[Archived] Rovers Young Guns

[T4E]

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that any of these lads are good enough to hold down a place in the English Premier League Majiball. In all the time the academy has been in existence, not one player who has been released has then come back into the Prem, with any other club. You say that's because the coaches at Ewood are "spoiling" the lads? I suggest that the trend you mention, is in fact a trend of bringing in youngsters that are simply not destined to be good enough.

It's either bad coaching (getting players with enough potential in but not being able to develop them adequately) or bad scouting (not getting players with the necesary amount of potential in the first place). Either way there's a big problem.

[den]

OK, I don't have a problem with that view. We employ two scouts full-time at the academy, and have done for a considerable time, they are answerable to the academy director and if you look at it from your point of view, then again it is a failing of the running of the academy.

At the end of the day if Sam signed a bunch of dud's in the summer we'd be calling for his head, not the scouts. All these forgein signings will surely have been approved by the man in charge and thus he is accountable for the decision.

Yes, but it's not even as simple as that. The truth of the matter, is that wherever Rovers scouts are, more than likely, so are the scouts from the big clubs. These clubs, no doubt have scouting systems far more comprehensive than ours and most likely have the first choice of the best youngsters. As long as we have an academy, we must take youngsters onto the books. You can't have an academy with no-one in it. These kids have been for the most part, in my opinion, destined not to be good enough. What we need, is for someone with suggestions as to how we can get the best kids away from the big city clubs and into Brockhall. That's the problem.

[LeChuck]

I think you underestimate the influence that coaching has on their careers Den, it's not all about natural ability. It's no coincidence that all Arsenal's youngsters come through that academy being able to play one touch pass-and-move football as good as any team in the world.

Other sports offer even better examples. Andy Murray moved away to Spain to learn tennis because of the standard in coaching here, and he's turning out to be the best player these shores have produced in decades. Lewis Hamilton's childhood seemed dedicated to becoming a Formula 1 driver, and that's exactly what he is. Then there's the Williams' sisters and their father, Tiger Woods etc. Yes they all obviously showed natural talent to begin with, but the coaching was also vital.

We're not even talking about unearthing world class talent in terms of Rovers, simply Premier League standard players. A hell of a lot of that can be achieved through good coaching and, like Majiball, I think we're seriously failing in that department.

[Majiball]

Yes, but it's not even as simple as that. The truth of the matter, is that wherever Rovers scouts are, more than likely, so are the scouts from the big clubs. These clubs, no doubt have scouting systems far more comprehensive than ours and most likely have the first choice of the best youngsters. As long as we have an academy, we must take youngsters onto the books. You can't have an academy with no-one in it. These kids have been for the most part, in my opinion, destined not to be good enough. What we need, is for someone with suggestions as to how we can get the best kids away from the big city clubs and into Brockhall. That's the problem.

Sorry Den I could not disagree more. Tranmere last ten years - Jason Koumas and Ryan Taylor

Blackburn Rovers - David Dunn

Shall we add in Crewe and Derby???? Crewe - Ashton

Derby - Huddlestone

All three of those teams have replaced the man in charge during the last ten years at least once, because they wanted new ideas and yet they've produced double or equeal the players we have, why??????? Please remember the budgets and facilities at those clubs do not even come close to Rovers.

So that makes them more successful than us, and tranmere (not even a Academy) have liverpool and Everton to compete with. We not only have twice the catchment area (half of there's is in the sea) but we are a Premiership team with a premiership budget 2M a season. So basically Dunn has cost 20M as he's the only to break in and stay in that we accutually produced (obviously its not really that simple).

The trouble is too many people think its all natural, my opinion is very different as I've seen what top level coaching can do provided its done properly and effectively. As well as all the research that backs it up.

We may as well have no-one in our academy for all the good its done over the last ten years, we'd have saved 20M thats a world class player. The guys in charge have had ten years to come up with ideas, since they haven't I say its time for change.

If you had failed to hit your target 9 out of ten times you'd be sacked from your job because you not capable of doing it.

Its not a nice thing to say but its time for him to go.

[Hughesy]

OK, I don't have a problem with that view. We employ two scouts full-time at the academy, and have done for a considerable time, they are answerable to the academy director and if you look at it from your point of view, then again it is a failing of the running of the academy.

At the end of the day if Sam signed a bunch of dud's in the summer we'd be calling for his head, not the scouts. All these forgein signings will surely have been approved by the man in charge and thus he is accountable for the decision.

Does that include the 2 new scouts from City & Bolton that we have signed?

We have also signed 6 young players for the summer.

[Majiball]

Does that include the 2 new scouts from City & Bolton that we have signed?

We have also signed 6 young players for the summer.

