|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Jan 9, 2022 17:52:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jan 9, 2022 19:13:00 GMT
Watching those BBC highlights, how on earth did Orient not win with all the chances they had (shit finishing obviously).
Three or four goals for them would not have been unreasonable if they had someone half decent up top.
We really are poor at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Jan 9, 2022 20:11:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Caerwrangonpotter on Jan 10, 2022 6:17:30 GMT
Finally just got around to see the highlights.....and its frightening how bad our defence is at the moment
|
|
|
Post by chuffedstokie on Jan 10, 2022 7:08:04 GMT
Finally just got around to see the highlights.....and its frightening how bad our defence is at the moment Any Orient fans watching those highlights will be both disappointed and encouraged.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Jan 10, 2022 8:15:35 GMT
Finally just got around to see the highlights.....and its frightening how bad our defence is at the moment Same thoughts here. To think that a few months back we dominated Forest, scored the goal of the season and I'm thinking wouldn't want to play them at the minute.
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Jan 10, 2022 12:54:09 GMT
odd caveating of MON's youth policy(.,,) Why does any of that stuff matter, how is it relevant? Because it's not a youth policy . It's a buying strategy. Of the young and the free. Nothing wrong with that. He's been moderately successful with it. But it's not about making use of the academy assets. So... did you wonder why Tezgel was given a greater reception than Bonham?
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Jan 10, 2022 12:56:26 GMT
2-0 win. Ince goal if playing. I'm disappointed you failed to predict a Campbell goal...
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Jan 10, 2022 12:59:47 GMT
Finally just got around to see the highlights.....and its frightening how bad our defence is at the moment Same thoughts here. To think that a few months back we dominated Forest, scored the goal of the season and I'm thinking wouldn't want to play them at the minute. It's not the same team is it? Six men and counting...
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Jan 10, 2022 13:11:17 GMT
You're buying into his propoganda. He's very good at it. He trusts young players that he's bought like Brown, Wilmot, TOB, Thompson, maybe he will trust Surridge in time. They get many chances even if they, or some of them, frequently play badly. He doesn't trust Coates, Taylor, Forrester, Varian, Jones, others to be tested in the team before sending them out on the kind of loans, which frequently make young players return worse than before they went out. Loaned out didn't help Tymon, Sorensen or others. Regular first team action (and a gentle hand around his shoulder from MON) helped Josh. Not to mention the fact that Hughes gave him a five year contract, otherwise he'd been out the door already. Actually I'm really grateful to MON for saving Tymon's career and making him fulfill the potential, which was always there at Clayton Wood. It's not meaningless whether players are from the academy or not. Far from it. The board has invested £100M in the academy since it was relaunched. Now that's a figure over time, but imagine what O'Neill could have done with some sort of such money for the first team. Now I don't expect him to pick players that are not good enough. But how does he know that, if they don't get tested. From a purely business pov we have wasted a huge part of the investment and got very little in return, because all our managers from Pulis to MON haven't had the courage to back them. I can't think of an academy player - which means signed by the club around the age of 15 or earlier - that has featured regularly or even in just one season. EDIT: I can think of one, Wilko. Dicko is from before that period and was on the way out then. Butland, Souttar, Collins, Campbell, all entered the academy at their previous clubs. We bought them young and have so far benefitted from selling Collins. Butland not so much. We have received small sums from our lending program and academy players sold for nominal fees. And that's it for the investment. I don't think it's a new approach. Not at all. All managers in the period, aware that the board wants to hear good news about the academy, have promoted players and have had them training with the first team, a few even made non-playing subs appearences. But they've been reluctant, to say the least, to take the next vital step. Porter hasn't started a full game in the league by the way. Nor has Sparrow, DWP or Macari, though they've been plugged for the last year. Yes but you were challenging the view MON promotes young players and there is no evidence of that. Whether a player spend all or part of his career in our academy, if they make the first team regularly that is job done. Selling Collins counts towards the return on investment on the academy in the same way selling Porter would do. As yet, there hasn’t been a good enough local academy graduate to be a regular. Not a surprise as it takes 10 years to build the capability and an 8 year when we were promoted should new be coming through. Our academy has a wider purpose. I was told by the departing CEO, our academy is larger than we need because the chairman wants to help any kid in the area with a chance of a career in football even if they never play for us. I would say Stoke City is set up to maximise all opportunities for local kids in a way hardly any other club is. We should be very proud of the philosophy I've heard this before. It's remarkable how the Coates, all three of them, are modelling scfc on european socialism in footie matters, probably not other business matters. But even then I don't believe that MON is talking up successive players, at least ten of them, from this season's academy amd last season's, if it's "to maximise all opportunities for local kids" and nothing else.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 10, 2022 13:27:08 GMT
Because it's not a youth policy . It's a buying strategy. Of the young and the free. Nothing wrong with that. He's been moderately successful with it. But it's not about making use of the academy assets. So... did you wonder why Tezgel was given a greater reception than Bonham? Apples and oranges isn't it? Bonham is an established professional player, the other is a 16-year-old. A more apt comparison would be between Tezgel and another youth prospect signed initially from a different club.
