ccfc1234
Well-Known Member
Agree with you, now we are higher up the leagues the development players we are signing hopefully will have more ability for the coaching team to improve.
Incoming - Tom Costello (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter SBAndy
- Start date
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
I don’t think that was the case
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
Sorry I did not know the grammer police were on tonight.When you get to my age "lack of space after a full stop" is the least of my worries
Tommo1993
Well-Known Member
Yeah. Even though it came from Andy Turner “two more before the weekend”, two for the u23’s seems anticlimactic.
Johhny Blue
Well-Known Member
Everyone enjoys scoring goals
(except maybe Dabo)
No plod here mate just thought it was odd and didn't know if there was a reason. Apologies.
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
Apology accepted. This is skybluetalk i'm on ? We are being too polite.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
When the accounts come out it's all lumped together. When we have to borrow money off the owners at extortionate rates it's not split into first team and development. Given we seem to always have a low budget and last year had a small squad I don't think it's unreasonable to want to heavily skew that budget towards the first team.
Of course I'm not adverse to investing in the youth and development as it can prove lucrative for us if we find a gem. But that's the point for me. They should be considered an absolute gem where we'd be disappointed if they didn't make it rather than happily surprised if they do.
U23 - use it to test the final year scholars to see if they're worthy of a pro contract, learning from playing alongside out of favour first teamers or those coming back from injury to keep their fitness up, give them a chance to play themselves into form and work their way back into the first team picture. Signing U23's just to make up the numbers without any real expectation of them is just a waste.
The Philosopher
Well-Known Member
I like building up the u23’s with players we could assess and loan out / develop / bring into first team.
I got dogs abuse from the usual eye rollers on here when I dare suggest signing a 21 year old local “basketball player” to bring in and develop. As it happens, he signed for a similar-sized team in the Championship yesterday. I wish him well and hope he succeeds and the eye rollers and laughing emoji gang show some style if I’m proved right. If he bombs, then they can do the same to me and I’ll accept I got it wrong.
The success and the future (and has been in the past in many ways) of this club does include having a great academy and developing young players. For every McCallum there have been many Dexter Walters and that Dutch guy who’s name escapes me.
I’m pleased with these signings today.
I got dogs abuse from the usual eye rollers on here when I dare suggest signing a 21 year old local “basketball player” to bring in and develop. As it happens, he signed for a similar-sized team in the Championship yesterday. I wish him well and hope he succeeds and the eye rollers and laughing emoji gang show some style if I’m proved right. If he bombs, then they can do the same to me and I’ll accept I got it wrong.
The success and the future (and has been in the past in many ways) of this club does include having a great academy and developing young players. For every McCallum there have been many Dexter Walters and that Dutch guy who’s name escapes me.
I’m pleased with these signings today.
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
Did he sign? Can’t see it on HTAFC site
The Dutch player was Bouwe Bosma, strange signing, was effectively written off a month after signing and loaned out until his contract expired
The Philosopher
Well-Known Member
Checked earlier, something on Twitter said he had and Insta link said “Striker…something something….Huddersfield B”
Can’t find now. Who knows. Might be wrong. Not the first time.
Bosma. Correct, odd signing but if you don’t gamble you stay as you are.
Prerty sure he was scouser! Loads of people on here make out like he was signed as potential as future first team player. We had a load of small technical young lads at the time. Pretty sure the club signed him just because he was about 6ft 4in and to protect some of the technical lads.
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
That doesn’t make sense though in this case, he played very few games for the U23s and was loaned out, which suggests failed signing rather than him being an experiment
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
Was loaned to Lewes (where he came from), Southport and Salisbury in his first year!
Flying Fokker
Well-Known Member
It’s the way he does it.Period.
fatso
Well-Known Member
Agree, I hardly got any sleep last night, worrying about it, I mean, why would you not leave a space after a full stop? It's totally crazy! Sometimes I even leave two spaces (amazingly) just to make sure I've spaced my sentences sufficiently.
