| Warbs from West London Sport 10:14 - May 3 with 39773 views | daveB |
One of the few positives of a crisis at QPR is Dave mc usually produces this kind of quality, fascinating insight
https://www.westlondonsport.co
|  | | |  |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:04 - May 5 with 3110 views | JamesB1979 |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:38 - May 4 by Antti_Heinola |
Something that Dave, and many others, fail to mention when discussing the 'costs' of an Academy, or youth system, is the responsibility of a professional club to the local community. It should be there both to find players but also to provide links with the community and give the sense that it is a club that supports its environs and the people within it. I find it pretty disgusting that any professional club would abandon its academy personally. |
It depends what you mean by local. My lad played there for about 12 months at a younger age group. The boys were from all over London and just outside London. And that’s the younger age groups. I would imagine at the U18 level it’s even more broad. That’s why I guess Harlington is close to M4. So I think the local community stuff doesn’t ring true to me. That said I’m a big supporter of the academy system. QPR is great in that they give younger boys time to see them develop and it’s not just 1 quick trial and “don’t call us, we’ll call you”. |  | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:06 - May 5 with 3099 views | 1JD |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:22 - May 5 by BrianMcCarthy |
Yet, the season before last we had the most minutes played in the season by graduates of any Championship club, apparently (though I suspect that included teenage signings like Chair and Eze).
There's no doubt that we've brought loads of players through under Ramsey, Ferdinand et al, but whether we need to keep the Youth part of the Underage set-up is a good debate. My worry is that if we're not Cat 1 we lose players to other clubs, but no-one seems to care about that so i seem to be out there on my own on that one.
Against that, the costs of the Academy do not count against FP/P&S so we're getting very cheap minutes from graduating players for a few years now which has helped us free up money to sign good players from elsewhere.
Note: Darnell Furlong broke through six years ago, under Ramsey and Ferdinand et al, though he'd been at the club a while at that stage naturally. |
In full agreement Brian. A Category 1 academy status is not just about the badge, but perhaps more importantly, it is the level of opposition you are playing against - the elite youth in your country.
As an aspiring young talent, you want to challenge yourself and play against the best in your age group. Add in the increased wages, and better facilities, and it’s an obvious decision for parents and children alike.
It’s really quite simply. The faster QPR stop playing down the academy 1 status (presumably when the training ground is built we submit for CAT 1), the better. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:26 - May 5 with 3007 views | MungoJezza |
This all smacks of typical work place politics - conflicting agendas, staff interfering in areas beyond their remit, poor communication between staff and with outside bodies, empire building, scapegoating, buck passing.... Tedious yet tragic!!
On the point of Warbs not sticking to his remit by using loan players instead of some of our 'up and coming' youngsters or players we actually own, the question has to be asked 'who sanctioned the loans in the first place?!'. Why wasn't Warburton told you can't bring in Hendrick or Sanderson, rather you have to make use of De Wijs (rather than loan him out), or use Kakay when he was back from AFCON? These decisions have conveniently provided a stick for certain factions within the club to beat Warbs with, and so deflect attention from their own poor performance.
I also find it strange that the club seem fine with WLS being many fans' first port of call' when looking to find out what is really going on at the club. Does Dave Mc have an inside source, is there a mole? Surely big news such as Warbs' impending departure should be announced first via official club media channels (and, ideally, after telling the manager!).
Talking of WLS, I listened to their latest QPR podcast, and the point was made that it's rare for an outgoing manager to get the send-off that Warbs received at the end of Friday's game, particularly after a very poor recent run of form and having been battered and beaten by Sheff Utd on the night! I saw a recent online poll where 56% of the respondents wanted Warbs to stay and 27% were unsure and waiting to see who the new manager is. You could argue, then, that whoever the board appoints, that new manager will need to hit the ground running very quickly to get the majority of the fanbase back on side. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:27 - May 5 with 3001 views | slmrstid |
Something that has been raised on this thread, I think, or certainly elsewhere on this board, that is worth bearing in mind regarding the current crop of U23s...
Those players that have broke through to our first team and have since been sold or are still within the team, did go out on loan at decent levels and flourished, suggesting they would do well in our first team.
Examples...
- Darnell Furlong - did very well at Cambridge United and Northampton Town in Lgs 1/2
- Seny Dieng - was well liked at Dundee in the SPL, and Doncaster in League 1
- Ebere Eze - stormed it at Wycombe in Lg1
- Ilias Chair - "best player ever" at Stevenage in Lg2
- Joe Lumley - kept a ridiculous number of clean sheets at Blackpool and Bristol Rovers in Lgs 1/2 (I remember NorthernR once describing him as "statistical porn" for his clean sheet stats at those levels)
- Ryan Manning - had been in and around the first team but then went to Rotherham in that McLaren spell and did OK there - certainly scored a lot of penalties...
