

I like how you never address the point. The point I was making was less about the specific player and more about the philosophy.

Then again, you think most players are crap, so why should we be playing anyone except RSC?

Den

Did Andy Taylor boff your sister by any chance?

[den]

Den

Did Andy Taylor boff your sister by any chance?

Would you be coherent enough to join a discussion?

[DingleBaiter]

Would you be coherent enough to join a discussion?

Depends what the subject is; if it's one about judging the merits of two players at different stages of development against each other with your views clearly set in favour of one, whilst disparaging others opinions based on the fact you're probably seen more of said players than someone else - I would politely decline thanks, and bow to your greater knowledge.

It's almost like a fan claiming to be a better supporter than another, it's a spurious & biased argument based solely on criteria to suit an agenda.

You do seem to have a downer on young Taylor, and IMO there's a reason for everything. The fact you act like he's done something to upset you and your avoidance of the opportunity to explain if there really is an explanation for your evident dislike of the guy still stands.

IMO McEveley was a decent player rated by one manager, Taylor was rated more for future development - that he didn't 'kick on' to achieve - under another manager (who'd also signed a far better left back than was around under McEv's times) is just about how far it goes. I simply don't think the two players stand up to direct comparison - it's like saying who would be the better Tory leader/PM, Thatcher or Cameron, I'm sure there was a point in time when they were both around together, albeit at completely different stages in their careers.

After all, it's down to opinions, and there isn't a way to objectively consider the two players against each other - not even first team chances, transfer fees, etc., as not matter what is said, you'd probably not concede to anything other than your opinion being the one truth.

[den]

Depends what the subject is;

Go back to rover6's post HERE, then follow the discussion and you'll find out. It has very little to do with McEveley and Taylor as a comparison.

You might have been better to read that before wading in.

You might also have realised that in fact, I'm the one supporting the club in their decisions with regard to the releasing of youngsters who wouldn't, in the opinion of the club, make the required grade. There is absolutely NO evidence that they released anyone who would have made a premier league player.

Still waiting for American to say whether rovers should have played Taylor more often, in order to hopefully get his value up.

[DingleBaiter]

Go back to rover6's post HERE, then follow the discussion and you'll find out. It has very little to do with McEveley and Taylor as a comparison.

You might have been better to read that before wading in.

You might also have realised that in fact, I'm the one supporting the club in their decisions with regard to the releasing of youngsters who wouldn't, in the opinion of the club, make the required grade. There is absolutely NO evidence that they released anyone who would have made a premier league player.

Still waiting for American to say whether rovers should have played Taylor more often, in order to hopefully get his value up.

I'd read it all previously, but it all went a bit haywire TBH.

Anyways, your opinions, valuable as they are just that - away from the specifics of this particular debate, I DO agree with your underlying point about backing the Academy, and their judgement. Sometimes it's not simply a case of if they are talented enough, sometimes they may have just lost their hunger. Luckily we seem to have caught young Treacy before he went the way of Sergio.

I'm always wary of naming players as the next big thing, but we've picked up some better prospects in the last couple of seasons IMO - it's just the 'development hell' of that step up between their first contract into Reserves into first team, for which I'm optimistic more under Ince these days. He's already brought belief and hope to Treacy & Judge it seems, which ultimately bodes well for the medium to long term for the Academy to hit its re-focussed aims.

Just out of interest - no ulterior motive for asking that is, other than listening to others views - are you going to reserves tonight, and who do you think of the current Academy (scholars or pros) do you think/hope will come through?

[67splitscreen]

-are you going to reserves tonight, and who do you think of the current Academy (scholars or pros) do you think/hope will come through?

Gent's do me and others a favour, Can we have some feedback on JSC if plays of course:D

[DingleBaiter]

Gent's do me and others a favour, Can we have some feedback on JSC if plays of course:D

He's down to start - back to his day job as a footballer, instead of being Carlos's translator LOL

[92er]

He's down to start - back to his day job as a footballer, instead of being Carlos's translator LOL

And he's partnering Fowler.

Simpson's debut was very promising for me. Yes he got lost in space one or two times, but he was up against Arsenal and overall I felt he equiped himself very well. The lad has pace, isnt afraid to get stuck in, and also can pass/ cross a decent ball.

It will be quite interesting to see how Simpson works out. I thought he looked decent defensively-until I realsied he had gone missing for the 2nd goal. I suspect the more he plays, the more his weaknesses will be found out.

I also thought his distribution was often poor-a big kick which often didn't find a team mate.

