Hills not letting go

[Biggish Dave]

51 minutes ago, paulhanley said:

Keith Hill is unquestionably a breath of fresh air. His sobering analysis of our set up and the acknowledgement of the need to build from scratch is no doubt absolutely correct.

His modern style of football, playing out from the back, is in marked contrast to much of what we've had over the last couple of decades - although I exempt Big Sam from that implied criticism given the success he had and given the "long ball" tag given to us while he was boss was always a bit simplistic anyway. 

Mentioning Big Sam is part of why I'm commenting. I agree with playing out from the back, I agree with keeping the ball on the deck, I agree with entertaining, pacy, quick -witted football. But there's a pragmatic part of me that says a defender still needs to know when row z is required/when he's taking one risk too many ... and that there's still occasionally a place for getting the ball wide and whipping in an early cross. This is fresh in my mind having watched England last night. An entertaining side to watch a lot of the time these days but the prime example of a team that sometimes takes liberties with the "play it out from the back" ethos and pays the price. Do it - but do it sensibly. 

That ended up being a memo to Gareth Southgate but I'd apply it to anyone, including us. I hope/think Keith Hill would probably agree.

Bang on the money. It’s quite a simplistic game, don’t try to over complicate it

[Kane57]

I really like the idea of playing out from the back. I'm just glad we don't have Wheater or Beevers trying it

[Guest]

3 hours ago, paulhanley said:

Keith Hill is unquestionably a breath of fresh air. His sobering analysis of our set up and the acknowledgement of the need to build from scratch is no doubt absolutely correct.

His modern style of football, playing out from the back, is in marked contrast to much of what we've had over the last couple of decades - although I exempt Big Sam from that implied criticism given the success he had and given the "long ball" tag given to us while he was boss was always a bit simplistic anyway. 

Mentioning Big Sam is part of why I'm commenting. I agree with playing out from the back, I agree with keeping the ball on the deck, I agree with entertaining, pacy, quick -witted football. But there's a pragmatic part of me that says a defender still needs to know when row z is required/when he's taking one risk too many ... and that there's still occasionally a place for getting the ball wide and whipping in an early cross. This is fresh in my mind having watched England last night. An entertaining side to watch a lot of the time these days but the prime example of a team that sometimes takes liberties with the "play it out from the back" ethos and pays the price. Do it - but do it sensibly. 

That ended up being a memo to Gareth Southgate but I'd apply it to anyone, including us. I hope/think Keith Hill would probably agree.

I like pragmatism rather the dogmatic “this is what we do”; change it around, look for openings, keep it unpredictable for the other team, think on the pitch.

Anything that Parky wasn’t, really.

[Tonge moor green jacket]

The kids that we have seen this season already looked more willing to play on the floor, even before hill arrived.

Hope he enhances them.

[Marc505]

"Looking at performances I think we’re still in the making but we could be a very good League One side,” he said. “It’s evident by the teams we’ve played.

“I think eventually, we could comfortably be a top six League One side. And we have to repeat somewhere over the next 34 games promotion form. And we will."

 

Keith, come and sit next to me in work please pal I think you could get an extra 20% out of me with talk like that.

[RONNIE PHILLIPS]

5 hours ago, Marc505 said:

"Looking at performances I think we’re still in the making but we could be a very good League One side,” he said. “It’s evident by the teams we’ve played.

“I think eventually, we could comfortably be a top six League One side. And we have to repeat somewhere over the next 34 games promotion form. And we will."

 

Keith, come and sit next to me in work please pal I think you could get an extra 20% out of me with talk like that.

He says whilst posting on WWays whilst at work 😁

[Newton White]

Playing from the back is good so long as it happens quickly before teams get set and organised. I cant stand it when two centre halves think they are being really clever by playing 1-2's for 30 seconds before the ball gets passed forward. I am not however in favour of the long boot from the keeper or the long ball over the full back which is essentially a rugby league 40 - 20.

Most goals these days happen either in transition with pace or set pieces. 

