Pathway for Academy...now closed

[David Brent]

12 hours ago, Malago said:

What a load of utter Barry.

is anyone suggesting Liam wouldn’t pick a Lloyd Kelly, a Bobby Reid, a Antoine Semenyo, a Alex Scott or even a Tommy Conway.

You’ve got JKL at Crewe, who will possibly take Naismith’s squad place next season, and Billy Phillips, as the only realistic academy prospects who look good enough for championship football.

The rest are miles off and the moment.
 

 

It appears that you are judging Semenyo, Scott, Conway et al on their abilities AFTER they had been given an opportunity to flourish in the first team.

We don’t know if the rest are miles off because it’s unlikely they will given an opportunity to show it. 

I have no reason to doubt, based on what happened with Conway and Bell etc..that Jamie Knight-Lebel would be a useful member of the first team squad had we kept him around. I won’t judge him too much on his spell at Crewe just as I didn’t with Conway at Bath City.  

 

[extonsred]

Some 12-15 months ago I seem to remember Tinnion saying the next lot of academy players coming through was even better than we had then!! Do I remember correctly or has brain fog taken hold?

[redsquirrel]

1 minute ago, extonsred said:

Some 12-15 months ago I seem to remember Tinnion saying the next lot of academy players coming through was even better than we had then!! Do I remember correctly or has brain fog taken hold?

you did hear correctly,he just conveniently forgot to add they were still in the under 12s

[Kid in the Riot]

31 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

You really think Liam would have picked a 16 year old Scott to face a Premier League side ?

A raw Semenyo or 19 Yr old Conway. No he wouldn't imo.

Given the financial situation at the time, I'm not sure Pearson had too many options. You could also flip that Q and ask, if Nige had access to more funds then would he have given these players a chance over signing more proven experience/quality. Probably not imo...

[MarcusX]

On 05/10/2024 at 12:06, bearded_red said:

What’s really galling is that when we’re up shit creek without a paddle the narrative becomes one where we’re blooding our own players and we’re doing things differently, and some of us fully buy into that. We’re asked to be patient as we rely on young players and we do just that.

Some of us accept some pretty poor performances with inexperienced players finding their feet at the level, we accept some defeats when a couple of injuries and a small squad has resulted in having to pick an extremely young team. We accept, and actually agree, with the stance of not bringing in expensive loans from the PL to develop their players when we could instead develop our own. We actually prefer a squad that we feel represents us rather than one full of journeymen that couldn’t pick out Bristol on a map.

Then, when it suits, all this goes out the window. They have to back this manager as otherwise the criticism will come to them and suddenly it’s raining tenners again. Suddenly it’s sign two players for the same position, spend a fee on a centre half that you don’t need, bring in a player purely to sit on the bench. We currently have 3 players out injured? And yet on a 9 man bench we still cant find one single space for one of our young players. 

Some may argue that for City to compete for the top six they need this larger squad of experienced imports rather than relying on our youngsters, and okay fine, maybe that’s true. But then you have to do that. If you’re exchanging mid table with Pearson’s squad for mid table with this squad, then I’m sorry there’s no contest. One of my favourite games of recent times was the WBA cup game just after Semenyo was sold, god knows how many academy players played that day, but it was loads and we played brilliantly. That seems a world away now.

You just feel like you’ve been had, you just can’t escape that we’re going round and round in circles endlessly repeating the same mistakes. People wonder why there’s negativity, people suggest there’s an overreaction to an underwhelming start to the season, well this may in part explain why.

This post is spot on

This is exactly why Pearson got more leeway than perhaps Manning is getting.

We’re treating them different and judging similar results by different metrics because the narrative and the context has changed.

And I much preferred seeing 6/7 young academy lads in the squad falling a little short but giving it a go than the tripe we saw Wednesday second half.

[David Brent]

2 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Given the financial situation at the time, I'm not sure Pearson had too many options. You could also flip that Q and ask, if Nige had access to more funds then would he have given these players a chance over signing more proven experience/quality. Probably not imo...

