Emphraim Yeboah

[NcnsBcfc]

6 hours ago, marcofisher said:

He is clearly training with the first team and that will benefit him just as much in the long run as getting minutes just for the sake of it where he is perhaps not quite there yet.

My Eldest has some friends in the Under 18s and 21s and I'm led to believe that training has certainly changed.

Alongside the magical lines on the train pitches, LM only takes around 14-15 first teamers that train together. The young ones are now back training with the Under 21s and Under 18s respectively.

Cue a few bruised egos I'm sure, but it certainly looks like LM has his own ideas of both training and game management for young players now.

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

55 minutes ago, Street red said:

Agreed he's done nothing wrong a constant menace you just had that feeling something would happen when he did come on. Good on the boy hope he does get another chance.

Personally I can't see why so much vitiol is being thrown at him. For a just 17 year old he's been excellent when he's come on, however his performances have been ok.  He's certainly not made any howlers or anything to suggest he's a liability.

[Gratz260689]

8 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Mehmeti has proven why NP wasn't willing to give him game time. 

Are we back to the days of waiting until a player turns 23/24 before they are deemed ready? 

Mehmeti has done more in his cameo roles over the last few games than yeboah

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 minute ago, Gratz260689 said:

Mehmeti has done more in his cameo roles over the last few games than yeboah

That will be because Yeboah hasn't played a single minute under Manning

[Gratz260689]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

That will be because Yeboah hasn't played a single minute under Manning

I meant yeboah this season, when he’s came on he’s looked for fouls to easy, and been to raw, atleast with mehmeti he looks a threat!! 

[Rocking Red Cyril]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Is he or next signing ?

[Cityboy1954]

9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

He’s a confident young fella.  Told Tins when he signed his photo would be on the wall like the other Academy players who’d reached the first team, and that it wouldn’t be long either.  I like his confidence.  But he’s a little way off what’s needed as it stands.

Dave he couldnt be no worse than weinman or Baby bell could he .

[Cityboy1954]

4 minutes ago, Cityboy1954 said:

Dave he couldnt be no worse than weinman or Baby bell could he .

Thought youd disagree Graham C

Edited December 10, 2023 by Cityboy1954

[W-S-M Seagull]

Around the time of Nigels departure I commented that the board would struggle to find another manager who would be so willing to invest in youth. 

Nigel was at the point in his career where he didn't care about his win record. 

As we know, Nige would just get on with the job and work with what he had and that included utilising the academy. 

Early signs suggest that Manning does not trust academy players because of the tactical side. 

It's all well and good having a young and upcoming head coach, but when it comes down to it they are more concerned about their own win record so therfore less willing to play academy players and would rather look to bring in players from outside the club. LJ was a prime example of this. 

Talk of us looking to bring in a left sided player concerns me as its not an area we should be looking to recruit in with the players we have that play on the left. 

 

 

 

[Silvio Dante]

13 hours ago, NcnsBcfc said:

My Eldest has some friends in the Under 18s and 21s and I'm led to believe that training has certainly changed.

Alongside the magical lines on the train pitches, LM only takes around 14-15 first teamers that train together. The young ones are now back training with the Under 21s and Under 18s respectively.

Cue a few bruised egos I'm sure, but it certainly looks like LM has his own ideas of both training and game management for young players now.

This is both sensible and disturbing at the same time.

There is no doubt Manning has a “set” way that involves “processs”, “behaviours” etc etc and the players will need to have that “trained” into them. Smaller the group, more you can focus on training those behaviours and patterns in etc.

However, what it also does is make it a closed shop. That pathway becomes less visible, and more importantly for the here and now it gives you less options for the team. Pring (for example) playing badly? No matter, he’s in the squad because the academy players don’t know the exact thing they’re supposed to do at the exact moment. It also potentially explains LMs reticence to bring through academy at prior clubs - if you’re working with that set group and overloading them with information it’s enough work.

It makes sense in the here and now of an immediate appointment and need to train the approach into players. But I’d be disappointed if it was the long term approach, and it’d (again) be contrary to the noises made at appointment

[W-S-M Seagull]

21 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

This is both sensible and disturbing at the same time.

There is no doubt Manning has a “set” way that involves “processs”, “behaviours” etc etc and the players will need to have that “trained” into them. Smaller the group, more you can focus on training those behaviours and patterns in etc.

