Academy & U21s

[RV Blue]

37 minutes ago, Parsonblue said:

Strange game at Brockhall this afternoon.  4-0 up at half-time and coasting against a very young Everton side.  We missed numerous chances to increase the lead but failed to take them.  We then got very sloppy with our passing and marking and Hilton, who is usually so reliable, made a couple of horrendous errors as Everton almost snatched a draw at the end.  

Like the first team it was a game of two halves.  First half we looked what we were - a vastly experienced side playing against a very young side as Everton fielded a number of their Under-18 team.  Second half we got very careless and started to overplay with the result that mistakes crept in.

I thought Danny Graham worked hard up front and held the ball up and tried to play in the youngsters around him.   However, he was a little careless in front of goal.  Richie Smallwood did likewise in midfield although he missed a gilt edged opportunity to add a fifth goal.

Joe Rankin-Costello and John Buckley were both excellent and Everton struggled to contain them.

We had a new trialist at right-back - Timi Sobowale from Manchester City.

Cup games are all about getting through to the next round - which we did, but boy did we make hard work of it at the end.

Turns out Hilton isn’t our saviour ?

[bluebruce]

6 hours ago, JoeH said:

Sobowale is a new one. Last known at Manchester City Under 18's, either signed for us and unannounced or its a trial.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/18001072.rovers-take-man-city-youngster-trial-given-defensive-injuries/

This article also mentions that they are being careful with Butterworth, rather than 'first team' players holding him back as you suggested earlier.

[JacknOry]

Think there is some confusion as to what a reserve side is there for.  

Its primary purpose is to postively effect our first team.  Whether thats to bring through academy players or provide fitness,  recouperation or simply some minutes for fringe players, is up to the managers.  

Winning leagues and points are all secondary.  Its nice for sure,  but beneffiting the first team is by far and away the priority. 

We have a squad of first team players, some cannot make the team,  others need fitness etc. Mols and the rest will get their chance if they prove themselves good enough over time ala Travis.  

As for Chapman being signed for the first team,  go read TMs interview when he signed him.  

Edited October 29, 2019 by JacknOry

[Stuart]

Just now, JacknOry said:

Think there is some confusion as to what a reserve side is there for.  

Its primary purpose is to postively effect our first team.  Whether thats to bring through academy players or provide fitness,  recouperation or simply some minutes for fringe players, is up to the managers.  

Winning leagues and points are all secondary.  Its nice for sure,  but beneffiting the first team is by far and away the priority. 

We have a squad of first team players, some cannot make the team,  others need fitness etc. Mols and the rest will get their chance if they prove themselves good enough over time ala Travis.  

As for Chapman being signed for the first team,  go read TMs interview when he signed him.  

I agree with this but I do not class Smallwood as someone who should be taking a spot from someone else - in either squad.

[JacknOry]

Just now, Stuart said:

I agree with this but I do not class Smallwood as someone who should be taking a spot from someone else - in either squad.

Well,  im in agreement there. Just saying its down to the managers how they use the reserve side/games in how it benefits the first team squad.  Whether they make the right decisions is another kettle of fish. 

[Stuart]

Just now, JacknOry said:

Well,  im in agreement there. Just saying its down to the managers how they use the reserve side/games in how it benefits the first team squad.  Whether they make the right decisions is another kettle of fish. 

The only extra dimension I would add is that the U23s need to stay in the top division to be able to better develop players so there is an element of team progression as well as individuals.

[JacknOry]

Just now, Stuart said:

The only extra dimension I would add is that the U23s need to stay in the top division to be able to better develop players so there is an element of team progression as well as individuals.

True,  its a balancing act.  Just trying to curb joe on his opinion that it should only be used for kids that have not played for the 1st team. 

Primarily,  it is there to benefit our first team.  Kids,  fringe players or maybe even Ben Gladwin one day. 

[Stuart]

Just now, JacknOry said:

True,  its a balancing act.  Just trying to curb joe on his opinion that it should only be used for kids that have not played for the 1st team. 

Primarily,  it is there to benefit our first team.  Kids,  fringe players or maybe even Ben Gladwin one day. 

Let’s not get carried away!

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Just now, JacknOry said:

True,  its a balancing act.  Just trying to curb joe on his opinion that it should only be used for kids that have not played for the 1st team. 

Primarily,  it is there to benefit our first team.  Kids,  fringe players or maybe even Ben Gladwin one day. 

There's more chance of Lord Lucan playing for Rovers U-21's.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, JacknOry said:

Think there is some confusion as to what a reserve side is there for.  

It's not a reserves side. Its a Development Squad AKA the Under 23's. A part of our Academy Set Up.

[Guest]

My personal view is unchanged, I don't think a group of players in Harry Chapman, Jacob Davenport, Sam Hart and Dominic Samuel should be consistently keeping our academy talents out of THEIR own side. Between those four they have over 200 SENIOR appearances. There is no Under 21's anymore, so after age 18, players like Jalil Saadi and Isaac Whitehall only have the Under 23's to strive towards, and when they struggle to get any game time because first team senior footballers with experience are taking the place of someone like Stefan Mols in the starting XI, I think its a crying shame.

