[Archived] Wharton

[Manchester Blue]

16 hours ago, tomphil said:

Who's beating the club ?  Beating Owen Coyle more like I think folk just don't read posts properly and look for a superfan way to jump on anything that doesn't agree and just scream Rovers rah rah rah.

He was on the fringes early last season then got sidelined then loaned out whilst defensive berths in the squad got filled by the likes of Greer ( fair enough back up ) and Brown ( another stich up probably ) .  I don't think i'm alone in think young Scott could have made a contribution at least equalling if not bettering anything from those two over the course of the season given the bits we'd seen of him.

I think that's the point tomphil though.  I'd honestly say the majority would agree with your point that he could have done a better job than the two you mention.  I think the frustration for me is people continually putting two and two and making five, and there are at least a few mischief makers only too happy to spread stuff.  We told cast iron that Wharton wasn't playing due to the club ensuring subsequent managers kept him out to save a bob or too.  Last season I could have half believed that given the situation.  However under Mowbray it was illogical especially when he was clearly spending a reasonable budget at this level.

At the end of the day i'm sure we all want the youngsters to come through and lead this club on, when they are ready, hopefully this puts to bed any of this rumour mill stuff.

[JBiz]

2 minutes ago, Manchester Blue said:

I think the frustration for me is people continually putting two and two and making five, and there are at least a few mischief makers only too happy to spread stuff.  We told cast iron that Wharton wasn't playing due to the club ensuring subsequent managers kept him out to save a bob or too.  Last season I could have half believed that given the situation.  However under Mowbray it was illogical especially when he was clearly spending a reasonable budget at this level.

Thanks and goodnight! (on this subject)

[K-Hod]

In fairness, can you honestly blame people for thinking the worst though? Venky's have form for this (Salgado) and it sounded like it was also a common thing with youth contracts. He's signed a new contract, so perhaps it's safe to assume that said clause is no longer included?

There's (generally) no smoke without fire and for several people close to the guy to ratify the same story hardly makes folk tinfoil hat wearing nutbags for believing that there was potentially some foul play. It's hardly as though people are being unreasonable, is it?

[JBiz]

Just now, K-Hod said:

In fairness, can you honestly blame people for thinking the worst though? Venky's have form for this (Salgado) and it sounded like it was also a common thing with youth contracts. He's signed a new contract, so perhaps it's safe to assume that said clause is no longer included?

There's (generally) no smoke without fire and for several people close to the guy to ratify the same story hardly makes folk tinfoil hat wearing nutbags for believing that there was potentially some foul play. It's hardly as though people are being unreasonable, is it?

Salgado was likely on a basic salary with big performance bonuses.

This lad was likely due a raise from 500 a week to 1000 a week...

Its completely different ends of the scale, and it makes no sense to me at least. 

[Manchester Blue]

1 minute ago, K-Hod said:

In fairness, can you honestly blame people for thinking the worst though? Venky's have form for this (Salgado) and it sounded like it was also a common thing with youth contracts.

There's (generally) no smoke without fire and for several people close to the guy to ratify the same story hardly makes folk tinfoil hat wearing nutbags for believing that there was potentially some foul play. It's hardly as though people are being unreasonable, is it?

Ok so I'll try and make it my final response as appreciate we're in danger of just repeating ourselves but absolutely agree with the first line.  Yes we've seen it, yes most contracts have it and yes.

Second point there is very often smoke without fire, I think all clubs suffer from it but I'd say 9/10 there is a logical explanation for why a player isn't playing especially now we have a real manager.  Doesn't mean we have to agree with everything he says and does mind.

[tomphil]

10 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

In fairness, can you honestly blame people for thinking the worst though? Venky's have form for this (Salgado) and it sounded like it was also a common thing with youth contracts.

There's (generally) no smoke without fire and for several people close to the guy to ratify the same story hardly makes folk tinfoil hat wearing nutbags for believing that there was potentially some foul play. It's hardly as though people are being unreasonable, is it?

I think it's quite common at a lot of clubs this kind of talk regarding players being left out etc and even under Souness there was many a rumour of imminent pay rises or contract clauses meaning one more start and we owe his former club another instalment for certain players.