However, what it also does is make it a closed shop. That pathway becomes less visible, and more importantly for the here and now it gives you less options for the team. Pring (for example) playing badly? No matter, he’s in the squad because the academy players don’t know the exact thing they’re supposed to do at the exact moment. It also potentially explains LMs reticence to bring through academy at prior clubs - if you’re working with that set group and overloading them with information it’s enough work.

It makes sense in the here and now of an immediate appointment and need to train the approach into players. But I’d be disappointed if it was the long term approach, and it’d (again) be contrary to the noises made at appointment

Surely Tinnion must be delighted with this change in approach? 

[Silvio Dante]

5 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Surely Tinnion must be delighted with this change in approach? 

It depends if it’s short or long term. Short term, as I said, I absolutely see the logic in it but longer term it’s more difficult to 

So, as with not hanging LM for not playing Yeboah I’m also not going to criticise him for a move I can see the short term logic of such as this one

[W-S-M Seagull]

8 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

It depends if it’s short or long term. Short term, as I said, I absolutely see the logic in it but longer term it’s more difficult to 

So, as with not hanging LM for not playing Yeboah I’m also not going to criticise him for a move I can see the short term logic of such as this one

I think my concerns are, does an Alex Scott get the same opportunities under Manning? 

I'm not quite sure. I don't think Manning is willing to overlook rawness. 

BT previously spoke about how previously academy players were often called to go and train with the first team. It seems this may not be the case anymore?

Will we now return to the days of sending players out on loan? Employing a loan physio? 

[Silvio Dante]

3 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I think my concerns are, does an Alex Scott get the same opportunities under Manning? 

I'm not quite sure. I don't think Manning is willing to overlook rawness. 

BT previously spoke about how previously academy players were often called to go and train with the first team. It seems this may not be the case anymore?

Will we now return to the days of sending players out on loan? Employing a loan physio? 

I think what you have to remember is Nige was an anomaly in the amount he played academy players, and this was undoubtedly driven in part by circumstance. We gave the most minutes to academy players in the top two leagues so even maintaining that (noting that ability coming through isn’t always consistent) would be difficult. 
 

Thats not to say Manning wouldn’t give a Scott a chance but he may not play a Kadji or an Omar Taylor-Clarke. And in a lot of ways that’s natural as finances improve - you can take less of a “punt” on academy players as you have money to get in proven.

Dont get me wrong - the point that he’s not brought through Academy to date is concerning, and this measure makes it less likely that more will make the breakthrough in the short term. The key for me is how this develops and if we’re sat here start of next season with pathway still seemingly blocked then I think there are questions to be asked over Tinnions statements or Mannings intent.

[Rob k]

11 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think what you have to remember is Nige was an anomaly in the amount he played academy players, and this was undoubtedly driven in part by circumstance. We gave the most minutes to academy players in the top two leagues so even maintaining that (noting that ability coming through isn’t always consistent) would be difficult. 
 

Thats not to say Manning wouldn’t give a Scott a chance but he may not play a Kadji or an Omar Taylor-Clarke. And in a lot of ways that’s natural as finances improve - you can take less of a “punt” on academy players as you have money to get in proven.

Dont get me wrong - the point that he’s not brought through Academy to date is concerning, and this measure makes it less likely that more will make the breakthrough in the short term. The key for me is how this develops and if we’re sat here start of next season with pathway still seemingly blocked then I think there are questions to be asked over Tinnions statements or Mannings intent.

Mannings main job is to keep himself in a job for the next 2 years. If I’m a manager of a championship club and I’m given funds then im going after the experienced Pro to sign and the only way an academy player plays is if they are 100% good enough.  It ultimately did NP no favours by using our academy players. 

[bcfc01]

1 minute ago, Rob k said:

Mannings main job is to keep himself in a job for the next 2 years. If I’m a manager of a championship club and I’m given funds then im going after the experienced Pro to sign and the only way an academy player plays is if they are 100% good enough.  It ultimately did NP no favours by using our academy players. 

He didn't have much choice at times, but I get the general point you are making.

Edited December 11, 2023 by bcfc01

[Rob k]

2 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

He didn't have much choice at times, but I get the general point you are making.

You’re right, he didn’t have much choice, however that didn’t affect the decision to sack him. 

[spudski]

4 minutes ago, Rob k said:

Mannings main job is to keep himself in a job for the next 2 years. If I’m a manager of a championship club and I’m given funds then im going after the experienced Pro to sign and the only way an academy player plays is if they are 100% good enough.  It ultimately did NP no favours by using our academy players. 

