[Archived] Rovers Young Guns

[CAPT KAYOS]

The idea that lads can be picked up at 8yrs of age and made into something they can never be, is flawed. It's wrong. It can't be done. It's dead. It's snuffed it. It's deceased.

This I agree with Den , but moreso that its too young an age and they should let it develop naturally until the age of 15/16

[cn174]

This I agree with Den , but moreso that its too young an age and they should let it develop naturally until the age of 15/16

The thing with that is now there is less and less kids playing football, not as many junior clubs etc. So whilst it may be better in the long run for people to play with their mates, in a local team etc for longer, there is now less opportunity to do so. Of course this isn't just a Rovers problem.

At Rovers, the academy was designed at the back of Roy Hodgson's reign, he had some 'different' ideas, but one that sticks out which sort of relates to what you said..

at the back of the academy there was plans for a space, with walls around it, and some mini goals etc. For kids to just play in by themselves, with no coaching, as they would play if they were just hanging round with their mates, playing 5-a-side, wally etc. I don't know if it ever got built, or if it was, it was never used to my knowledge.

[Sparky Marky]

Abolute garbage...by the time they are 15/16, they're past the point of potential development. How is it that all the best clubs in Europe have kids from the age of 8 in academies? Steven Gerrard joined Liverpool at 9. Rooney joined Everton at around the same age...Milan, Bayern...they all have kids from age of 8 and they produce homegrown talent....

Blackburn have a funny selection process. They tend to opt for kids who are big for their age and this bodes well for results in their academy games...but not long term success, by which time the skillfull kids are at "lesser clubs".

I have experience of the Academy system and Blackburn is generally regarded as a 1st class set-up albeit hard to get into if you're kid is small.

[Sparky Marky]

[

At Rovers, the academy was designed at the back of Roy Hodgson's reign, he had some 'different' ideas, but one that sticks out which sort of relates to what you said..

at the back of the academy there was plans for a space, with walls around it, and some mini goals etc. For kids to just play in by themselves, with no coaching, as they would play if they were just hanging round with their mates, playing 5-a-side, wally etc. I don't know if it ever got built, or if it was, it was never used to my knowledge.

It seems that Woy was ahead of his time then, because this is the kind of thing that Academies are encouraging more of at the moment....street football, with no coaches etc....it's supposed to allow the kids to come out of themselves and organise everythig with each other......4 a side is the big thing at the moment at Academy level....its a directive from the FA.

[LeftWinger]

......4 a side is the big thing at the moment at Academy level....its a directive from the FA.

4 a side is the way forward. When kids play 7 or a 11 a-side from a young age - some get very few touches of the ball. 4 a side allows many more touches - and is a great way of improving technique.

[cn174]

Blackburn have a funny selection process. They tend to opt for kids who are big for their age and this bodes well for results in their academy games...but not long

Ah yes! It has been that way for a long long time though. And it is a selection process for quite a lot of clubs, which is strange because there's no real evidence that being tall makes you a better footballer in the long run. The one thing I remember noticing quite a lot was how much more comfortable on the ball players from certain teams were, especially Man U.

[den]

Abolute garbage...by the time they are 15/16, they're past the point of potential development. How is it that all the best clubs in Europe have kids from the age of 8 in academies? Steven Gerrard joined Liverpool at 9. Rooney joined Everton at around the same age...Milan, Bayern...they all have kids from age of 8 and they produce homegrown talent....

This IS the point though. Gerrard and Rooney would still be the top players that they are, even without an academy. Ala Douglas, Clayton etc, etc.

Milan, Bayern produced talent before the expensive academy system didn't they, at the expense of the other clubs who couldn't compete with them for the best kids. That's what it's all about - getting the best lads into the club.

[Sparky Marky]

You're spot on about that.!

United's attitude in Academy games is that as long as they have the best player on the pitch, it doesn't matter if they lose 10-0.

Right from the start, their kids are given a ball and told to do skills, step overs etc......that's why traditionally they do crap against other clubs at academy level. Their kids are small and skillfull.

[Sparky Marky]

Den...you think Rooney would have made his league debut at 16 if the former system had have been in place? Its all about getting them into the first team fringes at 15/16 nowadays....this would never have happened before.

