Jump to content
IGNORED

Marvin Brown - back as a coach

Bristol Rob

By Bristol Rob
in Football Chat

Recommended Posts

Cowshed

Cowshed

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

One of my dads favourite phra.ses was "a good big 'un is almost always better than a good little 'un", it was always a failing of the old youth structure that we seemed to develop good "little" players. Am I right that these days they look at a players genetics to see how their body is capable of progressing? It's certainly something that seems to be changing when you look at Lloyd Kelly, Zak Vyner and others, they look much better equipped physically to cope with a mans game.

That is about as outdated as it gets. Trying to be respectful.

Its is practical to look at body shape ectomorph, mesomorph etc and make a informed choice that a individual is not cut out for a position, but there is a school of thought that the modern game needs smaller players because their low centre of gravity allows them greater game speed. That is where the game is heading - game speed backed by technique.

We wont see two 5.4 centre halves but in future we will see more faster intelligent centre halves who can play

Sheffield Wednesday once had a size requirement for academy players  - It would have ruled out Valdes (short Keeper). 

Any youth structure that develops small payers should be applauded. Its the easy thing to rule out kids for size, and that can down to simple age. Academies tend to pick up players born in Sept - Dec because they tend to be the biggest in their year.

Good academies should look at TIP or TAP. Technique, intelligence, physical or Technique, athleticism, personality - Two out of three is a trial. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Olé

Olé

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Port Said Red said:

One of my dads favourite phra.ses was "a good big 'un is almost always better than a good little 'un", it was always a failing of the old youth structure that we seemed to develop good "little" players. 

To be fair we had Clayton Fortune around the same time and he was about 7 foot. Unfortunately he wasn't a good anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taz

Taz

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Olé said:

To be fair we had Clayton Fortune around the same time and he was about 7 foot. Unfortunately he wasn't a good anything.

Jack of all trades, master of none come to mind. 

Seem to remember him playing up front, centre mid (advanced and defensive), and centre back at some point in his time here.

We seemed to be very good at producing/buying average mid-table League 1 (as it is now) players during that time, bar a few exceptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Major Isewater

Major Isewater

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Olé said:

As I think many know, Marvin was technically a good player. He was coming through around the time I was lucky enough to watch a lot of our reserve games. He was head and shoulders above many around him, although very slight. You can't coach raw talent but even if we wasted his playing potential why not tap that latent talent to coach others?

By the way, his problem, as I think with hindsight we can attach to most former academy players in skill positions, is they very visibly never progressed physically on entering "the mans game", they remained too lightweight to truly compete, and worse, once they were effectively handed over to the first team, their development appeared to end. 

It wasn't just Marvin. It was all of them (again - in skill positions, no slight on CB's, but they at least had physical attributes to sustain a career). Contrast Marvin with the sort of progress Bobby and Joe Bryan have now made in all attributes while with the first team, and physical transformation seems to be a thing now with others (i.e. O'Dowda).

Just because Marvin - like many others - was wasted in those crucial years between youth and first team football and then lost their way playing catch up dropping down the leagues (as opposed to being loaned out to develop in the opposite direction) shouldn't cause us to reject his input now. In any business, failure is the BEST TEACHER.

The Gas have had some great teachers then . 

:yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LondonBristolian

LondonBristolian

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, pongo88 said:

What has Marvin Brown done as a coach to justify a job at a Championship club? 

If he was a first team coach, I'd agree. I imagine there are a large number of under-18 coaches at a large number of clubs with relatively little experience in professional football or coaching. Everyone has to start on the ladder somewhere. From the sounds of it, he's earned his badges, learnt his skills and run junior soccer schools so I don't think it sounds wildly unreasonable he now has an entry level coaching position with a professional club.

In a weird way - depending on how well Brown can self-reflect use his experience - the fact he never made it as a pro could be a massive advantage. He can explain to kids how difficult the step up to the professional game is and what the potential pitfalls are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RidgeRed

RidgeRed

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, LondonBristolian said:

If he was a first team coach, I'd agree. I imagine there are a large number of under-18 coaches at a large number of clubs with relatively little experience in professional football or coaching. Everyone has to start on the ladder somewhere. From the sounds of it, he's earned his badges, learnt his skills and run junior soccer schools so I don't think it sounds wildly unreasonable he now has an entry level coaching position with a professional club.

In a weird way - depending on how well Brown can self-reflect use his experience - the fact he never made it as a pro could be a massive advantage. He can explain to kids how difficult the step up to the professional game is and what the potential pitfalls are.