This is a Category One Academy not producing Category One Academy talents. It hasn't been consistently doing so for a while.
Connor Mahoney & Callum Wright two prime examples of players who could be and could've been massive for us, but we let them slip through the cracks. 

I just don't agree that we should continue to hinder our own academy to suit the playing time of a lad who whilst talented, clearly isn't good enough for our first team (else TM would be giving him sub appearances at least). I like Harry Chapman, I do, and as I've said previously it would be great for him to prove me wrong, but clearly he's not seen as any better than Joe Rankin-Costello, who now gets sub spots in the first team ahead of him. 

[Parsonblue]

With respect, I think you are missing an important point Joe.  The Under-23 team is not a separate club so players at that level don't have THEIR own team.  The Academy and the Under-23's have one sole aim which is to help with development of players that will aid the progress of the senior team.  It is why the rules of Premier League 2 allow for a certain number of over-age players in Under-23 football so that players coming back from injury or players not getting regular first team football can get 90 minutes of competitive football. 

The Lancashire Senior Cup, of course, is not an age-limited competition which is why you often get senior players appearing in that competition.  Yesterday was unusual because Everton are playing PSV Under-21 in the International Cup today, hence a number of their Under-18's were drafted into their team whilst their Seniors were in Cup action last night.

The likes of Ben Brereton, Jacob Davenport and Harry Chapman are all young enough to be involved in Under-23 football and if not getting regular football for the senior team I would expect them to be turning out for the Under-23's.  Dominic Samuel has been able to aid his recovery from long term injury by playing for the Under-23's so that has benefited both the player and the club.

I've watched the club's second string for the best part of 60 years now and the aim has always been the same - to prepare players to step into the senior team when required.  Doesn't matter what name the competition goes by that aim is still the same.

[JacknOry]

3 hours ago, JoeH said:

It's not a reserves side. Its a Development Squad AKA the Under 23's. A part of our Academy Set Up.

Whatever a reserve side is called these days, its purpose is the same.

[Amo]

How are players like Chapman, Graham supposed to keep their match sharpness if they don't play in the U-23s?

[bluebruce]

6 hours ago, Amo said:

How are players like Chapman, Graham supposed to keep their match sharpness if they don't play in the U-23s?

He doesn't care. He has clearly stated he has no alternative plan for them.

[Guest]

15 hours ago, bluebruce said:

He doesn't care. He has clearly stated he has no alternative plan for them.

a) I wouldn't have signed Harry Chapman
b) If he's not good enough then sell him or loan him out
c) Use him from the bench for the first team
d) Play Harry Chapman for the 23's occasionally, or every other week (not every game)

For me the answer isn't:

c) Limit Stefan Mols, Jack Vale and others by playing Harry Chapman for the Under 23's every week. He was signed to our first team, hasn't come through our academy, and should be at least making the bench for Tony Mowbray. It's a sad state of affairs when promising talents like Stefan Mols are stifled because of poor management and a bad transfer window.

[Guest]

On 30/10/2019 at 09:11, Parsonblue said:

With respect, I think you are missing an important point Joe.  The Under-23 team is not a separate club so players at that level don't have THEIR own team.  The Academy and the Under-23's have one sole aim which is to help with development of players that will aid the progress of the senior team.  It is why the rules of Premier League 2 allow for a certain number of over-age players in Under-23 football so that players coming back from injury or players not getting regular first team football can get 90 minutes of competitive football. 

The Lancashire Senior Cup, of course, is not an age-limited competition which is why you often get senior players appearing in that competition.  Yesterday was unusual because Everton are playing PSV Under-21 in the International Cup today, hence a number of their Under-18's were drafted into their team whilst their Seniors were in Cup action last night.

 The likes of Ben Brereton, Jacob Davenport and Harry Chapman are all young enough to be involved in Under-23 football and if not getting regular football for the senior team I would expect them to be turning out for the Under-23's.  Dominic Samuel has been able to aid his recovery from long term injury by playing for the Under-23's so that has benefited both the player and the club.

I've watched the club's second string for the best part of 60 years now and the aim has always been the same - to prepare players to step into the senior team when required.  Doesn't matter what name the competition goes by that aim is still the same.

Harry Chapman isn't coming back from injury, he's not been injured for three months. And it's not our young academy lads fault he can't get a game under TM.

I'm aware that the LSC isn't age limited, I didn't claim otherwise, and in that competition the use of senior players is much more rife and understandable

Ben Brereton, Jacob Davenport and Harry Chapman have 139 appearances at first team level between them. It's not just about age its about experience. They're not youth players because they have way too many SENIOR appearances to be considered so.

And for me the aim of our Academy (at Category One status) should be to provide the club with top tier talents. It cannot do so if players signed for the first team that are deemed not good enough play in the Academy teams, limiting Sam Barnes, Stefan Mols, Dan Butterworth etc...

