Academy minutes , the drop off.

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

You can’t think differently, you have to defend me no matter what, remember??

I think your form is off

[mozo]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I think your form is off

Oh so you've cherry picked an arbitrary selection of Silvio's posts and manipulated the data to make a point???!! 

[The Constant Rabbit]

I might actually give him a bit of credit here.

 

Maybe it was as simple as he wanted to be fair to Huddersfield by playing the same quality of players as he did against Blackburn as both are locked in a end of season relegation battle.

 

Probably wrong, but maybe?

[Back of the Dolman]

2 minutes ago, The Constant Rabbit said:

I might actually give him a bit of credit here.

 

Maybe it was as simple as he wanted to be fair to Huddersfield by playing the same quality of players as he did against Blackburn as both are locked in a end of season relegation battle.

 

Probably wrong, but maybe?

I’d of thought Huddersfield would have preferred him to play a weaker side than he did against Blackburn.

Not a similarly strong side to ensure a fair and even relegation battle.

Cant see that’s the reason myself 

[Davefevs]

13 minutes ago, mozo said:

Oh so you've cherry picked an arbitrary selection of Silvio's posts and manipulated the data to make a point???!! 

In my cherry picked selection, your posts have been worse

[Lrrr]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

According to Brian, LM picks the team, decides the tactics….as it should be imho.

It probably makes a bit of a mockery of manager v head coach role titles too, both pick the team, decide the tactics.  This is not a discussion about Nige’s role v Liam’s role.

I’ve usually found manager v head coach usually refers to things like transfers, head coach gets given a selection to choose from whereas manager would work with head of recruitment do a lot more work themselves in saying what the pool is to start with. Then responsibility for the rest of the coaching staff etc, head coaches may more often have staff hired for them or only get a say at the very end whereas managers more involved with the process of whose being brought in to work under them. 

[mozo]

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

In my cherry picked selection, your posts have been worse

Fair

[1960maaan]

8 hours ago, Lrrr said:

I’ve usually found manager v head coach usually refers to things like transfers, head coach gets given a selection to choose from whereas manager would work with head of recruitment do a lot more work themselves in saying what the pool is to start with. Then responsibility for the rest of the coaching staff etc, head coaches may more often have staff hired for them or only get a say at the very end whereas managers more involved with the process of whose being brought in to work under them. 

I think a lot also depends on how the Club is set up and ran , possibly more so than the title. 
Chelsea have had top quality, high profile coaches. But they have all had the players forced on them it seems. Spending about a Billion pounds without buying a striker is madness , but out of the hands of the Coach. We have a DoF ( or technical director) and a recruitment department. Coach has final say and will say what sort of player they want initially . Pearson possibly had more say as I believe he had a hand in rejigging the backroom staff , but from what I've read he was happy with the Analyst / recruitment Dept. We did lose some scouts, not sure we have many eye on scouts now. Mervin Day left as Euro Scout and we lost another to Birmingham.
I would think it would would work in a similar way with Manning. He would say what sort of player he wants and the Analyst / recruitment Dept lines up a list for him to choose from. 

I found an old interview with head of Technical Recruitment , Sean Gilhespy.

Recruitment meetings and what Nige wants

"It starts with Nige," says Gilhespy. The recruitment team works to find players that Nigel Pearson wants, focusing on what a player can bring to the team rather than what they can't do..
"He sets the criteria for what he wants: positionally, at what point he wants certain players. He's really well planned in what he wants to do, and it's so underrated the clarity of the message that comes into us, it's important, because if it's not quite right or it waivers then you get further away from what's needed as the filtering develops.

"It's all part of a plan over a few windows where we can get to a place where he's got what he wants."

The team narrows down searches based on what he wants. Certain characteristics are prioritised.

The club's ideas and strategies must be factored in too.

"When he [Pearson] first came in just a few days in, we sat down and he wanted to see how we worked and what we were looking at and how we present certain things and some of the certain tools we use," says Gilhespy.

"He liked what he saw and was happy and said go get on with it really. He's very good for letting you work in your area and to show your expertise in that area."