Hutch11
Well-Known Member
No we're not you illiterate c**t
Do you not think they have seen him play before. He will initially be in peanuts so why not offer him a 2 year contract. One of the main reasons the youngest come is that they believe they may be given a chance if they perform. What’s the point of putting him under loads of pressure with a 1 year contract.
Years ago Liverpools philosophy was sign a player they then played reserve team football for a year to get to know the Liverpool way. The likes of Gary Gillespie and Phil Babb were signed by them from us and it took months for them to get into the first team yet had they have gone anywhere else they would have been 1st team players from day 1.
This is just a variation on that model.
mark82
Moderator
1. The budget is heavily skewed towards the first team.
2. They aren't signing any players "just to make up the numbers". Any signing is because they see something in them that makes them think they have a chance.
Hey I ran the odds of Kyle Hudlin ever playing in the Championship through the computer for you, let me know if you want to go through the data sometime
Hobo
Well-Known Member
u
1. Robins said a couple of weeks ago they were looking to sign players to bolster the U23's
2. Robins said in interview last season the U23's have their own budget to sign players they feel can be developed.
3. The U23's and development squad is about developing young talent. Ideally for our first team but not always.
There are numerous players who barely got near our first team but are having reasonable careers at League 1, League 2 and even Non League. That is good because it encourahes young talent to sign for us.
If you have two 18 year olds who you really think can make it at the top level, you cam't really develope them by surrounding them by rubbish.
There comes a time when certain players may need to be loaned out to develope. The squad left behind still needs to be of a sufficient standard to give the rest a chance of continued development.
Running a development squad is almost a seperate entity which the first team may and hopefully will benefit from. But to run it properly and to get a return you have to invest in it, players, coaches, facilities etc,. It is not cheap, but produce one class player and the rewards can be huge.
But I would say the biggest remit of the development squad is to give young talent a pathway into professional football. That may not be with us and it may not be at our level. But ultimately that is its remit and what it is judged on. But as we have already seen it has and does on occassions benefit our first team.
| J |
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
Thats more like it.
Hutch11
Well-Known Member
COVKIDSNEVERQUIT
Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
They have their own budget, but it all ultimately comes from the same pot. If you have, say, £20m to spend you could say £19m to 1st team, £1m to development. Or £18m and £2m. It still adds up to £20m and every £ spent on that development squad is a £ that can't be spent on the first team.
I agree about using the U23 to develop young talent. And what better way than get them playing with established pro's either out of favour or returning from injury rather than a bunch of other kids not as good as them to bulk up the numbers? When teaching new recruits on the job do you place them with people that know the job and are doing it to a decent standard already, or just lump them all in the same together? Sign 3 that you'd place a huge wager they'd be first team material than 6 who you're hopeful for rather than expectant.
I've seen people say we only take them on because we think they've got the ability, but how many of them recently have actually broken through, and how many have just ended up being released and ended up playing down the leagues again? It seems that either the scouting is poor, or we're just signing players on the off chance.
If we're signing development players, it should be with the expectation that they WILL end up playing for the first team before their contract expires. Anything less than that has been a waste of resources, because we get nothing for being the best development team.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
we didn’t sign Maddison or Wilson the only success has been McCallum
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
Hyam too has been in a success in terms of first team appearances but not going to produce a fee
Hobo
Well-Known Member
It doesm't matter. We are moving forward as a club and trying to progress talent.
It is proven Premiership Academys rarely produce players for their first team but pay their way by selling on.
We have benefitted from that, so it is ressonable a lot of our produce will go to lower leagues.
What is wrong with that?
Football clubs as a whole have to produce the next generation. They all depend on that. We also know it is not an efficient production line. But fan intervention plays a part in the inefficientcy
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
On the released list at the end of this season alongside that other tremendous signing Danny Cashman, so many of these signings never produce anything.