 

I get it, Harry Chapman is still young and he CAN play for the Under 23's. But why should he be prioritised under Billy Barr over Jack Vale, who shows just as much promise, is our academy player and could one day be a great talent for our club? I'm not saying Jack Vale is better than Harry Chapman, what I am saying is that Harry Chapman shouldn't be starting every single Under 23's game, which for the most part (minus a few exceptions) he is.

How can our academy ever succeed if the Under 18's players turn 18 and can't get a game in the 23's side because its full of first team rejects who TM won't play? We'll end up losing players like we did Callum Wright, and we'll never reap the rewards of having a Cat One academy. There's no path to the first team for someone like Stefan Mols if he ends up sat on the bench whilst a TM signing that hasn't quite worked out takes his spot in the Development Squad.

I get your points, and in some ways I'm playing devils advocate, because I don't hate HC, he is an alright player. I just think our 23's team play twice as good without the senior players clogging things up. Sam Hart has hindered Lewis Thompson this season, Harry Chapman has hindered both Jack Vale and Stefan Mols on multiple occasions. If the ONLY goal of our academy was to help Harry Chapman and Sam Hart become stars then that's fine, but for me it shouldn't be, and I don't think it is.

Edited October 31, 2019 by JoeH

[Mashed Potatoes]

Just now, JoeH said:

Harry Chapman isn't coming back from injury, he's not been injured for three months. And it's not our young academy lads fault he can't get a game under TM.

I'm aware that the LSC isn't age limited, I didn't claim otherwise, and in that competition the use of senior players is much more rife and understandable

Ben Brereton, Jacob Davenport and Harry Chapman have 139 appearances at first team level between them. It's not just about age its about experience. They're not youth players because they have way too many SENIOR appearances to be considered so.

And for me the aim of our Academy (at Category One status) should be to provide the club with top tier talents. It cannot do so if players signed for the first team that are deemed not good enough play in the Academy teams, limiting Sam Barnes, Stefan Mols, Dan Butterworth etc...

 

I get it, Harry Chapman is still young and he CAN play for the Under 23's. But why should he be prioritised under Billy Barr over Jack Vale, who shows just as much promise, is our academy player and could one day be a great talent for our club? I'm not saying Jack Vale is better than Harry Chapman, what I am saying is that Harry Chapman shouldn't be starting every single Under 23's game, which for the most part (minus a few exceptions) he is.

How can our academy ever succeed if the Under 18's players turn 18 and can't get a game in the 23's side because its full of first team rejects who TM won't play? We'll end up losing players like we did Callum Wright, and we'll never reap the rewards of having a Cat One academy. There's no path to the first team for someone like Stefan Mols if he ends up sat on the bench whilst a TM signing that hasn't quite worked out takes his spot in the Development Squad.

I get your points, and in some ways I'm playing devils advocate, because I don't hate HC, he is an alright player. I just think our 23's team play twice as good without the senior players clogging things up. Sam Hart has hindered Lewis Thompson this season, Harry Chapman has hindered both Jack Vale and Stefan Mols on multiple occasions. If the ONLY goal of our academy was to help Harry Chapman and Sam Hart become stars then that's fine, but for me it shouldn't be, and I don't think it is.

Callum Wright was playing regularly for us - he moved to Leicester for the money

[K-Hod]

Please can we keep posts in one coloured font everyone? Those posts really hurt my eyes.

Use the bold or italic selections if you want to use emphasis.

Thanks.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Please can we keep posts in one coloured font everyone? Those posts really hurt my eyes.

Use the bold or italic selections if you want to use emphasis.

Thanks.

Really? Why have the option for it then? Just seemed the best way to respond to multiple points and questions rather than re-quoting 6 times...

[bluebruce]

1 hour ago, JoeH said:

a) I wouldn't have signed Harry Chapman
b) If he's not good enough then sell him or loan him out
c) Use him from the bench for the first team
d) Play Harry Chapman for the 23's occasionally, or every other week (not every game)

For me the answer isn't:

c) Limit Stefan Mols, Jack Vale and others by playing Harry Chapman for the Under 23's every week. He was signed to our first team, hasn't come through our academy, and should be at least making the bench for Tony Mowbray. It's a sad state of affairs when promising talents like Stefan Mols are stifled because of poor management and a bad transfer window.

Christ how many players do you want to blame Chapman for holding back?? He is one player, he can only really be holding back one player per game. I thought both Mols and Vale were strikers anyway?

[K-Hod]

1 hour ago, JoeH said:

Really? Why have the option for it then? Just seemed the best way to respond to multiple points and questions rather than re-quoting 6 times...

You could always just use bold and italic for emphasis instead, like I suggested......

[Guest]

1 hour ago, bluebruce said:

Christ how many players do you want to blame Chapman for holding back?? He is one player, he can only really be holding back one player per game. I thought both Mols and Vale were strikers anyway?

No, Mols isn't a striker.

[47er]

7 hours ago, bluebruce said:

Christ how many players do you want to blame Chapman for holding back?? He is one player, he can only really be holding back one player per game. I thought both Mols and Vale were strikers anyway?

Wide strikers obviously!  

[philipl]

Lost 2-1 at Chelsea which is no disgrace.