So unless Tins in his new role imposes his ideas on things , I think Manning would get who he wants to fit his ideas. 

[Steve Watts]

17 hours ago, redkev said:

Whilst on the subject of academy players coming through has anyone watched enough of palmer Holden to think he would be for a first team squad place next season 

Seb has no prospects in a Liam Manning led Bristol city and would be better off going elsewhere. As would any young striker. You would have to be of an exceptional standard as a young striker to break into a Championship first team that only plays with one striker. Even moreso for a head coach who has never blooded youth in his career. 

11 hours ago, Back of the Dolman said:

I don’t think you’ll find LM is willing to sacrifice results, especially with the fan base feeling about him.

As for senior players not liking a youngster being picked ahead of them, I’d say suck it up.

They’re all part of the squad and they don’t have a god given right to be in the first 11

The trouble with that argument is that it's been demonstrated that results aren't massively more important than performances to fans. Indeed the latter feeds the former. We set up and play like we did against Blackburn, against Southampton, against Watford then we get both performances and results. It's perplexing that he doesn't see that.

10 hours ago, The Constant Rabbit said:

I might actually give him a bit of credit here.

 

Maybe it was as simple as he wanted to be fair to Huddersfield by playing the same quality of players as he did against Blackburn as both are locked in a end of season relegation battle.

 

Probably wrong, but maybe?

I don't think that's the case personally. If he felt like that then he'd have played the same style and system as he did on Wednesday. Instead he pulled another Southampton/QPR trick which almost gifted another team fighting for their Championship lives a golden opportunity to pick up some much needed points.

[Back of the Dolman]

21 minutes ago, Steve Watts said:

Seb has no prospects in a Liam Manning led Bristol city and would be better off going elsewhere. As would any young striker. You would have to be of an exceptional standard as a young striker to break into a Championship first team that only plays with one striker. Even moreso for a head coach who has never blooded youth in his career. 

The trouble with that argument is that it's been demonstrated that results aren't massively more important than performances to fans. Indeed the latter feeds the former. We set up and play like we did against Blackburn, against Southampton, against Watford then we get both performances and results. It's perplexing that he doesn't see that.

I don't think that's the case personally. If he felt like that then he'd have played the same style and system as he did on Wednesday. Instead he pulled another Southampton/QPR trick which almost gifted another team fighting for their Championship lives a golden opportunity to pick up some much needed points.

Maybe I didn’t make my point clearly but what I was saying is that LM won’t be playing more entertaining and exciting football to appease the fans.

He’ll be well aware that there is a large amount of the fan base still unconvinced by him but I think his plan will be to win them over winning matches his way.

And after all people were happy playing along with his cringey fist pumping after Leicester and Plymouth.

I’m not convinced by him but he’s with us so I’ll support the team regardless.

Those people that think he’s the man for the future, well I respect their opinion to.

One camp will be right, one will be wrong or maybe it will end up somewhere in the middle.

Just like our league position 

Edited April 15 by Back of the Dolman

[IAmNick]

30 minutes ago, Steve Watts said:

Even moreso for a head coach who has never blooded youth in his career. 

I get what you're going for, but I think we need to be a bit careful here - has he really never blooded youth in his career? Do you mean a team's own academy specifically, as that's a very different claim. What is "youth", what is "blooding" them?

 

A quick look, at MK Dons:

Brooklyn Ilunga: Gave him his debut from the academy at 17

Callum Tripp: Gave him his debut from the academy at 16

Signed and played:

Patrick O'Hora: 21

Matthew Dennis: 19

 

At Oxford:

Gatlin O'Donkor: Regular starter at 18 from the academy

Tyler Goodman: Played at 19 from the academy

Stephan Negru: Debut at 20

 

 

I'm not trying to go out of my way to defend Manning, but I'm just interested where this "He hates youth" thing comes from. His signings have been pretty young, he's playing some pretty young players... what do we mean specifically here?

The above is from a quick look so might be a bit wrong. It feels a bit like it's been said a few times recently though and is now accepted as truth.