[Marc505]

39 minutes ago, RONNIE PHILLIPS said:

He says whilst posting on WWays whilst at work 😁

Hey I'd done an hour, was well overdue a brew by then!

[Wanderlust]

On 11/10/2019 at 01:19, Mannyroader said:

 

When BSA was manager the only 2 that came through; Nolan and Hunt; were products of other clubs academies who didn't make the grade at those clubs.

In those heady days the Academy had access to a lot better raw talent, and although they weren't able to compete for places in BSA's all star team, the Academy did produce some excellent players who went on to have success elsewhere. Look at the the success Blerim Dzmaili had when he left us and more recently Aaron Mooy. Even Chris Basham's playing in the Prem these days.

That said, I think Hill is partially right inasmuch that the standard has dropped, but I put that partly down to us not having the pulling power for recruiting quality youth talent any more - comes with the territory when the first team keeps getting relegated - and partly down to having gone through a recent spell of having to sell off our better youth players just to balance the books.

Even so, the whole point of the Academy is to produce players of a quality that can compete for places in our first team or get sold on ideally for a good price unlike e.g. Holding and it currently isn't doing that well enough. In our position we should be focusing on recruiting really good, really young 'uns and being patient for a few years - hopefully achieving the financial stability that would mean we don't have to sell off the better ones.

As for the coaches, Hill might want to consider that they've had their better products sold off so it ain't all their fault.

[enzo gambaro]

Dzemaili had played 100+ club games and been to a World Cup before we signed him. I don’t think you can include him in your academy success stories.

[Mannyroader]

3 hours ago, enzo gambaro said:

Dzemaili had played 100+ club games and been to a World Cup before we signed him. I don’t think you can include him in your academy success storiees.

Nor Mooy, for me. Basham is really the only one. Put him against the list of hopefuls who never made it, the best of them being Holden, Livesey and O'Halloran. Luke Woodland is a recent case in point, who joined the club very young and played for England at junior levels. He has ended up playing in Malaysia after not being good enough for lower and non league here or as a pro in Thailand. He is a Phillipines international; mum is Filipino, but that is a long way from what was expected from him.

Edited October 15, 2019 by Mannyroader

[Casino]

Tbf, i believe woodland had a career threatening injury with us

Dunno how that affected him

 

Some good news, it looks like lee is being further marginalised

I suspect hes hanging on til he gets pushed

[Tonge moor green jacket]

1 minute ago, Casino said:

Tbf, i believe woodland had a career threatening injury with us

Dunno how that affected him

 

Some good news, it looks like lee is being further marginalised

I suspect hes hanging on til he gets pushed

Enlighten us please.

Is he coaching the youngsters or not?

[Wanderlust]

I think the minimum requirement of an Academy is that it washes it face financially either by selling on products or saving money on transfer fees to an extent that the investment that goes into it is fully recouped. To do that it should produce a Holding or Vela every couple of years and stop panic selling at below market value. In Vela's case he should have gone much earlier when his market value was higher, but that's water under the bridge now.

If the Academy breaks even and no more then it's probably just about worth keeping on in case there's a gem in the pipeline, but ideally it should be making a healthy profit and ours certainly doesn't seem to be doing that.

For me it all comes back to the basic problem caused by the Ferguson system i.e. bringing in vast quantities of the cream of youth talent at a young age on the back of a vague promise that they'll make it with a big name club (i.e. what they want to hear) and then ruthlessly culling them or farming them out to other clubs to develop them and pay their wages then bringing back the few who can make it or selling the borderline cases - often to the clubs they've been on loan to. Chelsea seem to be the current kings of that model and currently have over 40 players out on loan to other clubs and god knows how many aspiring kids. It's a great model considering kids are cheap, idealistic, dispensable and it simultaneously deprives other clubs of a chance of developing their own future players - as has been the case with us. We can't attract top quality kids and if any of those we do shows talent we don't get to keep them.