I like the idea that Marvin might be inspired to guide some talented youngster, maybe even more than one, through to the 1st team. We could do with a "one of our own" striker coming through. Suspect there may be a few possibles already in the ranks. Welcome back Marv & good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Silvio Dante

Silvio Dante

Posted
Posted
Just now, Danwal said:

This article also states that Trevor challis is the under 18’s coach. Is this the ex rovers full back?

Yes.

As an aside, friend of mines son is in the academy and speaks highly of Challis. The way they work is ensuring school work is done above everything else to ensure in the (likely) event kids don’t make it, their future prospects aren’t unduly effected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nickolas

nickolas

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Redtucks said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Brown_(footballer,_born_1983)

You obviously don't remember the confusing/tongue-in- cheek posts on here about 14 or 15 years ago.

Was a bit like Anthony Rougier and his brother Tony.

:laughcont:

 

Im old enough to have seen it, too old to have probably remembered it, but certainly havent seen it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BS4 on Tour...

BS4 on Tour...

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, BigTone said:

In Scotland that is.  May as well have been playing for Yatton.

Ah, that old chestnut....from 1950 to 1998 Scotland qualified for 9 World Cup Finals tournaments....England qualified for only 7 World Cup Finals tournaments in the same time period...and much of that was in Alex Ferguson’s time as a player in Scotland...I’m not sure Yatton hold the same proud record of qualification for World Cups....so easy to knock Scotland as a football nation...they have seriously punched above their weight for such a small country and have produced many world class players...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
North London Red

North London Red

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Ah, that old chestnut....from 1950 to 1998 Scotland qualified for 9 World Cup Finals tournaments....England qualified for only 7 World Cup Finals tournaments in the same time period...and much of that was in Alex Ferguson’s time as a player in Scotland...I’m not sure Yatton hold the same proud record of qualification for World Cups....so easy to knock Scotland as a football nation...they have seriously punched above their weight for such a small country and have produced many world class players...

Sorry - I have to pick you up on this. Between 1950 and 1998, England came through qualification in 1950, 1954, 1958, 1962, 1982, 1986, 1990 and 1998. That’s eight times, not the seven you mention. 

Scotland have only ever played in 8 world cups (you could also argue that they techincially ‘qualified’ in 1950 too - albeit by finishing behind England in the home nations’ championship - but opted not to send a team).

England also participated in 1970 by virtue of winning in 1966. In terms of ‘percentage of tournaments qualified for’ in the time period you mention, England’s record is superior to Scotland’s - and to make out that Scotland had a better record of qualifying for world cups than England between 1950 and 1998 is disingenuous.

England - 8 qualifications from 11 qualification campaigns - 72.7% success rate.

Scotland - 8 or 9 qualifications from 13 qualification campaigns, depending on whether you count 1950. Either way, lower than 72.7%. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BS4 on Tour...

BS4 on Tour...

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, North London Red said:

Sorry - I have to pick you up on this. Between 1950 and 1998, England came through qualification in 1950, 1954, 1958, 1962, 1982, 1986, 1990 and 1998. That’s eight times, not the seven you mention. 

Scotland have only ever played in 8 world cups (you could also argue that they techincially ‘qualified’ in 1950 too - albeit by finishing behind England in the home nations’ championship - but opted not to send a team).

England also participated in 1970 by virtue of winning in 1966. In terms of ‘percentage of tournaments qualified for’ in the time period you mention, England’s record is superior to Scotland’s - and to make out that Scotland had a better record of qualifying for world cups than England between 1950 and 1998 is disingenuous.

England - 8 qualifications from 11 qualification campaigns - 72.7% success rate.

Scotland - 8 or 9 qualifications from 13 qualification campaigns, depending on whether you count 1950. Either way, lower than 72.7%. 

Apologies, I missed out one England ‘qualification’ - so my point still stands, Scotland ‘qualified’ for 9 World Cups between 1950 and 1998 and England ‘qualified’ for 8 World Cups in the same time period....Scotland have punched well above their weight for such a small nation....

Also in the same time period Scotland did not qualify for the World Cup Finals of 1962, 1966, 1970 and 1994. Whilst England didn’t qualify for the World Cup Finals of 1974, 1978 and 1994 and they didn’t have to qualify for the Finals of 1966 (as hosts) and 1970 (as holders). And Scotland qualified for five successive World Cup Finals from 1974 to 1990 whilst England only managed to qualify for three during that time.

So to me Scotland’s record is impressive for a country with such small population figures over the time period discussed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...