Edited April 15 by IAmNick

[The Bard]

22 hours ago, FNQ said:

You’ve got to tell a few white lies these days to get a job…

"These days"

 

 

[Silvio Dante]

34 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

I get what you're going for, but I think we need to be a bit careful here - has he really never blooded youth in his career? Do you mean a team's own academy specifically, as that's a very different claim. What is "youth", what is "blooding" them?

 

A quick look, at MK Dons:

Brooklyn Ilunga: Gave him his debut from the academy at 17

Callum Tripp: Gave him his debut from the academy at 16

Signed and played:

Patrick O'Hora: 21

Matthew Dennis: 19

 

At Oxford:

Gatlin O'Donkor: Regular starter at 18 from the academy

Tyler Goodman: Played at 19 from the academy

Stephan Negru: Debut at 20

 

 

I'm not trying to go out of my way to defend Manning, but I'm just interested where this "He hates youth" thing comes from. His signings have been pretty young, he's playing some pretty young players... what do we mean specifically here?

The above is from a quick look so might be a bit wrong. It feels a bit like it's been said a few times recently though and is now accepted as truth.

Fair challenge. 
 

For everyone it’ll be a bit different and it really comes down to your definition of “bringing them through” or more broadly, what constitutes an academy player once they’ve hit the first team. For example, nobody would class Sam Bell as an academy player that Liam has brought through on the basis of Sam’s status when he arrived. On the other side of the coin, it’s difficult to argue he’s brought JKL through despite his time on the bench as he’s not really got on the pitch.

My definition of “bringing a player through” (and this will be arbitrary) is that you’ve given them their debut (or brought them back in after they may have had a sporadic game prior) and then they’ve gone on to be established in the first team squad under you, regularly playing minutes - cutoff for me is 5-10 games played as that is a sign you’re in the squad and playing regularly, but again that’s arbitrary. That means I don’t really class Joseph James as an academy player Nige brought through for example - he was a needed injury crisis game.

On the names above, O’Donkor and Goodrham had been established in Oxfords first team squad before LM got there. Negru there is an argument for - I think he pretty much hit the first team squad as soon as he signed (which was pre LM), but LM did give him his debut and he meets the threshold above. It’s a question of if he’s considered academy there.

MK Dons - Ilunga was one league game (5 EFL trophy) and farmed out to Conference South (which looks the right decision as not played a league game for Dons for over a year and on loan, so wouldn’t knock LMs judgement there). Tripp was one EFL trophy game. O’Hara was a Martin signing and had played a fair bit before LM arrived. Dennis I agree was a signing and then played straight away so it’s similar to Negru.

Again, it’ll all be a bit arbitrary (and people will have different definitions), and it’s also true - not just with us but generally that fans tend to expect a 19 year old signing to more immediately be in the first team than a 19 year old academy. But the only “academy” player I think you can make a case for here is probably Ilunga, and that was EFL trophy. Neghru though looks a success story and hopefully Murphy can do similar for us.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, 1960maaan said:

I think a lot also depends on how the Club is set up and ran , possibly more so than the title. 
Chelsea have had top quality, high profile coaches. But they have all had the players forced on them it seems. Spending about a Billion pounds without buying a striker is madness , but out of the hands of the Coach. We have a DoF ( or technical director) and a recruitment department. Coach has final say and will say what sort of player they want initially . Pearson possibly had more say as I believe he had a hand in rejigging the backroom staff , but from what I've read he was happy with the Analyst / recruitment Dept. We did lose some scouts, not sure we have many eye on scouts now. Mervin Day left as Euro Scout and we lost another to Birmingham.
I would think it would would work in a similar way with Manning. He would say what sort of player he wants and the Analyst / recruitment Dept lines up a list for him to choose from. 

I found an old interview with head of Technical Recruitment , Sean Gilhespy.

Recruitment meetings and what Nige wants

"It starts with Nige," says Gilhespy. The recruitment team works to find players that Nigel Pearson wants, focusing on what a player can bring to the team rather than what they can't do..
"He sets the criteria for what he wants: positionally, at what point he wants certain players. He's really well planned in what he wants to do, and it's so underrated the clarity of the message that comes into us, it's important, because if it's not quite right or it waivers then you get further away from what's needed as the filtering develops.