I was on about Nixon, Hartley and Curran, they are the full-time team I believe?????? I have no idea who those new guys are but clubs employ loads of part-time scouts?

Can you name the six players????? I've been rather out of touch for the last month or so, cheers.

At the end of the day they will only develop if they are placed in the right environment to do so.

[Hughesy]

No, Im just aware that they were all on Man City's youth radar but we got them 1st.

I think there are big changes afoot - lets give them the benefit of the doubt for this summer at least.

[Majiball]

No, Im just aware that they were all on Man City's youth radar but we got them 1st.

I think there are big changes afoot - lets give them the benefit of the doubt for this summer at least.

Hopefully they'll make the grade.

I'm not prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt they've had that for ten summers now. One first team player in ten years must make us one of the worst youth producing clubs in the whole country during that time. But if we should reward failure, then so be it.

I will however shut-up about it, as I'm always going on about it.

[Hughesy]

I think Sam is keen to get it sorted though - hopefully that is the difference this time....?!

[den]

I think you underestimate the influence that coaching has on their careers Den, it's not all about natural ability. It's no coincidence that all Arsenal's youngsters come through that academy being able to play one touch pass-and-move football as good as any team in the world.

Other sports offer even better examples. Andy Murray moved away to Spain to learn tennis because of the standard in coaching here, and he's turning out to be the best player these shores have produced in decades. Lewis Hamilton's childhood seemed dedicated to becoming a Formula 1 driver, and that's exactly what he is. Then there's the Williams' sisters and their father, Tiger Woods etc. Yes they all obviously showed natural talent to begin with, but the coaching was also vital.

We're not even talking about unearthing world class talent in terms of Rovers, simply Premier League standard players. A hell of a lot of that can be achieved through good coaching and, like Majiball, I think we're seriously failing in that department.

Let me explain how I see it LeChuck.

Firstly I don't think the academy system has made any difference to which clubs bring through the best youngsters. It's the same now as it was in the 60's, 70's etc, in that the clubs who have the best scouting set ups [and by that, I mean put most money into it and basically have the biggest scouting network - as well as have the drawing power] that bring the best talents through on anything like a regular basis. Having shiny new buildings at Brockhall was an advantage in the early days, but not now.

Rovers have brought some youngsters through though, Hird, Bailey, Duff, Dunn and a few others. Now to say that the coaching of these lads has made the difference is, IMO, wrong. They did/do have natural talent. The coaches will, or should, improve any youngster, but they can't make the difference between that kid being championship material and being good enough to play in a Premier league full of some of the top players in the world.

The comment about Arsenal's kids, expensive as they are - because they were the top youngsters in Europe - seems to err towards my view that they are indeed some of the most naturally talented youngsters in Europe, rather than kids who have been made because of how the coaches work with them. They were picked up in the first instance because of their talent, then improved.

Andy Murray - was he the top tennis player in GB before he went to Spain?

[LeChuck]

Andy Murray - was he the top tennis player in GB before he went to Spain?

He was certainly an excellent one.

The point is though that whatever natural talent he did have would have gone to waste if he'd stayed in England and gone through the poor coaching system we have here. I think the point Rover6 and others are making is that a similar thing is happening to talented young players arriving at our academy.

I can't disagree with too much of what you're saying regarding pulling power, but there's no reason we should be getting greatly outdone by the likes of Middlesbrough. We're not talking about competing with the likes of Man Utd etc. for the most talented players in Europe, but a fairly steady stream of Premier League quality players would save us millions. We should be able to coach youngsters to be as good as people like Mokoena, who aren't exactly brimming with natural ability.

[den]

The point is though that whatever natural talent he did have would have gone to waste if he'd stayed in England and gone through the poor coaching system we have here. I think the point Rover6 and others are making is that a similar thing is happening to talented young players arriving at our academy.

There's no evidence though, that the players who didn't make it at Rovers, would have made PL players under different coaches/coaching methods - is there? I would say the evidence we have to date, proves otherwise.

[LeChuck]

There's no evidence though, that the players who didn't make it at Rovers, would have made PL players under different coaches/coaching methods - is there? I would say the evidence we have to date, proves otherwise.

There's no concrete evidence either way, which is why there's this fairly constant debate going on. If we had some more info to work with we could probably save ourselves all this.

There must be reasons why we're constantly failing to produce players though.

[den]

There must be reasons why we're constantly failing to produce players though.

Yes, whatever the reason, the status Quo isn't, or shouldn't be, acceptable.

[bellamy11]

Andy Murray - was he the top tennis player in GB before he went to Spain?