People need to separate general everyday football 'conspiracy' from the deeper darker Rovers stuff. If I question Mowbrays use of subs tonight or something it doesn't automatically mean I think Jerome & Fat Barry are sat in a room sending texts to the Rovers bench plotting a way for the team to lose to teach the fans a lesson or grab another wad at the bookies !!!

Mind you if Kean or Coyle were in charge I might think differently

[Dreams of 1995]

He's been injured under Mowbray so nobody has said he's not been getting into his team because of the contract. That's been twisted by those denying it. So if you could have half believed that then surely some it must be ringing true to you?

2 minutes ago, tomphil said:

 

People need to separate general everyday football 'conspiracy' from the deeper darker Rovers stuff. If I question Mowbrays use of subs tonight or something it doesn't automatically mean I think Jerome & Fat Barry are sat in a room sending texts to the Rovers bench plotting a way for the team to lost to teach the fans a lesson or grab another wad at the bookies !!!

 

This. It's as if the minute you question a decision by the club these days you are considered a conspiracy theorist and there's some that will just outright deny it and ridicule you for saying it.

[davulsukur]

3 hours ago, Stuart said:

 

From Mowbray's comments it doesn't sound like he is even on his radar.

No it doesn't.

Sounds like he'll be loaned out (if there are available suitors) in January.

[tomphil]

If he gets loaned out now at least we know it's for football reasons by a bloke who's at least half an idea of what he's doing.  If the contract had been sorted sooner and he'd been fit i'm sure TM would have had a good look at him at least but the way it's panned out he's already got a back centre defender in so it's back to the starting blocs for Wharton.

I'd like to see him get fit and stay until Jan and see how it pans between now and then.

[Guest]

20 hours ago, tomphil said:

Who's beating the club ?  Beating Owen Coyle more like I think folk just don't read posts properly and look for a superfan way to jump on anything that doesn't agree and just scream Rovers rah rah rah.

He was on the fringes early last season then got sidelined then loaned out whilst defensive berths in the squad got filled by the likes of Greer ( fair enough back up ) and Brown ( another stich up probably ) .  I don't think i'm alone in think young Scott could have made a contribution at least equalling if not bettering anything from those two over the course of the season given the bits we'd seen of him.

Sorry Phil, that wasn't aimed specifically at you, and I was being a grumpy-pants. I'll rephrase more diplomatically. 

Scott Wharton is 19, and sounds like he's going to feature in the first team at some point this season. I've never seen the guy play, but he seems to be getting good reports, which is good news for us. Coyle is at fault for many things, but I don't think he's really at fault for letting Wharton go out on loan to Cambridge United last season, where Wharton made just 9 appearances. I've seen a number of posts suggesting that Wharton is being messed about by the club, a-la-Mahoney; the difference being that Mahoney proved he could cut it in our first team, and most of us saw him in the flesh.

Wharton hasn't done that yet, but I'm sure we'll get to see him soon. I'm proud of our youth system - we've developed some utter gems over the years! I just think that there's a really bizarre overstatement of certain youth players on here that doesn't cut with reality, and there have already been comments that the club treats them with disregard to the point that we'll lose them.

Anyway, let's see if Wharton can cut it for us. I hope he can, and I think this season with a more positive feeling about the club is a far better environment for him to get going in than last season.

[tomphil]

33 minutes ago, Phil T said:

Sorry Phil, that wasn't aimed specifically at you, and I was being a grumpy-pants. I'll rephrase more diplomatically. 

Scott Wharton is 19, and sounds like he's going to feature in the first team at some point this season. I've never seen the guy play, but he seems to be getting good reports, which is good news for us. Coyle is at fault for many things, but I don't think he's really at fault for letting Wharton go out on loan to Cambridge United last season, where Wharton made just 9 appearances. I've seen a number of posts suggesting that Wharton is being messed about by the club, a-la-Mahoney; the difference being that Mahoney proved he could cut it in our first team, and most of us saw him in the flesh.

Wharton hasn't done that yet, but I'm sure we'll get to see him soon. I'm proud of our youth system - we've developed some utter gems over the years! I just think that there's a really bizarre overstatement of certain youth players on here that doesn't cut with reality, and there have already been comments that the club treats them with disregard to the point that we'll lose them.