"It's all part of a plan over a few windows where we can get to a place where he's got what he wants."

The team narrows down searches based on what he wants. Certain characteristics are prioritised.

The club's ideas and strategies must be factored in too.

"When he [Pearson] first came in just a few days in, we sat down and he wanted to see how we worked and what we were looking at and how we present certain things and some of the certain tools we use," says Gilhespy.

"He liked what he saw and was happy and said go get on with it really. He's very good for letting you work in your area and to show your expertise in that area."

So unless Tins in his new role imposes his ideas on things , I think Manning would get who he wants to fit his ideas. 

Mike - I posted this link the other day too.

This view that players are forced onto a manager / head-coach is too simplistic.

It is of course up to the talent ID / Technical recruitment team to make sure they meet the brief - hence clarity that Nige gave so crucial.  But on the same basis it is up to the manager / head-coach to let the recruitment team know through the process if the players they come up with are suitable too.  This isn’t a straight line process:

Manager hands over brief > recruitment team go away and do their stuff > provide 3 players > manager chooses one

There will be to’ing and fro’ing along the way.  Pointless recruitment team handing over 3 names if they all get rejected.  That is why Liam and Nige have / had regular meetings, to check along the way.

Of course a manager can ask that a player he likes is put into the process, as can anyone else too.  Twine for Liam, Jamo for Nige for example.

If the recruitment team keep coming back with the wrong players, then either the brief was poor, or the searching is…or maybe a bit of both.

We (allegedly) know that Nige was offered a CB in August - Daniel Ayala.  Nige rejected it.  I suspect the reason he got offered Ayala was more down to him being cheap, ie the closest player to meeting the brief with the money available.

[spudski]

We've been blessed in a short space of time, with academy players who were Championship ready and some now Prem.

Under NP I think he included some academy players, even though they weren't capable of playing well consistently at this standard. But then he wasn't given money to bring in players that were considered any better. 

At this present time under Manning, he's being given money to spend. To bring in loans. 

Imo, what we have in the academy right now, isn't Championship ready. 

Let's be honest, we've been very blessed in recent years. 

I also really believe that BT would push for players to be included in his previous role. In his new role, imo, it's no coincidence that inclusion has fallen off, regardless of whether they are good enough or not. 

Previously he was judged on the academy. Not now under his new role. 

[Davefevs]

Excellent post @spudski (I sound like Robbored!)

True - it’s a bit poacher turned game gamekeeper isn’t it?

[spudski]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Excellent post @spudski (I sound like Robbored!)

True - it’s a bit poacher turned game gamekeeper isn’t it?

That's very much how I see it Dave. 

It'll be interesting to see over the summer who we recruit, who we release and what academy players are included in the first team. 

And whether any ' pathways' are blocked. 

Also if any words of truth are given by either the club or player re Mbude. 

[1960maaan]

10 minutes ago, spudski said:

That's very much how I see it Dave. 

It'll be interesting to see over the summer who we recruit, who we release and what academy players are included in the first team. 

And whether any ' pathways' are blocked. 

Also if any words of truth are given by either the club or player re Mbude. 

We heard some very interesting stories some years ago, we used to play golf with some players several years ago . Not complimentary about BT and he sounds like he is very self serving and not the Club man he likes to appear. 
While he was with the Academy , bringing through players made him look good. Now his role has changed you could argue, new signings would shine a positive light on him. 

As you the summer , and going forward , may be very telling.

[Mendip City]

20 hours ago, Lrrr said:

Knight-Lebel is the curious one for yesterday that Manning would rather put a RB and make shift RCB in a back three in the middle of the back three over playing an actual centre back there, I'd be getting pretty annoyed by now if I were Knight-Lebel, he's played just 1100 minutes (including U21's) in what's one of the most important years for his development where he's had to sit on the bench for the first team where either Atkinson gets fit in the summer or we probably buy another CB over him. 

I agree with this - perfect opportunity to assess JKL. We’ve got a challenge over the summer - Naismith and Atkinson might or might not be fit for next season so do we buy another centre half and risk having way too many (and block the “pathway”)? 2 or 3 games now would tell us whether JKL is likely to be up to it as a stand-in defender, save the transfer budget and not block the pathway. If the lad isn’t up to it yet, he may as well get out and get a decent loan somewhere. 

