Transfer Window - COMPLETE. Where’s Gregg?

[joey_big_nose]

4 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

Ash Phillps has hardly played for the U23s, let alone to be relied upon for the hustle and bustle of a Championship season. That's fanciful thinking.

He needs to be playing games, either with the U23's or being loaned out to gain experience to prove his potential.

There's no point him hanging about our 1st team squad just to, at best, sit on the bench.

To be fair Jude Bellingham went straight into the Birmingham City team after eight months of U23s. Ash Phillips is in the same levels - started in U23s in Jan. Could start playing August.

If he's exceptional he can play first team football at 16.

[bluebruce]

4 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

To be fair Jude Bellingham went straight into the Birmingham City team after eight months of U23s. Ash Phillips is in the same levels - started in U23s in Jan. Could start playing August.

If he's exceptional he can play first team football at 16.

He's 17 so, even easier 😉

[joey_big_nose]

Just now, Theaxe15 said:

If excitement is getting pasted every weekend 

Went back and looked at youngest squads last season and how they did. Us and Bournemouth had young squads but did well. Rest of young squads (Barnsley, Peterborough, Cardiff, Swansea) had very poor seasons.

So maybe my copium isn't very good afterall.

[roversfan99]

1 hour ago, glen9mullan said:

Could i ask what you are basing this on?

Kids football.

[glen9mullan]

4 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

To be fair Jude Bellingham went straight into the Birmingham City team after eight months of U23s. Ash Phillips is in the same levels - started in U23s in Jan. Could start playing August.

If he's exceptional he can play first team football at 16.

Its fair to also say, we have some promising young players, but we will totally ruin them if thrown in too early and we get licked every match.

It neither helps them or us.

I'd like to see some get gametime this season, with zero pressure on their shoulders., 20 minutes here, there, with the odd start in winnable fixtures.

To expect the 4 or 5 kids to start 30 plus games each, is just suicide 

[Mattyblue]

14 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

TBH if we go into the season starting six or seven academy players it reeks of incompetence from a management perspective but will be quite exciting for the fans.

Also - without really having reviewed any data my feeling is it's not usually teams with a bunch of kids playing who get relegated. Its usually teams full of jaded journeymen.

That's my copium anyway 

Maybe because unless a club is in severe financial distress, in administration etc, most clubs don’t start a season in the Championship with the team made up of 6/7 players plucked out the youth team.

Edited July 15, 2022 by Mattyblue

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

started in U23s

Played U23's well before Jan. Everton game at Ewood he started early last season.

[Guest]

It's not true that throwing young players in ruins them. I think you see if they sink or swim. We're not Man City, we can't wait 5 years every time for a footballer to develop. We've a Cat 1 academy and we have to use it. If Vale, Garrett and Phillips all get chances this year and one of them doesn't work out, I make that a 2-1 win...

[Guest]

Buckley swam, Butterworth sank. That's football. Can't wait until they're 23 every time like Scott Wharton. Sometimes there's a hole that needs filing. £3-4m being spent every year on that academy, got to use what it produces.

[Wheelton Blue]

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

Buckley swam, Butterworth sank. That's football. Can't wait until they're 23 every time like Scott Wharton. Sometimes there's a hole that needs filing. £3-4m being spent every year on that academy, got to use what it produces.

Totally agree, but it has to be used sensibly.

Throwing 3 or 4 straight into the first team team and crossing fingers and toes, is not sensible.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Wheelton Blue said:

Totally agree, but it has to be used sensibly.

Throwing 3 or 4 straight into the first team team and crossing fingers and toes, is not sensible.

I think if they're the reserves, which they are, then that's fairly conservative. I think maybe Carter is the only one they plan on putting straight in, and even he's been on two League One loans himself.

[roversfan99]

But the problem is relying on a large influx at once not because they are all simultaneously demanding places but because of incompetence in the transfer market, through lack of funds or otherwise.

Buckley broke through not in the absence of signing midfielders but because he was good enough regardless.

We are already very much "using what it produces" but you have to be realistic as to what we can expect to come through and how often. The only alternative to a "Man City one player per 5 years" policy is not numerous players every season as that is unrealistic.

It should also be continuous so that when one is loaned out, which won't apply to everyone. That they come back and at that point can justifiably demand a squad place. Take Carter, you can maybe sign one less CB considering that we have lost 2 and take Carter as somewhat proven.

[roversfan99]

6 minutes ago, JoeH said:

It's not true that throwing young players in ruins them. I think you see if they sink or swim. We're not Man City, we can't wait 5 years every time for a footballer to develop. We've a Cat 1 academy and we have to use it. If Vale, Garrett and Phillips all get chances this year and one of them doesn't work out, I make that a 2-1 win...

Maybe one or two at a time yes, but if you throw multiple in together then you are setting yourself up for a fall. Giving maybe one a debut amidst a normal team with experience (more than we currently have which is fairly minimal) and then you get a true picture, if we ever fielded a league team anywhere close to our 2nd team that played at Dundee, we would likely get battered.

[Guest]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

But the problem is relying on a large influx at once not because they are all simultaneously demanding places but because of incompetence in the transfer market, through lack of funds or otherwise.

r broke through not in the absence of signing midfielders but because he was good enough regardless.

We are already very much "using what it produces" but you have to be realistic as to what we can expect to come through and how often. The only alternative to a "Man City one player per 5 years" policy is not numerous players every season as that is unrealistic.