Before the academies came along, how many 15/16/17 year olds played 1st team football or got near?.....compare that to now...they're coming along all the time even at Premiership level (Vaughn, Rooney, Hobbs, Fabregas, half Arsenals team)....If the kids are playing against the best players in the country from 8-9, surely they will be better players sooner.

[den]

Den...you think Rooney would have made his league debut at 16 if the former system had have been in place? Its all about getting them into the first team fringes at 15/16 nowadays....this would never have happened before.

Before the academies came along, how many 15/16/17 year olds played 1st team football or got near?.....compare that to now...they're coming along all the time even at Premiership level (Vaughn, Rooney, Hobbs, Fabregas, half Arsenals team)....If the kids are playing against the best players in the country from 8-9, surely they will be better players sooner.

To the point in your first paragraph - yes, I do think he would have done.

To the second paragraph, it's not the academies that's providing these lads is it? Arsenal are buying them in.

[Sparky Marky]

I'm not commenting on arsenal's buying policy, I'm simply saying that 15 years ago, you could never have a team as young as Arsenal's 2nd side, consistantly playing such quality football and beating good strong Premiership sides.

It has to be because of the way they are raised in football.

[den]

I'm not commenting on arsenal's buying policy, I'm simply saying that 15 years ago, you could never have a team as young as Arsenal's 2nd side, consistantly playing such quality football and beating good strong Premiership sides.

It has to be because of the way they are raised in football.

15 years ago, pre academy, you could have had the same situation if Man Utd had bought all the best talent from around the world.

Well, of course coaching makes a difference. All I've ever said, is that the academy is of not much greater merit to Blackburn Rovers, than the old A and B teams were.

[CAPT KAYOS]

It has to be because of the way they are raised in football.

No it doesn't its because they are exceptionally good players

Herding them into an academy at thje age of 8/9 etc is no good IMO and dis associates and counts out some young un's as proved by your own words

'I have experience of the Academy system and Blackburn is generally regarded as a 1st class set-up albeit hard to get into if you're kid is small'

- so if you are small you will generally be predjudiced against- good that don't you think

its the grassroots of football (your parks and playing fields etc and getting the players back interested) that needs looking at with the excessive amounts of money awash in the game I'm sure something could be done

'Before the academies came along, how many 15/16/17 year olds played 1st team football or got near?.....compare that to now...they're coming along all the time even at Premiership level (Vaughn, Rooney, Hobbs, Fabregas, half Arsenals team)....If the kids are playing against the best players in the country from 8-9, surely they will be better players sooner.'

The thing here is money wasn't awash as it is now and neither where squads as big - I'd hazard a guess though % wise there won't be much difference.

Abolute garbage...by the time they are 15/16, they're past the point of potential development.

It seems that Woy was ahead of his time then, because this is the kind of thing that Academies are encouraging more of at the moment....street football, with no coaches etc....it's supposed to allow the kids to come out of themselves and organise everythig with each other......4 a side is the big thing at the moment at Academy level....its a directive from the FA.

Seem to be contradicting yourself here with the 'Absolute Garbage' response then seeing as you have 'experience'

Wouldn't say he was ahead of his time, probably just realised its about gettting the fundamentals right first - before trying to be a flash/ tricky player etc - that comes as you mature

Everybody learns differently and at different levels - playing football needs to be enjoyed in my book and letting kids develop 'naturally' will help more than the disciplined mollycoddling nature installed at the academies.

As I have asked before - do trainees still clean the boots of the 'first team squad' etc or clean the changing rooms?

[Dave S]

15 years ago, pre academy, you could have had the same situation if Man Utd had bought all the best talent from around the world.

Well, of course coaching makes a difference. All I've ever said, is that the academy is of not much greater merit to Blackburn Rovers, than the old A and B teams were.

I have hardly posted on this thread because I agree with most of what Den has posted.

I think the main problem with the Academy system is that the origional idea was to have a centre of excellence run by the FA.

This was superceded by the idea that approximately 20 clubs would have Academies. These clubs would attract and nurture all the best young players from Britain and Ireland. This would give young players better coaching than they would have had in previous generations. Academies would effectively be the Elite.

For some reason more and more clubs were given Academy status with each club being prepared to spend money on specialist fascilities. Possibly for fear of being left behind.

There is now no real advantage to having an Academy from the origional A and B youth systems. OK Rovers will probably attract players over lower league clubs. But there is no real advantage when it comes to fascilities and training compared to other Academies.