So there was a pathway, necessitated by lack of funds, but that pathway is now closed? Would love to hear Tinnion’s opinion. 

[Kid in the Riot]

1 minute ago, David Brent said:

So there was a pathway, necessitated by lack of funds, but that pathway is now closed? Would love to hear Tinnion’s opinion. 

Or it's a bit more nuanced, and particularly regards two generational talents for this club in Semenyo and Scott, they very likely would have made it to where they are now, in any event. 

And maybe now there aren't players waiting in the wings of that ability and ceiling...

[mozo]

1 minute ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Or it's a bit more nuanced, and particularly regards two generational talents for this club in Semenyo and Scott, they very likely would have made it to where they are now, in any event. 

And maybe now there aren't players waiting in the wings of that ability and ceiling...

Yeah just like Fergie was a legendary manager, but I don't attribute Ryan Giggs' talent to Fergie. And selecting Giggs was surely a no-brainer.

[David Brent]

3 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Or it's a bit more nuanced, and particularly regards two generational talents for this club in Semenyo and Scott, they very likely would have made it to where they are now, in any event. 

And maybe now there aren't players waiting in the wings of that ability and ceiling...

I just think that Liam doesn’t have the hypothetical conundrum you suggested with regards to Nigel spending funds if he had them.

Liam has a choice to use the academy or go and spend a couple of million. I would like Tinnion’s thought, he’ll tell us how great the academy is. Let’s see it. 

[Ivorguy]

32 minutes ago, extonsred said:

Some 12-15 months ago I seem to remember Tinnion saying the next lot of academy players coming through was even better than we had then!! Do I remember correctly or has brain fog taken hold?

I no longer believe a word that man says about football.

He is a football free zone

[Davefevs]

39 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Given the financial situation at the time, I'm not sure Pearson had too many options. You could also flip that Q and ask, if Nige had access to more funds then would he have given these players a chance over signing more proven experience/quality. Probably not imo...

I honestly believe Nige would’ve kept a similar balance of squad size and mix. He understood the importance (and financial benefit) of the academy. He often said “I won’t accumulate players”. He would have liked to have spent, but focussing on quality.

[Kid in the Riot]

11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I honestly believe Nige would’ve kept a similar balance of squad size and mix. He understood the importance (and financial benefit) of the academy. He often said “I won’t accumulate players”. He would have liked to have spent, but focussing on quality.

Think I'd disagree. He also talked about the squad being too light a fair bit.

And, I think he knew what needed to be said to protect the position of the club. 

Brilliant communicator, and brilliant politician too. 

[Davefevs]

And pretty good strategist too!!!!

[italian dave]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Those might be the examples used by me and others in some posts, but it’s certainly not the bar by which I expect an academy player to attain before they get given opportunity.  I don’t characterise by those three, I regularly characterise with Joe James, Tommy Backwell, Omar Taylor-Clarke, and the ones in the next para.  The one raising the bar to that level is perversely Liam Manning.

As I said I’d have happily had JKL (loaned), SPH (loaned), Stokes (signed and loaned), Morrison, Nelson (injured) in / around the first team set-up this season than buy the second striker (not signed one of Armstrong or Mayulu), the extra no10 (not signed one of Twine or Earhy), the extra CB (McNally).

Just to be clear; I’m not suggesting that’s the level at which the bar is set. I’m just using them as examples of players who’d be above the level at which any bar is going to be set.

And if Manning has raised the bar, is that unreasonable? For the very reasons that the posters you quote give.

The level of the bar will inevitably change as circumstances and expectations change. We can agree or disagree about the level it’s at. But it’s not unreasonable that it change. And there’s a difference between it changing and it being blocked. 

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, italian dave said:

Just to be clear; I’m not suggesting that’s the level at which the bar is set. I’m just using them as examples of players who’d be above the level at which any bar is going to be set.