I'm just wondering if Hill's recent comments about the Academy and coaches is a prelude to a cull or even the closure of the Academy itself i.e. Hill putting out the idea that he's doing due diligence as a pre-justification? There's a niff of constructive dismissal about it IMO.

[HomerJay]

9 hours ago, Hoppy510 said:

In those heady days the Academy had access to a lot better raw talent, and although they weren't able to compete for places in BSA's all star team, the Academy did produce some excellent players who went on to have success elsewhere. Look at the the success Blerim Dzmaili had when he left us and more recently Aaron Mooy. Even Chris Basham's playing in the Prem these days.

That said, I think Hill is partially right inasmuch that the standard has dropped, but I put that partly down to us not having the pulling power for recruiting quality youth talent any more - comes with the territory when the first team keeps getting relegated - and partly down to having gone through a recent spell of having to sell off our better youth players just to balance the books.

Even so, the whole point of the Academy is to produce players of a quality that can compete for places in our first team or get sold on ideally for a good price unlike e.g. Holding and it currently isn't doing that well enough. In our position we should be focusing on recruiting really good, really young 'uns and being patient for a few years - hopefully achieving the financial stability that would mean we don't have to sell off the better ones.

As for the coaches, Hill might want to consider that they've had their better products sold off so it ain't all their fault.

i know a little about academies these days. i spoke to plenty about my lad, and bolton pretty much said we dont scout theses day at any great depth. I see scouts every week from other clubs, last year we were approached by pretty much every northwest club of significance. I have never seen a bolton scout. and i live 15 mins from the stadium.

Bolton were happy for me to just bring him down for a trial. as they currently dont push to get players. not that ive seen anyway.

You mention pulling power... i dont believe that at all. there are plenty of kids at grass roots level, just needing a chance. I guess it comes down to how picky we are. as a cat 2 academy i think we only would recruit 12/14 players at under 9s. which would require 4 part time coaching staff, but a cat 1 have more than double that in players, and full time staff.

 

Im not saying this is wrong btw. theres a lot to be said in getting other clubs rejects. maybe its that rejection that gives the kid the hunger to prove somebody wrong?

 

But equally, if we get decent youngsters, they have value. even at 9 year old, they are worth 4k each, then 12k (i think) at 10. we dont see the number of kids that get sold on. maybe thats classed as production also??

 

Edited October 15, 2019 by HomerJay

[Wanderlust]

34 minutes ago, HomerJay said:

i know a little about academies these days. i spoke to plenty about my lad, and bolton pretty much said we dont scout theses day at any great depth. I see scouts every week from other clubs, last year we were approached by pretty much every northwest club of significance. I have never seen a bolton scout. and i live 15 mins from the stadium.

Bolton were happy for me to just bring him down for a trial. as they currently dont push to get players. not that ive seen anyway.

You mention pulling power... i dont believe that at all. there are plenty of kids at grass roots level, just needing a chance. I guess it comes down to how picky we are. as a cat 2 academy i think we only would recruit 12/14 players at under 9s. which would require 4 part time coaching staff, but a cat 1 have more than double that in players, and full time staff.

 

Im not saying this is wrong btw. theres a lot to be said in getting other clubs rejects. maybe its that rejection that gives the kid the hunger to prove somebody wrong?

 

But equally, if we get decent youngsters, they have value. even at 9 year old, they are worth 4k each, then 12k (i think) at 10. we dont see the number of kids that get sold on. maybe thats classed as production also??

 

Good points. I'm also involved in youth football to a small degree and the one thing that stands out for me is the massive number of decent kids that want to play professionally who fall by the wayside at every level. It's a brutal system and they not only nearly all get rejected sooner or later but a fair few get bad injuries - I know a very talented 14 year old who recently did his ACL for the second time so that's him done and dusted. And I've lost count of former Cat A trainees I've played with and against over the years at a very low level. Difference is that a handful of clubs are scouting internationally and pulling in 10 year olds from Africa and Brazil etc. My mates a former player and Spuds scout and he tells some tales about the lengths that some clubs go to to cream off the best from around the world - and at an early age there's no doubt that they predominantly want to play for the likes of RM, Barca, Manure etc. Their parents are all for it and because the youngsters are big fish in a small pond at that age, they're easily convinced that they can do it.

