Academy & U21s

[joey_big_nose]

On 16/01/2022 at 16:52, briansol said:

I've seen both on several occasions. 

For me Wharton reminds me a bit of Tom Cairney. Box-to-box midfielder who can control a game with his classy passing. Left footed and looks like he has all the time in the world. "Sees all the pictures" as Mowbray would say. His defensive side has improved as well.

Garrett is someone I really like. He is more of a sitter (defensive midfielder). Played against Leeds in a pre-season and looked good. Will tackle anything that moves. He's a great tackler but a bit rash at times, and picks up quite a lot of cards. Needs to wise up when and where a tackle is needed. The best thing about him is that he is very good passer as well. Very calm in possesion, and almost always pick the right option. Can switch play and hit short and long with his left foot. For me he is someone who can challenge for Travis spot in the couple of years. He is far better on the ball than Travis.

Incidently I think Wharton and Garrett should work well together.

I'd hope that both don't need to wait two years. Highly rated players have always done well for us when they've got the chance. 

That  both already made the bench this season for the first XI (Garrett pre-season and Wharton against Wigan) suggests to me they may get a go before the season is out. 

That said I went back and looked at Buckley and Travis. Neither got their first game till they were 20. So maybe your assessment is fair enough (Wharton is 17 and Garrett 18). 

Really exciting time for all the young players - they must all look at the first team with all the home grown talent and feel that they're valued and they have got a clear route and the support to become professionals.

[Mattyblue]

9 hours ago, riverholmes said:

McBride seems to be hitting some form. Interesting to see what the club decides about him. I suppose if the club's decided that he can go this summer, he might be free to be talking to clubs now to sign a pre-contract. He won't be short of suitors, as his success as a PL2 player of the season nominee was being reported in the nationals in Scotland, last year.

People are rightly hailing the achievements of the U18s this season. However, my concern is that the success of the U23s last year hasn't translated into first team promotions yet. Carter and Butterworth have been involved but are a little older, I think, and they weren't involved that much in last season's U23 campaign that resulted in an impressive 4th placed finish. The team were in the top two, I think for a while, but fell off at the end.

By contrast, the prior 'year group' has seen Buckley, Butterworth, Carter, Travis and Nyambe come through to make appearances. There's still time for players but it does look as if the U23s of 2020-21, are largely going to fall by the wayside, despite success amongst Premier League peers. As much as there is no guarantee of success or transition, the fact that not a single member is, apparently, anywhere near coming through must raise questions. It begs the question whether the next generation will face the same issue. With Ash Phillips and Adam Wharton being fast-tracked to appear on the first team bench for the FA cup tie, it may not be the case.

And that’s the way it will always be with youth development, some ‘year groups’ just don’t kick on how you’d hope or expect. Just think how barren it got post a golden crop of Dunn, Duff, Taylor, Johnson.

If we skip some players currently 20/21, but we see quality in the younger crop of Wharton Junior and Philips breaking through soon-ish, then I’ve no issue with that.

Edited January 18, 2022 by Mattyblue

[JacknOry]

That Spuds LB and Ash Phillips

.

Edited January 18, 2022 by JacknOry

[briansol]

10 hours ago, riverholmes said:

McBride seems to be hitting some form. Interesting to see what the club decides about him. I suppose if the club's decided that he can go this summer, he might be free to be talking to clubs now to sign a pre-contract. He won't be short of suitors, as his success as a PL2 player of the season nominee was being reported in the nationals in Scotland, last year.

People are rightly hailing the achievements of the U18s this season. However, my concern is that the success of the U23s last year hasn't translated into first team promotions yet. Carter and Butterworth have been involved but are a little older, I think, and they weren't involved that much in last season's U23 campaign that resulted in an impressive 4th placed finish. The team were in the top two, I think for a while, but fell off at the end.

By contrast, the prior 'year group' has seen Buckley, Butterworth, Carter, Travis and Nyambe come through to make appearances. There's still time for players but it does look as if the U23s of 2020-21, are largely going to fall by the wayside, despite success amongst Premier League peers. As much as there is no guarantee of success or transition, the fact that not a single member is, apparently, anywhere near coming through must raise questions. It begs the question whether the next generation will face the same issue. With Ash Phillips and Adam Wharton being fast-tracked to appear on the first team bench for the FA cup tie, it may not be the case.

I think you raise a valid concern, but I I think there is several reasons for the lack of first team promotions. 

The level of U23. Most teams will loan out their best young players, meaning that often is the "second" best + top U18 players that face in the league. Rovers on the other hand played with their best players and in most cases older than their opponents. 

Rovers was also more of a team, rather than spectacular individuals. The best players like Pike, Vale, Burns have all been loaned this season to get them to the next stage of being ready for senior football. Not many can go directly from U23 and impact senior football at the top end of the Championship. 

The ones you mention are not from the same "year", but have been bedded in over several years and agewise most of them have been 20+ before being involved. 

That said the signals are that the club have high hopes for the U18 talent pool and are clearing the path for them at U23 level. In an interview the Academy boss said they were actively lower the age group of the U23 to give them the best possible chance of producing the next senior players.

[bluebruce]

On 17/01/2022 at 21:45, mr bishi said:

Wow...wonder if there was some underlying resentment about us taking their top scorer just before the game? I watched that a couple of times and it looks by far the Spurs players starting most of the shit and crossing the line. I think it's very harsh that we each got the same number of players sent off. Hope it doesn't unsettle Markanday's welcome to the club, his old team mates scrapping with our lads.

