Transfer Window - COMPLETE. Where’s Gregg?

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

24 minutes ago, JoeH said:

He has it all.

The new Mike England then. He had it all.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

16 minutes ago, tomphil said:

There's a lot of expectation building on this lad already.

I'd rather see him go quietly on loan somewhere for 6 months getting games then see how it goes.

People get carried away too easily similar things were said about Lowe, Henley was highly rated when young.  And of course for those who remember Marlon Broomes was the next big thing for a long time.

Lets give him time to develop.

I remember Shearer saying Broomes was going to be the next Bobby Moore. Sounds like he never saw Moore play.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

he’s not going to be starting Championship games on a regular basis next season.

Should be, there's genuinely no reason why not. Throw him in.

[roversfan99]

2 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Should be, there's genuinely no reason why not. Throw him in.

You would have him as a regular in a Championship side now?

[Mattyblue]

Of course there are those rare superstar 16/17 year olds that play regularly at a high level, but we both know he won’t be one of them…

[Guest]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

You would have him as a regular in a Championship side now?

Yes. I would. Especially with Lenihan off. I’d have him on the bench from September, ready to step in. He’s good enough, his age matters not.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Mattyblue said:

Of course there are those rare superstar 16/17 year olds that play regularly at a high level, but we both know he won’t be one of them…

He easily could be. But yeah, in reality, I don’t think it’ll happen. Shame really. He doesn’t need to spend four seasons in the lower leagues.

[superniko]

Didn’t we bring in Harvey Elliott when he was 17?

Granted it’s midfield playmaker vs central defender so age/physicality is different. But if he’s good enough, he’s old enough 

[Mattyblue]

We’ve thrown in much poorer 17/18 year old PL academy loanees too.

But it just doesn’t happen with our own (Phil Jones in a former incarnation of Blackburn Rovers aside).

Edited May 19, 2022 by Mattyblue

[J*B]

Joe’s right, Phillips is the envy of a lot of clubs and the coaches think he’s something really special. Watch Adam Wharton this season as well, he offers genuine competition to Buckley already. 

[bluebruce]

20 minutes ago, superniko said:

Didn’t we bring in Harvey Elliott when he was 17?

Granted it’s midfield playmaker vs central defender so age/physicality is different. But if he’s good enough, he’s old enough 

 

17 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

We’ve thrown in much poorer 17/18 year old PL academy loanees too.

But it just doesn’t happen with our own (Phil Jones in a former incarnation of Blackburn Rovers aside).

Apart from Elliott - who was evidently special from day one and had been bought at 16 for millions - the only other 16/17 yr old I can recall us loaning in was Rekeem Harper. That was in League One, and he was shite for us.

[joey_big_nose]

5 hours ago, Oldgregg86 said:

Never seen Phillips play so this judgment isn’t off ability but if he’s big and strong enough to compete in this league  and has the skill set then he’s old enough for the bench and should be on it imo. Wont be the first 17 year old to play championship level football. Why waste another wage and place on the bench if this kid is good enough as cover if nothing else. He’s just as likely to get injured playing down the leagues. Play him pre season and if he does well keep him for the first team squad 

Yeah, the "he's sixteen" thing is weird.  Jude Bellingham started for Birmingham very close to his sixteenth birthday. He ended up playing 41 games that season.

If he's really good he'll get some subs, if he looks good in those he will start.

[Mattyblue]

Branthwaite was 18 and was chucked straight in, nowhere near ready.

Clarkson, 19, nowhere near ready, but still chucked straight in until it was quickly clear he was miles off.

Not a chance they’d have been in the side if from our own Acacemy. It’s bizarre the pedestal these PL academies and ergo their graduates are put on , but there you go.
 

Edited May 19, 2022 by Mattyblue

[Mike E]

Is Phil Jones not our own example?