[Red-Robbo]

3 hours ago, IAmNick said:

I get what you're going for, but I think we need to be a bit careful here - has he really never blooded youth in his career? Do you mean a team's own academy specifically, as that's a very different claim. What is "youth", what is "blooding" them?

 

A quick look, at MK Dons:

Brooklyn Ilunga: Gave him his debut from the academy at 17

Callum Tripp: Gave him his debut from the academy at 16

Signed and played:

Patrick O'Hora: 21

Matthew Dennis: 19

 

At Oxford:

Gatlin O'Donkor: Regular starter at 18 from the academy

Tyler Goodman: Played at 19 from the academy

Stephan Negru: Debut at 20

 

 

I'm not trying to go out of my way to defend Manning, but I'm just interested where this "He hates youth" thing comes from. His signings have been pretty young, he's playing some pretty young players... what do we mean specifically here?

The above is from a quick look so might be a bit wrong. It feels a bit like it's been said a few times recently though and is now accepted as truth.

 

Gatlin O'Donkor has to be a made-up name, surely?  

[Davefevs]

10 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Gatlin O'Donkor has to be a made-up name, surely?  

He’s as much of a handful on the pitch as he is in the primary school Spelling Bee comp!

[W-S-M Seagull]

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I probably think differently to @Silvio Dante.

As it stands I don’t think he is disrespecting the pathway, so there’s nothing to assert.  You’ll see my comments pre-match yesterday re JKL, I don’t think it was right to start him yesterday.  I’d have given him more minutes on Wednesday, but we are talking 5-10 mins more.

I think that the hierarchy put pressure on him pre-Easter and now he’s trying to secure results.  So in some ways they are culpable / responsible.

+++++

@red panda don’t forget debut for Joseph James (started) and JKL (sub in) as well as Yeboah’s minutes.

It shouldn't have taken SL to come along and possibly tell him to play to the squad's strengths. 

That is a big ️ next to Mannings name for me. Maybe had he of played to pur strengths to begin with, we'd still have something to play for. 

[petehinton]

On 14/04/2024 at 12:23, petehinton said:

Also having to post this for people to know, as god forbid our own club update us on our academy lads….

Finger on the pulse!

[Steve Watts]

5 hours ago, IAmNick said:

I get what you're going for, but I think we need to be a bit careful here - has he really never blooded youth in his career? Do you mean a team's own academy specifically, as that's a very different claim. What is "youth", what is "blooding" them?

(The remainder of the post edited out just to avoid long quote boxes)

Yeah, I guess my definition is that of utilising the clubs academy to bring through first team players.  I concede that we've had a good few years of productivity from the Academy and maybe we're in slight downward trend at the moment.  I think Silvio has addressed the examples you make quite well, and as such I think it meets the criteria of not wanting to bring through academy prospects.  I accept that he has signed and/or played youth, but none that were given a real chance from the academy.  EFL trophy games are as much (or more) about resting the first teamers than giving academy kids a game.  

I just can't see SPH in particular making it here.  Tommy may well (probably will) leave in the summer, but I still can't see him being given a chance over Nakhi or Sammy.  And Manning has shown that a chance won't come alongside them.  

It's obviously been discussed to hell and back about JKL not being given a chance in a dead rubber (for us) and instead shifting a number of players into weaker positions.  For my money, JKL has always looked like a player who could shine in the limited exposure he's had.  Was excellent at Forest for example, and I don't recall him looking like a fish out of water any other time either.  Looking at it (without the benefit of seeing them in training day in day out), but going with a depleted bench (several times) and going with a makeshift defence instead of playing a dedicated centre half who's been with the first team for most of the season (Saturday), does look like a lack of intent by Manning to utilise the tools at his disposal. 

I just certainly don't have any faith that another Tommy or Sam Bell for example will emerge under Manning.  And if he's going to continue to buy youth rather than nurture it, then the Academy becomes a very expensive piece of window dressing.