As our 'Philosophy' is to compete by developing Academy products, and fast tracking them to first team, and attracting scholars in doing so...I would be interested to know how much influence and pressure Tins and the board give our managers into playing them. 

It's obvious some aren't ready for Championship football, but they've been included on the less. 

I personally don't think NPs judgement is that bad to play someone like Yeboah, unless there was pressure from above to do so. 

And if true...Manning isn't including so many academy players in first team training...then perhaps a shift?

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Around the time of Nigels departure I commented that the board would struggle to find another manager who would be so willing to invest in youth. 

Nigel was at the point in his career where he didn't care about his win record. 

As we know, Nige would just get on with the job and work with what he had and that included utilising the academy. 

Early signs suggest that Manning does not trust academy players because of the tactical side. 

It's all well and good having a young and upcoming head coach, but when it comes down to it they are more concerned about their own win record so therfore less willing to play academy players and would rather look to bring in players from outside the club. LJ was a prime example of this. 

Talk of us looking to bring in a left sided player concerns me as its not an area we should be looking to recruit in with the players we have that play on the left. 

 

 

 

In an ideal world, should be coaching those already here to be better.  We have two in Bell and Mehmeti who could save us splashing out, especially as both are young with plenty of upside.

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

This is both sensible and disturbing at the same time.

There is no doubt Manning has a “set” way that involves “processs”, “behaviours” etc etc and the players will need to have that “trained” into them. Smaller the group, more you can focus on training those behaviours and patterns in etc.

However, what it also does is make it a closed shop. That pathway becomes less visible, and more importantly for the here and now it gives you less options for the team. Pring (for example) playing badly? No matter, he’s in the squad because the academy players don’t know the exact thing they’re supposed to do at the exact moment. It also potentially explains LMs reticence to bring through academy at prior clubs - if you’re working with that set group and overloading them with information it’s enough work.

It makes sense in the here and now of an immediate appointment and need to train the approach into players. But I’d be disappointed if it was the long term approach, and it’d (again) be contrary to the noises made at appointment

I think we have to be mindful of some training ground gossip.  Not saying what Neil said isn’t true, but bearing in mind we only have 14 senior outfield players fit, the keepers typically taken off on their own, with the likes of Joe Duncan used in training, numbers will be short for certain sessions.  We also know that different sessions are for different objectives.  Some sessions will take just the players who started, whilst the non-starters from the previous game are taken off for a bit more intensive work.  We know they’ve had an 11v11 in Manning’s time here, so that must’ve involved some of the “pathway”.

Are we suggesting that JKL, JM, EY aren’t joining in training, because that makes 17 outfield, plus the likes of Nahki stepping up his training.

I do agree with you and @W-S-M Seagull that LM is likely to be anywhere near as “trusting” (if at all) with the younger players at this point than Nige, and I do agree that Nige as various times was happy to “test” them in a first team environment to gauge where they were.  Some swam, some went back to the Academy to put their arm-bands back on.  I loved that about Nige, also the buzz around the ground when you hear that an academy player is gonna make his debut, a bit of a “I was there…” moment.

[Davefevs]

13 minutes ago, Rob k said:

Mannings main job is to keep himself in a job for the next 2 years. If I’m a manager of a championship club and I’m given funds then im going after the experienced Pro to sign and the only way an academy player plays is if they are 100% good enough.  It ultimately did NP no favours by using our academy players. 

I don’t disagree, but paying lip-service to the Academy isn’t part of the remit he was brought in for either.

Its too early to judge how he will use the Academy.

Nige had no choice, he had no money.

3 minutes ago, spudski said:

As our 'Philosophy' is to compete by developing Academy products, and fast tracking them to first team, and attracting scholars in doing so...I would be interested to know how much influence and pressure Tins and the board give our managers into playing them. 

It's obvious some aren't ready for Championship football, but they've been included on the less. 

I personally don't think NPs judgement is that bad to play someone like Yeboah, unless there was pressure from above to do so. 

And if true...Manning isn't including so many academy players in first team training...then perhaps a shift?

Nige tried to introduce them without over-exposing them.  Didn’t always work, but he created an environment to lessen that risk.

It was a huge success of the last 2+ years.

Some of those players, e.g. Conway and Bell are fully fledged first teamers, so the conveyor belt might slow a little.