The second major problem is that the Academies attempt to attract players from outside the traditional GB and Eire catchment further defeating the origional idea of home grown talent.

This is where the likes of Arsenal step in they have bought a great deal of their young talent from other youth systems around Europe. This Youth team as Wenger puts it cost more than our first team.

[cn174]

The second major problem is that the Academies attempt to attract players from outside the traditional GB and Eire catchment further defeating the origional idea of home grown talent.

This is where the likes of Arsenal step in they have bought a great deal of their young talent from other youth systems around Europe. This Youth team as Wenger puts it cost more than our first team.

This is a problem created by the FA themselves. No player under the age of 16 can live more than 1.5 hours away from where the academy is. I think that it was intended that it'd mean clubs would have to look more locally, but it has turned out to be more than a restraint. For example, it would have meant that Beckham would never have been picked up by Man U. So because they are geographically restrained within the UK, that is why most have looked outside the UK to bring lads in from abroad.

It also potentially means that there are some areas of the country which might have some very good players but they're out of teams catchment areas and so don't get seen.

[AggyBlue]

How's Rostyn Griffiths doing, I thought he might have made the bench during our midfield crisis.

He's always looked more than handy whenever I've seen him.

[Moppy]

We bought Jansen from Crystal palace for 4.1 mill.

Young guns well weve got Martin Olsson coming through and yes we bought him but weve nurtured him and we are making him into a good player with our facilities and we have young Mamadi Keita coming through who looks a decent prospect. I also think Treacy is a good player a winger with a good cross (Dont ask MGP lol) and this was apparent when he was on the bench last year against Reading which obviously was shared by Hughes. I also believe Nolan had a game against Nancy last year in which he came on as a sub for todd i think and did well and isnt Nolan an irish u21? Gunnar Nielsen who weve bought is looking a decent prospect too and only Bobby Downes and the facilities can make him better which im sure you would agree with, i also noticed Zak Jones,Frank Fielding are out on loan and Fielding is playing brilliantly not sure about Jones though. Paul Gallagher is also at Preston and even though hes 23 is still someone with a chance of being a good first team player for Rovers.

clicky

So much for Keita being a promising young player. See the footnote at the bottom of this article.

[LeftWinger]

Not sure if it's been mentioned - but Rovers academy are on MUTV this weekend on Saturday at 11am for anyone who gets it.

[sussexrover]

Interesting listening to Mark Bowen on Talksport this morning - when he was asked about youngsters coming through the one he singled out as having very high hopes for was Frank Fielding.

General concensus seems to be that he has been doing pretty well down at Wycombe.

[Lee]

I expected to see him named in the England under 21 squad to be honest. Maybe next time if they've a friendly match.

[rover6]

The academies will be of no greater benefit to Blackburn Rovers if the mentality of the management doesn't chance.

If the youth players see Morten Gamst Pedersen playing like Keith Gillespie wearing his boots on the wrong feet or Aaron Mokoena jumping with all the agility of present day Bobby Robson to compete for headers, and these guys are picked game in game out, then they will consciously or subconsiously think - what the heck, I've got no chance. Keith Treacy is judged on one game but Gamst is crud every game. No sense - just prejudice.

And seeing as the reserves play once every other blue moon and when they do play, they have to invariably put up with a pitch like a pond against a bunch of neanderthals - there's little chance of anything good coming out of the system. How can you judge a player on a reserve game when there is no form or momentum to speak of. Everyone knows a successful team needs continuity, confidence and stability - the reserves have none of that because they play infrequently and the team is constantly chopping and changing.

And then there's U18 players who are deemed not to meet the standard of Gary Stopforth of Clitheroe fame - but then they leave to play for Hamburg's reserve side, having trained with their Champions League stars.

Just a total mess. There is no point having an academy. Rovers should save the money.

[USABlue]

Should we re-name this thread to Rovers Young water Pistols?

[rover6]

No, that makes the academy sound fun and useful in warm conditions.

[philipl]

I am utterly confused. Granted there appear to be things not as they should be at the Academy but is rover6 talking about watching the reserves and academy sides and from personal conversations with the players and staff?

[den]

I am utterly confused. Granted there appear to be things not as they should be at the Academy but is rover6 talking about watching the reserves and academy sides and from personal conversations with the players and staff?

I'm not sure Philip.

After all that's been debated, he still comes back to the argument that the lads are good enough and the academy staff should be sacked.