[only2garners]

6 hours ago, bluebruce said:

Wow...wonder if there was some underlying resentment about us taking their top scorer just before the game? I watched that a couple of times and it looks by far the Spurs players starting most of the shit and crossing the line. I think it's very harsh that we each got the same number of players sent off. Hope it doesn't unsettle Markanday's welcome to the club, his old team mates scrapping with our lads.

Spurs had two sent off.

[Guest]

Burnley at the weekend for the U18's, and Sheffield Wednesday at home in the next round of the FAYC.

[Guest]

FAYC will be at Ewood next Thursday.

[roversfan99]

Is it not crazy to have unnecessary games on the pitch at the moment considering the poor state emanating from a couple of downpours on matchdays and the budget cuts from the owners last summer?

[only2garners]

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Is it not crazy to have unnecessary games on the pitch at the moment considering the poor state emanating from a couple of downpours on matchdays and the budget cuts from the owners last summer?

The pitch is just having a three week break from any games.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Is it not crazy to have unnecessary games on the pitch at the moment considering the poor state emanating from a couple of downpours on matchdays and the budget cuts from the owners last summer?

I don't think it's had much wear and tear recently and we've got plenty of away games. A great opportunity for some of the younger lads to get used to playing in a real stadium. It's good for their development and the boys are delighted they get to play. 

Plus, give our new, let them play and we'll win it off them strategy in the first time - is a rough pitch not to our advantage at the mo?

[had.e.nuff]

3 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Is it not crazy to have unnecessary games on the pitch at the moment considering the poor state emanating from a couple of downpours on matchdays and the budget cuts from the owners last summer?

you have to have permission to play at a neutral ground doubt we would have got it for two rounds

[had.e.nuff]

will the u23 game on monday be moved with the first team playing that night

[rigger]

1 hour ago, had.e.nuff said:

will the u23 game on monday be moved with the first team playing that night

I was wondering that myself, I can't see many Rovers attending when the first team are playing, at the same time.

Edited January 20, 2022 by rigger

[bluebruce]

On 19/01/2022 at 15:53, JoeH said:

I don't think it's had much wear and tear recently and we've got plenty of away games. A great opportunity for some of the younger lads to get used to playing in a real stadium. It's good for their development and the boys are delighted they get to play. 

Plus, give our new, let them play and we'll win it off them strategy in the first time - is a rough pitch not to our advantage at the mo?

Given how we played in the last 2 games we played those conditions, I'd have to say it's not to our advantage, no. We got points still,  but just barely.

[bluebruce]

On 19/01/2022 at 08:59, only2garners said:

Spurs had two sent off.

Hadn't realised that, thanks.

[rigger]

18 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

Hadn't realised that, thanks.

To me it looked like the ref showed the second red to a Rovers player. But it also looks like he shows the first red to Tottenhams number 12, when it was the number 2, that kicked off. Who knows ?

Edited January 21, 2022 by rigger

[only2garners]

58 minutes ago, rigger said:

To me it looked like the ref showed the second red to a Rovers player. But it also looks like he shows the first red to Tottenhams number 12, when it was the number 2, that kicked off. Who knows ?

I do! Cesay and Omole were sent off for Spurs and Garrett for Rovers. Cesay was their number 2.

[slowmo]

4 hours ago, only2garners said:

I do! Cesay and Omole were sent off for Spurs and Garrett for Rovers. Cesay was their number 2.

Was Garrett the rovers player right at the start,  who walked towards a spurs player looking like he was going to nut him ? Near the technical box 

[slowmo]

Anyone know how the 18's got on this afternoon vs Burnley?

[lsp82]

15 minutes ago, slowmo said:

Anyone know how the 18's got on this afternoon vs Burnley?

One each. Leonard got the goal for Rovers

[arbitro]

1 hour ago, slowmo said:

Anyone know how the 18's got on this afternoon vs Burnley?

As Isp82 said it was 1-1 and on an adjacent pitch the under 16's won 3-1.

Interestingly both teams still had Recoverite on their shirts with the 18's in red and black and the 16's in blue and white.

[had.e.nuff]

5 hours ago, arbitro said:

As Isp82 said it was 1-1 and on an adjacent pitch the under 16's won 3-1.

Interestingly both teams still had Recoverite on their shirts with the 18's in red and black and the 16's in blue and white.

don't think they can put new sponsor on their shirts due to age and what it advertises

[arbitro]

10 hours ago, had.e.nuff said:

don't think they can put new sponsor on their shirts due to age and what it advertises

I wasn't aware of that but my point was also that we are still advertising Recoverite?

On a wider point what about anybody who has bought a kids shirt and doesn't want the previous sponsors name on it if they aren't allowed to have a Totally Wicked patch on their shirt. I haven't seen anything from the club which covers this.

[rigger]

3 hours ago, arbitro said:

I wasn't aware of that but my point was also that we are still advertising Recoverite?

On a wider point what about anybody who has bought a kids shirt and doesn't want the previous sponsors name on it if they aren't allowed to have a Totally Wicked patch on their shirt. I haven't seen anything from the club which covers this.

If they don't want the logo, don't buy the shirt.