And if Manning has raised the bar, is that unreasonable? For the very reasons that the posters you quote give.

The level of the bar will inevitably change as circumstances and expectations change. We can agree or disagree about the level it’s at. But it’s not unreasonable that it change. And there’s a difference between it changing and it being blocked. 

It is completely unreasonable when it costs of £m’s to not use them!!!

[Redhed123]

2 hours ago, italian dave said:

Just to be clear; I’m not suggesting that’s the level at which the bar is set. I’m just using them as examples of players who’d be above the level at which any bar is going to be set.

And if Manning has raised the bar, is that unreasonable? For the very reasons that the posters you quote give.

The level of the bar will inevitably change as circumstances and expectations change. We can agree or disagree about the level it’s at. But it’s not unreasonable that it change. And there’s a difference between it changing and it being blocked. 

Manning doesn't even watch academy games

[Redhed123]

How many academy players are even getting to train with first team?

[Sir Geoff]

4 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Given the financial situation at the time, I'm not sure Pearson had too many options. You could also flip that Q and ask, if Nige had access to more funds then would he have given these players a chance over signing more proven experience/quality. Probably not imo...

Depends on what his employers targets and ambitions were I suppose.

[Charlie BCFC]

36 minutes ago, Redhed123 said:

Manning doesn't even watch academy games

What evidence do you have of that? 
 

34 minutes ago, Redhed123 said:

How many academy players are even getting to train with first team?

A lot were training with the first team during pre season. Pecover especially has been training into the season aswell. With the injuries to Pring today and Roberts could be out for a bit longer, reckon there’s a good chance Morrison gets a go?

[italian dave]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

It is completely unreasonable when it costs of £m’s to not use them!!!

Even if we’re fielding academy players who aren’t up to it and get relegated at a cost of even more £ms as a result?

I rarely disagree with you Dave, but on this I do.

In my view, rigidly using academy players just because they come from the academy and just to demonstrate that there’s a ‘pathway’ every season is just as inflexible as blocking pathways completely and never ever giving an opportunity to academy players.

It has to depend on the circumstances and expectations of the club and in the abilities and capabilities of the academy players at any given time. Surely?.

Edited October 6 by italian dave

[italian dave]

46 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Depends on what his employers targets and ambitions were I suppose.

I think that’s exactly the point.

The targets and objectives that Bristol City has set its managers over the past decade have been varied in the extreme! 

[GrenadaRed]

I think younger, less confident Managers like LJ and Manning don't feel they can risk playing academy players. More experienced managers, like Pearson,  who have a better track record, feel more confident to bring them on. The Academy pathway is dead under Manning! 

We are all crying out for some hope, instead of this turgid nonsense. Some youngsters won't be ready, but I feel many fans are ready to take some risks and invest in our future instead of watch journeymen slog it out. 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Sir Geoff said:

Depends on what his employers targets and ambitions were I suppose.

He turned down Daniel Ayala.  Pearson could’ve bolstered his squad but that’s not his way.  He’d have loaned some cheap players if so.  He didn’t.

36 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Even if we’re fielding academy players who aren’t up to it and get relegated at a cost of even more £ms as a result?

I rarely disagree with you Dave, but on this I do.

In my view, rigidly using academy players just because they come from the academy and just to demonstrate that there’s a ‘pathway’ every season is just as inflexible as blocking pathways completely and never ever giving an opportunity to academy players.

It has to depend on the circumstances and expectations of the club and in the abilities and capabilities of the academy players at any given time. Surely?.

I’m saying he doesn’t need a bloated squad, he can develop players on-site…that’s very different to what you're suggesting.  He can backfill.  Not farm out.  How many players need to be injured before Manning will give a youngster a go?  Let alone need to.