[Mattyblue]

That’s what I said about five posts up, but that was a dozen years ago and we all know Phillips will play second (third?) fiddle to loanees…

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

52 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

 

Apart from Elliott - who was evidently special from day one and had been bought at 16 for millions - the only other 16/17 yr old I can recall us loaning in was Rekeem Harper. That was in League One, and he was shite for us.

Harper’s shite now. Last I heard he was on loan from Ipswich to somewhere, Crewe rings a bell.

[roversfan99]

I dont necessarily conform to the idea that PL loanees are unfairly preferred to our own kids in that on average they tend to be better, hence why they are at bigger clubs. Obviously its not a flawless market and there are exceptions such as Clarkson and Brainthwaite.

You look at loanees this season, Garner and Davis at Forest, Colwill at Huddersfield, Van Hecke and Khadra here, Van Der Berg, Archer and Iversen at Preston, Phillips at Bournemouth etc, there are so many that are so much better than what any of those clubs already have.

It allows our own young players when they arent ready to themselves go out on loan too. Carter has looked very shaky at this level but hopefully a second loan spell will do similar to him to what happened to Wharton. Conversely, some youngsters struggle on loan, Vale hasnt done well and players like McBride who have been called to play for our first team have perhaps shown that they are well off. Under 23s football is not a good way of determining readiness.

Phillips may be a very good young talent but we can not sign one less centre back expecting him to be ready to play now. He may seem like a beast against kids but its a whole new ball game.

 

[Mattyblue]

I’m talking about teenagers, not loans in general, the loan market is what oils the wheels at this level. However, fair number of raw teenagers are brought in that are poorer/no better than what we already have, a waste of a wage and a squad place.

Unless they are a considerable improvement, I.e Elliot, they shouldn’t be anywhere near the club.

 

Edited May 19, 2022 by Mattyblue

[roversfan99]

Just now, Mattyblue said:

Plenty are brought in that are poorer/no better than what we already have, a waste of a wage and a squad place.

Unless they are a considerable improvement, I.e Van Hecke, Elliot, they shouldn’t be anywhere near the club.

 

I think the success rate seems to be in line with recruitment in general at the very least.

As long as they are an improvement at all then they are successful signings. There is a bit of a myth that they always block the route of our own players but they can allow our own youngsters to play regularly rather than occasionally and improve as a result, as Wharton did and as Carter is doing.

Its not as if they necessarily get preferential treatment either which is key. We have had lots of successful loanees and also ones like Palmer and Clarkson who werent and subsequently didnt play and got sent back.

[Mattyblue]

Not sure we are on the same page here, you are talking about loans in general, which is fair enough, the way it is at his level. Khadra and JPVH are obviously better than what we would be plucking out of the U23s.

I’m talking about out of their depth teenagers, you don’t invest heavily in a Cat 1 Academy so you can bring in a raw, not ready teenager each window, we have enough of our own without taking them from other academies too thanks very much.

Edited May 19, 2022 by Mattyblue

[bluebruce]

2 hours ago, joey_big_nose said:

Yeah, the "he's sixteen" thing is weird.  Jude Bellingham started for Birmingham very close to his sixteenth birthday. He ended up playing 41 games that season.

If he's really good he'll get some subs, if he looks good in those he will start.

It's not weird in the slightest.

Players that can play successfully with men at 16 are very few and far between. Of course there are examples, there's examples of nearly anything. That doesn't mean this one will be one of the exceptions. It should be taken into account that it could potentially be too much too soon in this case. The mental effect on such a young lad if he doesn't adjust well under that pressure, and the physical effect on a player who has had injury issues already, should also be considered.

As far as I've seen, nobody is saying there's no way he can play in the first team yet. I may be wrong but I've not spotted such a remark. People are merely advising caution, and not to rely on him as a CB option for our first team when counting our squad depth. If he breaks through this year, and he very well may, that's fantastic. If we throw him in, and he sinks, and we didn't recruit a tried and tested CB because we assumed he would be good enough, or if he just has injury issues again, we're going to be feel very foolish.