I can imagine Palmer-Houlden being part of the first team set-up next season.  If we can get Benarous back fit too, and someone like JKL might be more ready to play a fuller part too.

[Silvio Dante]

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I don’t disagree, but paying lip-service to the Academy isn’t part of the remit he was brought in for either.

Its too early to judge how he will use the Academy.

Nige had no choice, he had no money.

 

What I would say is that if he doesn’t use the academy (and I say that with the caveat that I understand the current approach, finances improving, dependent on ability etc) then it’s another cross against what was sold.

We know it’s not front foot attacking football (whatever that is!), we know it’s not pushing on this squad to success as it’s not set up for LM (so he needs his own players/time to reshape) and then if it’s also not developing young players then it’s hard to say any part of the statements on his appointment are true.

We seem to end up in that place one heck of a lot recently!

[chalkeyred]

10 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

In an ideal world, should be coaching those already here to be better.  We have two in Bell and Mehmeti who could save us splashing out, especially as both are young with plenty of upside.

Agreed.

On the basis that we have brought in a 'progressive' coach (effectively for the whole club structure), do you think we have existing players that will thrive under what seems to be a different playing philosophy? 

[IAmNick]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Around the time of Nigels departure I commented that the board would struggle to find another manager who would be so willing to invest in youth. 

Nigel was at the point in his career where he didn't care about his win record. 

As we know, Nige would just get on with the job and work with what he had and that included utilising the academy. 

Early signs suggest that Manning does not trust academy players because of the tactical side. 

It's all well and good having a young and upcoming head coach, but when it comes down to it they are more concerned about their own win record so therfore less willing to play academy players and would rather look to bring in players from outside the club. LJ was a prime example of this. 

Talk of us looking to bring in a left sided player concerns me as its not an area we should be looking to recruit in with the players we have that play on the left. 

I think you're being unfairly harsh on Manning here (surprise surprise)... and just to be controversial, maybe if Nige had cared more about his (or as he'd no doubt point out, the teams) win record, he'd still be here? The goal of a manager is ultimately to win games after all, the rest is just a bonus on the way. You could make an argument about sacrificing a couple of mid table places to give game time to some kids sure, but that's different.

Manning no doubt needs time to see and assess the academy himself - he hasn't been here long. He's trying to change the way we play and that'll be a lot easier with a smaller group, and with more experienced players. The way we seem to be looking to play - considered, controlled, and so on, aren't what you'd usually associate with a raw 18yo from the academy either. Perhaps we've been spoilt by Scott, but we won't see the likes of him again for 10 years probably, if then.

Who know if he doesn't "trust" academy players yet? You've started with a conclusion, and are now trying to find pieces to make it fit - We have no idea if that's true or not, you're making it up. Which academy players would you have played, and when? The odd 15m cameo for Yeboah in one or two games and that's about it?

We don't want to play academy players. We want to play the best players we can in a position and win matches of football. If that includes our academy then wonderful, we'll all be very happy - and hopefully they get first (and second) dibs before we look elsewhere. We shouldn't be refusing to look elsewhere though at the expense of all else.

 

[Davefevs]

18 minutes ago, chalkeyred said:

Agreed.

On the basis that we have brought in a 'progressive' coach (effectively for the whole club structure), do you think we have existing players that will thrive under what seems to be a different playing philosophy? 

Thrive might be too strong a word, but generally they are all technically sound, so why not, would be my thought.

It’s not like we have a team of long-ball merchants suddenly trying to play passing forward.

There will undoubtedly be some who do better / adapt better than others.

The only real overall difference I’ve seen so far is patience with the ball.  Theatre patience allowing us to recycle and rotate positions to move your opponent about.  Under Nige I’d say when we got it into an area there was more emphasis on trying to create the chance from there, not necessarily the right time though.

The only new pattern I’ve seen (and I’m not a coach) was the Knight / Sykes link-up on Saturday, where Knight got the overlapping or undercutting Sykes in behind a few times.  That seemed to work off if the back of Sykes (RWB) being 1v1 versus Headley (LWB) and Knight finding pockets playing on the right of Conway (Weimann opposite) in a 3421-box.

I’ll continue to observe.

[W-S-M Seagull]

12 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

I think you're being unfairly harsh on Manning here (surprise surprise)... and just to be controversial, maybe if Nige had cared more about his (or as he'd no doubt point out, the teams) win record, he'd still be here? The goal of a manager is ultimately to win games after all, the rest is just a bonus on the way. You could make an argument about sacrificing a couple of mid table places to give game time to some kids sure, but that's different.