[den]

It will be quite interesting to see how Simpson works out. I thought he looked decent defensively-until I realsied he had gone missing for the 2nd goal. I suspect the more he plays, the more his weaknesses will be found out.

I also thought his distribution was often poor-a big kick which often didn't find a team mate.

Haven't been at all impressed with Simpson. I'm not sure what he offers. Doesn't offer a threat going forward and his passing is ordinary to say the least. Another Championship player to my way of thinking.

Bert MK2 is a far better bet.

[American]

Haven't been at all impressed with Simpson. I'm not sure what he offers. Doesn't offer a threat going forward and his passing is ordinary to say the least. Another Championship player to my way of thinking.

Bert MK2 is a far better bet.

And obviously you've seen him play more than Fergie who gave him 8 appearances!

[American]

And that is a key part of what Den misses. Those 8 starts didn't cost them a thing, and made him a more valuable commodity. Players of his ilk tend to go on loan to Championship clubs where they get lesser experience.

Where was I responding to 6's post? Where was I discussing Taylor? Sorry I don't hang out online all day to respond to your blinkered posts (pot calling!).

I'm not saying Taylor deserves a chance more than anyone else, I'm saying the philosophy is wrong and that with the right situations, and the right players, there is either more money to be made, or more home grown players to add to the squad.

Derbs is my example. You've said in the past that he isn't Premiership standard. I bet you we could get at least 3 million for him at this point. The only reason he was given a chance was desperation and injuries.

(On a side note, I'd say that overall this is one of the most interesting discussions on this board. I respect your opinion, Den, I just have a different philosophy, having seen it work in other sports.)

[den]

Derbs is my example. You've said in the past that he isn't Premiership standard. I bet you we could get at least 3 million for him at this point. The only reason he was given a chance was desperation and injuries.

There's the difference American.

The turn over of academy players is quite prolific. Now, as ever, when a youngster has outgrown the academy and made it into the reserves, the club must make a decision on whether the lad is going to make the grade as a premier league player. If they don't think he's going to make it, they must release him, - for the sake of the player and the club. Continual reserve team games are no good to either party.

In the case of derbs, he had shown enough in the academy and in the reserves, to suggest he had a chance. That was the right decision by the club, wasn't it? In the case of Taylor, which is who I'm discussing with rover6, the club decided that he wasn't going to make the grade, and rightly so IMO.

Rover6's opinion seems to be, that these lads such as Taylor, would bring in more cash, or would make better players with more first team games behind them. I reckon that the club can't possibly operate that way. They must decide early in their career, keep them, or release them. The club must decide "yes" they can make it, or "no" they will fall short. Still don't see where the club has got that wrong.

[Majiball]

The turn over of academy players is quite prolific. Now, as ever, when a youngster has outgrown the academy and made it into the reserves, the club must make a decision on whether the lad is going to make the grade as a premier league player. If they don't think he's going to make it, they must release him, - for the sake of the player and the club. Continual reserve team games are no good to either party.

Languishing in the reserves or to quote someone on here "the elephants graveyard" is no good to player development. Once you reach the reserves and do well where do you go where does the next challenge come from? The only two options are to stay at the club and train as normal or go out on loan.

Players need the challenge to see if they can rise to the occasion so to speak. But the opportunity must be right, the player has to have a good chance of passing the test. Confidence is a word well used in the game and rightly so, putting a developing player in a situation where he stands a good chance of failing is a confidence breaker.

I've read all about the debate, should we give our kids a chance? Yes of course but it must be right from all angles. Its not all about money its about whats right for all parties. On a personal level I am encouraged this year to see us loaning players to lower league teams, it fulfils the criteria of all parties and takes the risk away from Rovers.

[den]

Good point Majiball. Loans are the option for youngsters who still might have a chance.

What a state of affairs though, when the Premier league clubs can't provide a suitable platform for the kids after their academy education.

[Majiball]

It is a sorry state of affairs indeed. I know the FA are doing what they deem best for the education of young footballers, but it still does not solve the problem in later development.

I have said it on here before but I would like to see U18's league become U20's, it would raise the standard and still give late developers a chance.

Rovers would do well to establish links with clubs in our area, we have plenty. In Spain the top teams have there B teams who play in the league set-up, it has advantages and disadvantages. One main advantage is that you can bed youngsters in competitive football whilst still training them as you want.

U18's and Reserve level needs looking at by the FA, its a dead end for players. The jump to premier league level is too big for most, they need to be eased in. The trouble is for a club like Rovers we cannot afford to blood kid's for the sake of it, Treacy is a good example of what can happen when it goes wrong (Coventry). strong links with lower level clubs aids us as much as them.