|
|
hotpot
Youth Player
Posts: 432
|
Post by hotpot on Jan 11, 2022 1:58:20 GMT
There's still a big hole in the middle of our defence. Nothing to be proud of in this flukey FA Cup win against an unlucky Orient side.
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Jan 11, 2022 12:35:53 GMT
Because it's not a youth policy . It's a buying strategy. Of the young and the free. Nothing wrong with that. He's been moderately successful with it. But it's not about making use of the academy assets. So... did you wonder why Tezgel was given a greater reception than Bonham? Apples and oranges isn't it? Bonham is an established professional player, the other is a 16-year-old. A more apt comparison would be between Tezgel and another youth prospect signed initially from a different club. No.
|
|
|
Post by onepara on Jan 11, 2022 12:41:23 GMT
That Smith lad in their midfield looked worth having.
|
|
|
Post by saturday on Jan 14, 2022 14:46:48 GMT
Well I went and it was great seeing Campbell’s magic at the end.
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Jan 18, 2022 12:00:56 GMT
Who said it was "purer"? I didn't. I'm saying it's bad business not to look to the investment the club has made first (if academy and non-academy players are roughly the same level). Who said "it doesn't count as development or blooding young players if you signed the players from another academy"? I didn't. All I'm trying to say is that we don't reap any financial or footballing benefits if we don't "blood" our own academy players first, provided they are good enough. It's very bad business to keep investing and then throw the products away. Every time there's a "vacancy" in the team we look at what's available in the transfer market and can we afford him, but we don't ook to see if we can fill that vacancy ourselves. That's a common mistake at other clubs too. Who said we should "flood" the team with academy players at the same time. Give me one example where I have said that or hold your filthy tongue, son! I'm paraphrasing, of course. I just think if you’re going to present something as fact you should have some kind of evidence to back it up.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 18, 2022 12:03:49 GMT
I'm paraphrasing, of course. I just think if you’re going to present something as fact you should have some kind of evidence to back it up. The evidence is throughout this thread. If that wasn't the point you were making in dreaming up these ridiculous caveats about players being loaned out or being signed from other academies, then what was it, exactly?
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Jan 19, 2022 9:38:24 GMT
I just think if you’re going to present something as fact you should have some kind of evidence to back it up. The evidence is throughout this thread. If that wasn't the point you were making in dreaming up these ridiculous caveats about players being loaned out or being signed from other academies, then what was it, exactly? So...you failed to spot that I quoted you exactly.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 19, 2022 9:42:12 GMT
The evidence is throughout this thread. If that wasn't the point you were making in dreaming up these ridiculous caveats about players being loaned out or being signed from other academies, then what was it, exactly? So...you failed to spot that I quoted you exactly. I didn't, I ignored it, because it was irrelevant. I tried instead to get you to answer the question I asked, which proved as exhausting as it always does.
|
|