Manning no doubt needs time to see and assess the academy himself - he hasn't been here long. He's trying to change the way we play and that'll be a lot easier with a smaller group, and with more experienced players. The way we seem to be looking to play - considered, controlled, and so on, aren't what you'd usually associate with a raw 18yo from the academy either. Perhaps we've been spoilt by Scott, but we won't see the likes of him again for 10 years probably, if then.

Who know if he doesn't "trust" academy players yet? You've started with a conclusion, and are now trying to find pieces to make it fit - We have no idea if that's true or not, you're making it up. Which academy players would you have played, and when? The odd 15m cameo for Yeboah in one or two games and that's about it?

We don't want to play academy players. We want to play the best players we can in a position and win matches of football. If that includes our academy then wonderful, we'll all be very happy - and hopefully they get first (and second) dibs before we look elsewhere. We shouldn't be refusing to look elsewhere though at the expense of all else.

 

No I said "early signs" 

Those signs being that at Oxford and MK he doesn't appear to have introduced many academy players and since he's been here he's not given a single minute to Yeboah and others. Those are just facts. 

His comments about Yeboah suggests to me he doesn't trust youth players. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

40 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

What I would say is that if he doesn’t use the academy (and I say that with the caveat that I understand the current approach, finances improving, dependent on ability etc) then it’s another cross against what was sold.

We know it’s not front foot attacking football (whatever that is!), we know it’s not pushing on this squad to success as it’s not set up for LM (so he needs his own players/time to reshape) and then if it’s also not developing young players then it’s hard to say any part of the statements on his appointment are true.

We seem to end up in that place one heck of a lot recently!

People seem to struggle to understand why I am still so angry and what you've commented is exactly why I am. 

The club came out and said "we accept communication hasn't been good" they then gave a series of interviews etc in an attempt to 'improve communications' 

What has transpired since has shown that during their attempt at improving communications, they were once again telling us absolute bullshit. That once again leaves a sour taste in the mouth. 

People are then somewhat surprised that I'm holding them to account.

If they would have appointed a guy that fit their remit, then I wouldn't be here holding them to account. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

In an ideal world, should be coaching those already here to be better. We have two in Bell and Mehmeti who could save us splashing out, especially as both are young with plenty of upside.

One of the reasons given for the change was that we wanted a 'on the grass' head coach. 

I don't know if it's true or not that we are looking to bring in a left sided player. But if we do I will be pissed off. 

Because if what the club said was true, a on the grass head coach should be working with those players to improve them. Not spending money in a position where money doesn't need to be spent. But we will have to wait and see if we do spend money in that position. 

 

[chalkeyred]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

No I said "early signs" 

Those signs being that at Oxford and MK he doesn't appear to have introduced many academy players and since he's been here he's not given a single minute to Yeboah and others. Those are just facts. 

His comments about Yeboah suggests to me he doesn't trust youth players. 

Is it a trust, or a time to assess thing?

In the relatively short time that he was at each club, do we know if they had any Academy players that had enough quality to step into 1st Team Football?

With the obvious investments that we have made in the HPC / Academy, I'm trusting (praying) that our Academy players are further down the First Team football pathway than either Oxford or MK. 

 

[Numero Uno]

4 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Surely Tinnion must be delighted with this change in approach? 

If true, and we are relying on the word of one person the obvious questions are:

Is Tinnion buying into the new approach? Because one things for sure, if you aren’t training with the first team the opportunity to impress the Manager alongside “real players” rather than inexperienced kids vanishes.

How does it tie in with developing players and increasing the Nest Egg pot that the Ultimate Funder spoke of? Are Jon and Steve on board?

It certainly adds weight to opinions questioning whether the two now in charge of football operations knew what we were getting when they appointed Manning?

[marmite]

13 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

If true, and we are relying on the word of one person the obvious questions are:

Is Tinnion buying into the new approach? Because one things for sure, if you aren’t training with the first team the opportunity to impress the Manager alongside “real players” rather than inexperienced kids vanishes.

How does it tie in with developing players and increasing the Nest Egg pot that the Ultimate Funder spoke of? Are Jon and Steve on board?

It certainly adds weight to opinions questioning whether the two now in charge of football operations knew what we were getting when they appointed Manning?

Brilliant last paragraph.