It should also be continuous so that when one is loaned out, which won't apply to everyone. That they come back and at that point can justifiably demand a squad place. Take Carter, you can maybe sign one less CB considering that we have lost 2 and take Carter as somewhat proven.

I don't think replacing Jacob Davenport with Jake Garrett is rash, for example. If they're members for the squad, it's hardly a "reliance on a large influx". Like I said, there's only Carter I think they plan to go straight in.. and he's been bred for it over 2x League One loans.

[Mattyblue]

Of course we should, and will, be blooding more youngsters. 

But they have to be helped along with experienced pros, that’s just how it is in top level football. For all their ability, a team needs that nous, game management and sometimes physical presence, as some young lads develop physically later, that only experience provides.

The fact we are even having this conversation says a lot to how nature abhors a vacuum…
 

[Guest]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

if we ever fielded a league team anywhere close to our 2nd team that played at Dundee, we would likely get battered.

But that's never going to happen. Not unless 14+ players get injured or suspended.

[Guest]

I don't see how anything suggests we'll be throwing a big group of them in at the deep end. I see them having Garrett on the bench instead of Davenport and Carter coming into to replace Lenihan. That's 1 and a half in my eyes. Phillips will play 23's and lots of the others will go on loans.

[simongarnerisgod]

1 hour ago, martonrover said:

Alas, the last local reporter who was prepared to ruffle a few feathers at the club was Andy Cryer. 
Nowadays, the likes of Sharpe and Jackson just deal in safe reporting and analysis.

a decent journo would sniff the story of non transfer activity and be all over it,sharpe and jackson are just office boys who type what they are told

[Dreams of 1995]

Jack Vale and Hayden Carter are 21 and 22 respectively. They aren't kids.

Adam Wharton and Ash Phillips are all very highly rated. As said a million times - Phil Jones was 17.

In reality we are asking, or suspecting, potentially 4 players to step into the first team. Not necessarily the starting 11, the first team.

Two of which are matured young adults; one of which is now 18 and one who is in his "coming of age" years. 17 years old is old enough if they are good enough.

I think Phillips is easily good enough to play in this league. Wharton too. It isn't that good of a league, and the days of being lumped about the pitch is just archaic talk. It's a different game.

Sparks mentioned James Hill a few pages up. He was 17 / 18 when playing regularly for Fleetwood in League 1. Looked a class act. Bournemouth signed him for a £1m in January, and they are a Prem club now.

I was speaking to a mate of mine about Zouma only earlier today. He's an avid Hammer. He was 16 when he started playing in the top tier French league. 19 when he got his move to Chelsea. The phrase goes: if you are good enough you are old enough.

And I would say it is incredibly disrespectful to think Ash Phillips cannot be as good as a player like Zouma or Jones when you have actually sat and watched the young lad play.

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

I don't think replacing Jacob Davenport with Jake Garrett is rash, for example. If they're members for the squad, it's hardly a "reliance on a large influx". Like I said, there's only Carter I think they plan to go straight in.. and he's been bred for it over 2x League One loans.

By straight in, do you mean to start or within the squad?

Davenport was one of 3 central midfielders that departed. If we signed 2 proven midfielders and then Garrett was seen as the 5th choice, then that would make sense.

I don't agree with this idea that when holes need filling, that academy players step up. It should be the other way round. Players demonstrate enough either as individuals on the fringes or even on loan to justify more game time, not just because we don't have the resources or competence to fill any vacancies properly.

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

But that's never going to happen. Not unless 14+ players get injured or suspended.

Even if it was a case of 2 central midfielders or centre backs being out at once, you'd be naming a rookie partnership. Point being we need a number of senior players in ASAP. 

[Mattyblue]

We won’t be throwing 6/7 in, obviously! I’m just responding to JBN’s hypothetical view that he wouldn’t be worried about relegation if we did… I would!

[Guest]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

Point being we need a number of senior players in ASAP. 

Just don't understand why it's being framed that liking the idea of Garret and Carter being in the squad has to come hand in hand with being happy with no senior recruitment on top of that.

[Guest]

Just now, Mattyblue said:

We won’t be throwing 6/7 in, obviously! I’m just responding to JBN’s hypothetical view that he wouldn’t be worried about relegation if we did… I would!

As would I. 21's teams can't compete with senior sides, the Papa John's showcases that every season.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

By straight in, do you mean to start or within the squad?

 

I think Carter will be the starting RCB this season, personally think he's very well suited to it. If we went and bought an impressive L1 defender of his age for 500k this summer, plenty would be fairly content. 

[TheWeasel]

I don't see a huge issue using more youth players in places. An 18-19 year old player having a good season at this level will command a good fee, for the aspiring moneyballers at board level. 

However I do worry that we've lost some really good experience from the spine of our team, the likes of an Adam Wharton for example could have a fairly free role and have the occasional rough game it's not a huge deal. But a centre back like Phillips having a bad day at the office means a loss, a catastrophe. 

I hope Tomasson does well for us and im rooting for him, but am worried he's not getting the start he needs, inexperienced squad, lack of creativity in the final third, a stitched up defence. For example he has a bad first month because glaciers move quicker than the shower of shit at board level, players lose confidence and suddenly things look dire and he looks the mug. Then things take a nasty turn and we start nervously looking down. Football is very fickle and having these grand plans in place is fine, but you can't neglect the present.