For the record, I do want him introduced this season, but very much on a test-the-water basis at first. Played in some friendlies, named on some benches, played in the cups, and if he impresses see if we can bring him along further. In fact I was hoping, and I think the club were too, that he would get his debut this season just gone. I think the injuries are what put paid to that.

[roversfan99]

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

Not sure we are on the same page here, you are talking about loans in general, which is fair enough, the way it is at his level. Khadra and JPVH are obviously better than what we would be plucking out of the U23s.

I’m talking about out of their depth teenagers, you don’t invest heavily in a Cat 1 Academy so you can bring in a raw, not ready teenager each window, we have enough of our own without taking them from other academies too thanks very much.

But even with the raw teenagers, its not a foregone conclusion that they are out of their depth. Its certainly not an ideal market because its so difficult to know what you are getting but equally its not one that has only given us failures. 

Branthwaite was out of his depth but we signed Harwood Bellis at the same time who actually had practically no first team experience (Branthwaite played a few games at Carlisle) who did well when he came. Clarkson had played a couple of cup/Champions league games and was out of his depth but Khadra had only played 10 minutes of senior football before he came and again was a raw teenager. Even Elliott had barely played any senior football. Of course we dont want out of their depth raw loanees but ultinately we dont want to sign anyone out of their depth and like any type of signings, those in the category that you describe have come with mixed success.

[Mattyblue]

Sorry, but any club should be able to see the difference from an Elliot, known in the game to be going to the very top, and a Clarkson, a run of the mill kid, in which there will be countless examples of in every academy and U23 side. We are supposedly a Championship side, not a L2 club just happy for bodies, we need players that can make a difference in what is a decent level, I expect your standard churned out Academy product to be sent to a Barrow, a Fleetwood.

The actual discussion centred on how these run of the mill 18 year olds get chucked straight in the side, whilst our own go on a magical mystery tour until they are about 21. I don’t think we should be bringing in teenagers from other clubs unless they are better than our own products - and that’s what scouts and loan managers are for, yes sometimes even they won’t work out, that’s football, but for me there is a lack of due diligence with these signings and it’s simply a case of, ‘well he’s from Liverpool’s 🤩academy, so we’ll have him..’

But Ok. We’ll leave it there, as we obviously won’t agree, so I can see arguments being repeated all day here.

Edited May 20, 2022 by Mattyblue

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

10 hours ago, bluebruce said:

It's not weird in the slightest.

Players that can play successfully with men at 16 are very few and far between. Of course there are examples, there's examples of nearly anything. That doesn't mean this one will be one of the exceptions. It should be taken into account that it could potentially be too much too soon in this case. The mental effect on such a young lad if he doesn't adjust well under that pressure, and the physical effect on a player who has had injury issues already, should also be considered.

As far as I've seen, nobody is saying there's no way he can play in the first team yet. I may be wrong but I've not spotted such a remark. People are merely advising caution, and not to rely on him as a CB option for our first team when counting our squad depth. If he breaks through this year, and he very well may, that's fantastic. If we throw him in, and he sinks, and we didn't recruit a tried and tested CB because we assumed he would be good enough, or if he just has injury issues again, we're going to be feel very foolish.

For the record, I do want him introduced this season, but very much on a test-the-water basis at first. Played in some friendlies, named on some benches, played in the cups, and if he impresses see if we can bring him along further. In fact I was hoping, and I think the club were too, that he would get his debut this season just gone. I think the injuries are what put paid to that.

Another issue is the position he plays. If you’re winning you don’t normally want to swap your centre halves unless it’s around 4-0 or 5-0 and if you’re losing you normally want to sub attacking players. It’s hard to give a young centre half 10 or 15 minutes.

[Torgeir]

Big Sam played Phil Jones as DMC to take a bit of pressure off him. I haven't watched Ash in action, but to gel him in gently would be to let him come on as DMC or RB towards the end.

He could also benefit hugely playing alongside Ayala in a back three, but in a back four it's easier to get exposed.