Anyway, let's see if Wharton can cut it for us. I hope he can, and I think this season with a more positive feeling about the club is a far better environment for him to get going in than last season.

No probs i do know where your coming from and it will be nice if there is a horde of U23s contracted to the club long term banging on the gaffers door saying when do i get a chance because handled correctly it'll serve the club well in the long term especially if we end up staying in this div.

[Garage Flower]

I don't understand how anyone has seen enough of him to really know if he's ready to play regularly in this league. Until he's thrown in when he'll either sink or swim. 

[RevidgeBlue]

4 hours ago, Biz said:

Salgado was likely on a basic salary with big performance bonuses.

This lad was likely due a raise from 500 a week to 1000 a week...

Its completely different ends of the scale, and it makes no sense to me at least. 

The situations with the likes of Salgado and the youngsters in recent times are completely different but I dont think there's a huge conspiracy in either case.

I thought it was fairly well established that under the previous regime there was a practice of being obliged to hand out new contracts automatically to players in their 30's once they had completed a certain number of games the previous season. A ludicrous situation imo and one that needed stopping even if it affected individual players who were pretty popular.

On the flip side of the coin it appears the progress and development of a lot of our young players in recent seasons has been hampered or extinguished altogether by them being entitled to an improved contract once they had completrd a certain number of appearances of a minimum duration etc. In the meanwhile we've seen a right load of dross brought in above them and that is a completely false economy to me.

Im delighted Wharton has been granted a long term contract but now he has to be given a proper chance. I hope he hasnt been given a contract to just to loan out and eventually sell on. From what bits I've seen of him given a run of games I can't see that he'd be any worse than the likes of Wes Brown, Ward or anyone else and I'd also like to see Tomlinson given a proper chance.

In recent seasons the Academy seems to have been operating like a watered down version of the Chelsea model, producing players to play for other Clubs. That's a little more  understandable at Chelsea as any youngster there has to dislodge some of the best players in the world. Not the case here and its a bit pointless seeing players like O Sullivan being kept on and on and on indefinitely without getting a chance and galling seeing  players like Morris, Mahoney and O Connell either doing well elsewhere without ever seeing the light of day here or leaving in frustration due to lack of opportunity.

A lot of it boils down to the manager. Many managers seem happier to stick with experienced journeymen who were never any good in the first place than give youth its head and I think that most managers need to be a lot braver in that respect

[JAL]

23 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

The situations with the likes of Salgado and the youngsters in recent times are completely different but I dont think there's a huge conspiracy in either case.

I thought it was fairly well established that under the previous regime there was a practice of being obliged to hand out new contracts automatically to players in their 30's once they had completed a certain number of games the previous season. A ludicrous situation imo and one that needed stopping even if it affected individual players who were pretty popular.

On the flip side of the coin it appears the progress and development of a lot of our young players in recent seasons has been hampered or extinguished altogether by them being entitled to an improved contract once they had completrd a certain number of appearances of a minimum duration etc. In the meanwhile we've seen a right load of dross brought in above them and that is a completely false economy to me.

Im delighted Wharton has been granted a long term contract but now he has to be given a proper chance. I hope he hasnt been given a contract to just to loan out and eventually sell on. From what bits I've seen of him given a run of games I can't see that he'd be any worse than the likes of Wes Brown, Ward or anyone else and I'd also like to see Tomlinson given a proper chance.

In recent seasons the Academy seems to have been operating like a watered down version of the Chelsea model, producing players to play for other Clubs. That's a little more  understandable at Chelsea as any youngster there has to dislodge some of the best players in the world. Not the case here and its a bit pointless seeing players like O Sullivan being kept on and on and on indefinitely without getting a chance and galling seeing  players like Morris, Mahoney and O Connell either doing well elsewhere without ever seeing the light of day here or leaving in frustration due to lack of opportunity.

A lot of it boils down to the manager. Many managers seem happier to stick with experienced journeymen who were never any good in the first place than give youth its head and I think that most managers need to be a lot braver in that respect

Substitute chickens for footballers how many chickens do you have to sell in this over inflated present day football market to match money wise on a lower league footballer.