You can run a trimmer first team squad and give Academy players a pathway.  Where do I say rigidly using?  Even under Pearson, we still needed a terrible injury run to necessitate playing a really weakened team, and then after Cardiff the likes of Vyner were back, etc.  but look at the experience Joe James got, or even Tommy Backwell (being on the bench).  You’re dragging this to extreme scenarios to make your point.  That’s not what I’m saying.  As it stands we’ve got two senior pros not even getting changed (Atkinson and Cornick).

Or you can run a bigger squad and have academy players wondering when they might even get to train with the first team.

 

7 minutes ago, GrenadaRed said:

I think younger, less confident Managers like LJ and Manning don't feel they can risk playing academy players. More experienced managers, like Pearson,  who have a better track record, feel more confident to bring them on. The Academy pathway is dead under Manning! 

We are all crying out for some hope, instead of this turgid nonsense. Some youngsters won't be ready, but I feel many fans are ready to take some risks and invest in our future instead of watch journeymen slog it out. 

And some fly don’t they.

[RollsRoyce]

4 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Think I'd disagree. He also talked about the squad being too light a fair bit.

And, I think he knew what needed to be said to protect the position of the club. 

Brilliant communicator, and brilliant politician too. 

A realist 

[Kid in the Riot]

13 minutes ago, RollsRoyce said:

A realist 

In many ways, yes. Overplayed his hand at the end though, claiming he needed a 45m op to get sorted, when it was realistically 3-6 months on the sidelines. 

[RollsRoyce]

37 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

In many ways, yes. Overplayed his hand at the end though, claiming he needed a 45m op to get sorted, when it was realistically 3-6 months on the sidelines. 

As ever you only ever get part of the story. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Is Atkinson fully available yet?

As in fit and raring to go or would that be post International break at the earliest in respect of e.g. March fitness.

[mozo]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Is Atkinson fully available yet?

As in fit and raring to go or would that be post International break at the earliest in respect of e.g. March fitness.

I know McNally scored today. But I think Atkinson returning would make a world of difference

[Kid in the Riot]

6 minutes ago, RollsRoyce said:

As ever you only ever get part of the story. 

I don't think so...I accept the Lansdowns wanted him gone a long time before...in fact I'm on record end of summer 2023 saying Nige would be sacked as soon as a bad run of results hit. And then I posted after Leeds away he would be sacked, a full two weeks before he was. 

But tell me what Nige was doing in December 2023? Tell me where he is currently employed? 

We are in agreement of the utterly incompetent ownership, but there's no earnest argument that Nige could have stayed in post in absentia. 

If you don't know this, then maybe it is you receiving part of the story. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, mozo said:

I know McNally scored today. But I think Atkinson returning would make a world of difference

Depends..Vyner and Atkinson I like but 18 months. Hmm, that's quite a time out but if we can get the Atkinson of old back.

[Sir Geoff]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Is Atkinson fully available yet?

As in fit and raring to go or would that be post International break at the earliest in respect of e.g. March fitness.

Played the best part of 90 mins in each of the last 2 U21 games.

McCrorie only played 2 x 45 mins in them

[Davefevs]

4 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Played the best part of 90 mins in each of the last 2 U21 games.

McCrorie only played 2 x 45 mins in them

Can see him going

         McNally | Vyner | Atkinson

Tanner                                       McCrorie

At Boro.  Solid base, aerial threat from set pieces with that bunch.

[italian dave]

18 hours ago, Davefevs said:

 

I’m saying he doesn’t need a bloated squad, he can develop players on-site…that’s very different to what you're suggesting.  He can backfill.  Not farm out.  How many players need to be injured before Manning will give a youngster a go?  Let alone need to.

You can run a trimmer first team squad and give Academy players a pathway.  Where do I say rigidly using?  Even under Pearson, we still needed a terrible injury run to necessitate playing a really weakened team, and then after Cardiff the likes of Vyner were back, etc.  but look at the experience Joe James got, or even Tommy Backwell (being on the bench).  You’re dragging this to extreme scenarios to make your point.  That’s not what I’m saying.  As it stands we’ve got two senior pros not even getting changed (Atkinson and Cornick).