His older brother Jamie was a higher-rated, higher-ranked young player when they were both kids. Andy went to Spain, Jamie didn't. Andy is now 3rd in the world, will probably be second in the next few months and I'd bet on him winning multiple grand slams. I don't think Jamie is in the top 500 singles players.

[den]

Jamie Murray was the second-best junior player in the world in the early days. He was also older than Andy. I've no idea what happened to Jamie's talents Bellars, but still, Andy was a top young player. He beat Jamie at the age of 12, - before he even he went to Spain.

Coaching improves players in any sport. You wont get to the top though without a great deal of natural talent.

From Wiki:

Leon Smith, Murray's tennis coach from 11 to 17, said he'd never seen a five-year-old like Murray, describing him as "unbelievably competitive".

-That's another part of any sportsmans make up that coaches can't effect.

[Hughesy]

Lets be honest though - how many 'top' talents have we let go that have gone on to become superstars?...........

[LeChuck]

We're not on about 'superstars' though, just players good enough to play some part in a Premier League squad. We haven't been been managing to do that.

From the reviews Kevin Pezzoni is getting in Germany it sounds like he is one who was let go far too soon. There's also the lad at AZ, although I can't remember his name.

Even that is besides the point that was being discussed...some are saying that we're not developing the talented players that arrive at the academy as well as we should be. I think Rover6 mentioned Bussman as someone who arrived with a big reputation (at least for his age) but has gone backwards since we began coaching him.

[den]

Lets be honest though - how many 'top' talents have we let go that have gone on to become superstars?...........

None Hughesy. It's not simply down to coaching, otherwise rival clubs would have picked them up and made far better players out of them.

[LeChuck]

None Hughesy. It's not simply down to coaching, otherwise rival clubs would have picked them up and made far better players out of them.

I don't think you could pick up 18/19/20 year olds and try to start teaching them things they should have been learning at 13 and 14. There will be the odd exception to the rule, but generally I believe that to be the case.

[den]

I don't think you could pick up 18/19/20 year olds and try to start teaching them things they should have been learning at 13 and 14. There will be the odd exception to the rule, but generally I believe that to be the case.

On the other hand, the one's released at that age are released because they are found to be lacking for other reasons. For example some players fall by the wayside because they lose their physique during their teens. Some fall because they simply don't improve technically. Some fall because of injury. Some fall because they don't have the fire in their bellies, or the determination that is vital to make a top player [a common downfall with youngsters, that can't be judged by us out of the know]

It seems that the only possible reasons given for a player not making it at Ewood, is that the coaches aren't up to it.

It's all old ground LeChuck. I'm tiring quickly.

[Jan]

Jamie Murray was the second-best junior player in the world in the early days. He was also older than Andy. I've no idea what happened to Jamie's talents Bellars, but still, Andy was a top young player. He beat Jamie at the age of 12, - before he even he went to Spain.

Coaching improves players in any sport. You wont get to the top though without a great deal of natural talent.

From Wiki:

Leon Smith, Murray's tennis coach from 11 to 17, said he'd never seen a five-year-old like Murray, describing him as "unbelievably competitive".

-That's another part of any sportsmans make up that coaches can't effect.

Judy Murray (Andy and Jamie's mum) "credits" the GB coaching with ruining Jamie's chances, so much so that when Andy was beig recruited to follow, she took him to Spain. She'll admit that Jamie had more raw talent and at least the same desire as his brother, but it was "coached" out of him here.

[JAL]

None Hughesy. It's not simply down to coaching, otherwise rival clubs would have picked them up and made far better players out of them.

Dont believe its just that den, scouting or identifying talent that is inherent in a lads ability is equally of importance, if not thee most important factor. Coaching is just guiding that ability in the right direction.

[The Prof.]

It's tough being a talented kid these days. You're picked up, dropped, moved around, driven 30mins - 2hrs after school twice a week and then go and play in -10 on a windswept mudbath which isn't flat. you have more chance of winning the lottery than playing for reasonable money.

Rovers could do much more though. The scouting system is very poor, coaching 3rd rate and the general level of pitches round Blackburn is dire (Everton anyone?). 'Big clubs mop up anyone decent and Burnley have the better setup.

The big gap though is between the first team and the rest. Since the Central League went years ago, 2nd team fixtures are frowned upon by the first team - even as a route back from injury. There are England players who can't get a regular game at their clubs so it's not surprising is it.

The price of having the Best League in the World!

[dave birch]

Dont believe its just that den, scouting or identifying talent that is inherent in a lads ability is equally of importance, if not thee most important factor. Coaching is just guiding that ability in the right direction.

I sometimes wonder whether "coaching" is the right way. Maybe we should just let them play.

It's the unpredictability that makes a player what he is. It's my thought that "coaching" takes a lot of that away, particularly when players "make it".