A anomaly, of sorts, here is Osman Kakay - if I remember rightly he had a fairly unremarkable spell at Chesterfield but then to be fair to him had the guts to go up to Scotland with Partick Thistle - looked down on by Todd Kane of course infamously but it must have been a hell of a culture shock for him and he should receive great credit for willing to go up there to play football. But then is Kakay really a top half Championship player? Probably not.
Looking at the current crop, have any of them gone to good levels and pulled up trees? Arguably not this year to suggest they could come in next year and be effective.
- Bettache - OK Oldham have been chaotic, which probably hasn't helped him, but you can argue cream should still rise to the top and he doesn't appear to have
- Kelman - not really done much at Gillingham
- Masterson - as above, same with Cambridge this year
- Armstrong - obviously doing well in the Conference this year but its a hell of a jump to say he could do it in the Championship next year - probably needs a good Lg1/Lg2 loan spell first - so could still change
- Duke-McKenna - see Armstrong really
All the others have gone to Conference South levels or lower, so they could come on strong still but again its a hell of a jump to say they could come in and be competitive in the Championship straight away. Even Jamie Vardy took a year going from Fleetwood to Leicester before he became more effective.
Given a managers job rests on results, I'm sure if Warburton thought any U18/U23 player could come in and have an impact he would have done so. So I'd be a bit wary of the Academy side foisting players onto the first team squad who aren't good enough as well. |  | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:51 - May 5 with 2885 views | francisbowles |
Great post by Hunter. It echoes my thoughts about what might have happened with Hendrick and my opinion that it wasn't really an option to offer MW a new contract based on his recent record. The article just adds factors that added to that opinion.
I would think that going forward the club will want a new younger manager that they can have more influence and control over and ensure there are opportunities for the younger players to prove themselves.
The contracts situation and the lack of budget are vital and I agree it is essential that the new manager gets a say in who to keep and who to release. The major problem now is time is tight and some of the managers we have been linked with not only need compensation paying but are involved in play offs as well. Hence it may be June before we interview as someone suggested. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:58 - May 5 with 2833 views | Hunterhoop |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:27 - May 5 by slmrstid |
Something that has been raised on this thread, I think, or certainly elsewhere on this board, that is worth bearing in mind regarding the current crop of U23s...
Those players that have broke through to our first team and have since been sold or are still within the team, did go out on loan at decent levels and flourished, suggesting they would do well in our first team.
Examples...
- Darnell Furlong - did very well at Cambridge United and Northampton Town in Lgs 1/2
- Seny Dieng - was well liked at Dundee in the SPL, and Doncaster in League 1
- Ebere Eze - stormed it at Wycombe in Lg1
- Ilias Chair - "best player ever" at Stevenage in Lg2
- Joe Lumley - kept a ridiculous number of clean sheets at Blackpool and Bristol Rovers in Lgs 1/2 (I remember NorthernR once describing him as "statistical porn" for his clean sheet stats at those levels)
- Ryan Manning - had been in and around the first team but then went to Rotherham in that McLaren spell and did OK there - certainly scored a lot of penalties...
A anomaly, of sorts, here is Osman Kakay - if I remember rightly he had a fairly unremarkable spell at Chesterfield but then to be fair to him had the guts to go up to Scotland with Partick Thistle - looked down on by Todd Kane of course infamously but it must have been a hell of a culture shock for him and he should receive great credit for willing to go up there to play football. But then is Kakay really a top half Championship player? Probably not.
Looking at the current crop, have any of them gone to good levels and pulled up trees? Arguably not this year to suggest they could come in next year and be effective.
- Bettache - OK Oldham have been chaotic, which probably hasn't helped him, but you can argue cream should still rise to the top and he doesn't appear to have
- Kelman - not really done much at Gillingham
- Masterson - as above, same with Cambridge this year
- Armstrong - obviously doing well in the Conference this year but its a hell of a jump to say he could do it in the Championship next year - probably needs a good Lg1/Lg2 loan spell first - so could still change
- Duke-McKenna - see Armstrong really
All the others have gone to Conference South levels or lower, so they could come on strong still but again its a hell of a jump to say they could come in and be competitive in the Championship straight away. Even Jamie Vardy took a year going from Fleetwood to Leicester before he became more effective.