Or you can run a bigger squad and have academy players wondering when they might even get to train with the first team.

 

 

Sorry Dave, still feel the absolutism comes in, for example, your suggestion that we could definitely save £ms. My point is that it's far more nuanced than that.

Take JKL this season as an example: if you're going to give him experience by having him sit on the bench, then isnt it at least debateable that he gets more and better experience playing regularly for Crewe. (And potentially learning from senior pros there)? If he's going to be used regularly (as presumably would have been the case had we not signed Mcnally) then is he really up to what we're expecting from the side this season. I'm not convinced. It might have been great experience for him, but it might have cost us points - and we'd maybe not have got that equaliser yesterday.

All conjecture, of course. We'll never know. But I don't have a problem with the judgement having been made the way it has.

Don't get me wrong: as I said at the outset, I'm 100% signed up to Bearded Red's view. I'd love to see more players come through. I just doubt that there'd be the tolerance (from Board and fans) that there has been when expectations have been about staying up and putting the finances right. And I just think that a combination of those expectations and capability of the crop of academy youngsters coming through right now justifies it. And most of all I don't think that means that any pathway is now "closed". 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, italian dave said:

Sorry Dave, still feel the absolutism comes in, for example, your suggestion that we could definitely save £ms. My point is that it's far more nuanced than that.

Take JKL this season as an example: if you're going to give him experience by having him sit on the bench, then isnt it at least debateable that he gets more and better experience playing regularly for Crewe. (And potentially learning from senior pros there)? If he's going to be used regularly (as presumably would have been the case had we not signed Mcnally) then is he really up to what we're expecting from the side this season. I'm not convinced. It might have been great experience for him, but it might have cost us points - and we'd maybe not have got that equaliser yesterday.

All conjecture, of course. We'll never know. But I don't have a problem with the judgement having been made the way it has.

Don't get me wrong: as I said at the outset, I'm 100% signed up to Bearded Red's view. I'd love to see more players come through. I just doubt that there'd be the tolerance (from Board and fans) that there has been when expectations have been about staying up and putting the finances right. And I just think that a combination of those expectations and capability of the crop of academy youngsters coming through right now justifies it. And most of all I don't think that means that any pathway is now "closed". 

All good ID.

I’d have rather brought JKL slowly into our first team environment…you’re kinda saying he would be exposed had we not signed McNally.  I’m saying we had Naismith, and also Atkinson about to return.  We now have more players in his way.  Next summer when Naismith leaves (assumption) LM will still be wondering whether JKL is ready.

[italian dave]

59 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

All good ID.

I’d have rather brought JKL slowly into our first team environment…you’re kinda saying he would be exposed had we not signed McNally.  I’m saying we had Naismith, and also Atkinson about to return.  We now have more players in his way.  Next summer when Naismith leaves (assumption) LM will still be wondering whether JKL is ready.

More than the one assumption in that last sentence!!

[Davefevs]

31 minutes ago, italian dave said:

More than the one assumption in that last sentence!!

Yeah, at least 3….one of which is that LM will be here or even care!

[jj77]

On 05/10/2024 at 13:28, Odd socks said:

Tinnon was biging it up at the fans forum last year , about an academy player who clubs in the premier league were interested in.  Where this lad now ?.

He's probably 12

[Fuber]

Between Kasvosve off to Brighton, Araoye's failed loan spell, and other loans not working out too well, the pathway closed etc etc.

Apologies for this slightly confused ramble.

This loan manager/academy director/head of football operations/ tecknical director is not up to much is he, for someone who bigger up his own 'work' in the academy.

Just don't understand any of it. Usually it's possible to see some sort of logic, but I see no overlaying plan in place.

It's bemusing.

[extonsred]

On 08/10/2024 at 14:52, jj77 said:

He's probably 12

Injured!!