But the reality is that it's a tiny fraction of a percent that make it all the way. But it's a fair point about some rejects wanting it more. Hopefully we can find 'em.

[peelyfeet]

Our academy has fallen behind several other local academies in recent years, in terms of facilities, coaching/scouting staff numbers, initial recruitment, and the quality/amount of rejects from other clubs that we get.

Sadly, Burnley, Blackburn, Fleetwood, Accrington, Wigan, Stoke, Crewe all now have arguably newer/better academy facilities than us, so an Under 9, or a reject from the big 4 NW clubs (or any other club for that matter) may be more likely to be attracted to them initially,  and I bet Hill/FV have recognised this.

Case in point, how many Bury players have come to us? Most that I know have initially gone to one of the other clubs mentioned above.

up until 2015, we were still a Cat 1 academy, which meant we were more attractive to prospective players than most on the list above. We don't have that any more, so what have we got to offer that the other clubs don't?

Hopefully Hill and FV can start to rebuild.

Edited October 15, 2019 by peelyfeet

[peelyfeet]

3 hours ago, HomerJay said:

But equally, if we get decent youngsters, they have value. even at 9 year old, they are worth 4k each, then 12k (i think) at 10. we dont see the number of kids that get sold on. maybe thats classed as production also??

 

It's £3k per year from U9-11, for all categories

Cat 1 is £40k per year from U12-16.                                                                                                                                                      Cat 2 is £25k per year from U12-16                                                                                                                                                There's multi thousand £ add-ons for first team appearances too.

So each 16yr old player could be worth over £200K, 

Academies can be a gold mine if they get it right. 

 

 

[paulhanley]

This sentence is very telling as regards Hill's strategy at Bolton. The balance he strikes between "guiders" and young players over the next couple of years will determine an awful lot. I'd say it needs to be roughly 50/50 through the XI on any given day and the squad as a whole. 

“There are players who I don’t have to teach. Daryl Murphy, Jake Wright, Liam Bridcutt – they are the guiders who are looking to continue their career,” he said

[Duck Egg]

On 15/10/2019 at 10:38, Mannyroader said:

Nor Mooy, for me. Basham is really the only one. Put him against the list of hopefuls who never made it, the best of them being Holden, Livesey and O'Halloran. Luke Woodland is a recent case in point, who joined the club very young and played for England at junior levels. He has ended up playing in Malaysia after not being good enough for lower and non league here or as a pro in Thailand. He is a Phillipines international; mum is Filipino, but that is a long way from what was expected from him.

Ward  (?) was another one wasn't he. A wide player we sold to Huddersfield for a reported £1m. Not heard of him in ages

[MalcolmW]

4 minutes ago, Duck Egg said:

Ward  (?) was another one wasn't he. A wide player we sold to Huddersfield for a reported £1m. Not heard of him in ages

Danny of that ilk. Over 100  league appearances for Huddersfield, then 90 for Rotherham and so far 36 for Cardiff (including 14 in last season's PL).

[Duck Egg]

37 minutes ago, MalcolmW said:

Danny of that ilk. Over 100  league appearances for Huddersfield, then 90 for Rotherham and so far 36 for Cardiff (including 14 in last season's PL).

That's the chap.  Cheers. Could do with unearthing another like him 

[Casino]

Didn't we sign Danny ward from Leeds when he was 16 ish

[Traf]

2 minutes ago, Casino said:

Didn't we sign Danny ward from Leeds when he was 16 ish

We did. Had to pay them some training compo.

[RoadRunnerFan]

1 minute ago, Traf said:

We did. Had to pay them some training compo.

Bout half a mill iirc. 

Don't think we'll be unearthing many at that price 

Edited October 16, 2019 by RoadRunnerFan