Given a managers job rests on results, I'm sure if Warburton thought any U18/U23 player could come in and have an impact he would have done so. So I'd be a bit wary of the Academy side foisting players onto the first team squad who aren't good enough as well. |
It’s still missing the point.
It’s not a choice. As a club of our size, with our tiny income, we MUST give opportunities to the better youth prospects. Whether they are good enough or not is a) subjective, and b) irrelevant. Tough for Warburton or whoever the manager is, but this the club we are. He, and the new guy, will know this on arrival.
The alternative to not giving youth chances is signings (loan or perm). But we don’t have the resources to do this. We lose £1.5m-£2m a month. The Board is covering this for now, but it won’t I definitely, and you need an Eze sale every 2-3 years to keep with FFP.
What people don’t seem to be appreciating is that Warburton got his way the last 12 months. Johansen, Gray, Hendrick, (Sanderson to a lesser degree) were all his men, cost us a lot in salary and all blocked opportunities for our own players, or took budget away from signing young players from elsewhere. The Board (and Les) backed him even if they disagreed with him. He was supported. The trade off was “we’ll back you, but it must be play offs” (and if no promotion, promotion the year after, I’d imagine) because the backing of Warburton getting his way isn’t/wasn’t financially sustainable OR in keeping with the clear ethos and identity of the club (developing young talent/pathway to first team). We’ve then collapsed spectacularly. Warburton got his way and Warburton is accountable.
We have 12 points from 16 games and one of the best players in that run was Amos who was dropped for the first 4 games of that spell after scoring against Reading for Hendrick.
Will the team be massively better with lots more opportunities/game time for younger players? Probably not. But if one turns out to be mustard, that’s us sorted financially each year. If several turn out to be good, they may take us up or bring in a lot of cash to buy established Champ players.
It is the only approach we can take. If your first team manager does not want to engage with that, you have a problem. The Board went with Warburton’s way recently in the hope of getting promotion (and the financial windfall it brings), but when that fails as it has, either he changes (they clearly felt he wouldn’t and childish behaviour of not talking to Paul Hall, etc, supports that) or they need to change him. |  | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 11:02 - May 5 with 2804 views | Northernr |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:58 - May 5 by Hunterhoop |
It’s still missing the point.
It’s not a choice. As a club of our size, with our tiny income, we MUST give opportunities to the better youth prospects. Whether they are good enough or not is a) subjective, and b) irrelevant. Tough for Warburton or whoever the manager is, but this the club we are. He, and the new guy, will know this on arrival.
The alternative to not giving youth chances is signings (loan or perm). But we don’t have the resources to do this. We lose £1.5m-£2m a month. The Board is covering this for now, but it won’t I definitely, and you need an Eze sale every 2-3 years to keep with FFP.
What people don’t seem to be appreciating is that Warburton got his way the last 12 months. Johansen, Gray, Hendrick, (Sanderson to a lesser degree) were all his men, cost us a lot in salary and all blocked opportunities for our own players, or took budget away from signing young players from elsewhere. The Board (and Les) backed him even if they disagreed with him. He was supported. The trade off was “we’ll back you, but it must be play offs” (and if no promotion, promotion the year after, I’d imagine) because the backing of Warburton getting his way isn’t/wasn’t financially sustainable OR in keeping with the clear ethos and identity of the club (developing young talent/pathway to first team). We’ve then collapsed spectacularly. Warburton got his way and Warburton is accountable.
We have 12 points from 16 games and one of the best players in that run was Amos who was dropped for the first 4 games of that spell after scoring against Reading for Hendrick.
Will the team be massively better with lots more opportunities/game time for younger players? Probably not. But if one turns out to be mustard, that’s us sorted financially each year. If several turn out to be good, they may take us up or bring in a lot of cash to buy established Champ players.
It is the only approach we can take. If your first team manager does not want to engage with that, you have a problem. The Board went with Warburton’s way recently in the hope of getting promotion (and the financial windfall it brings), but when that fails as it has, either he changes (they clearly felt he wouldn’t and childish behaviour of not talking to Paul Hall, etc, supports that) or they need to change him. |
Great post mate, exactly right. |  | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 11:09 - May 5 with 2755 views | ozexile |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:58 - May 5 by Hunterhoop |
It’s still missing the point.
It’s not a choice. As a club of our size, with our tiny income, we MUST give opportunities to the better youth prospects. Whether they are good enough or not is a) subjective, and b) irrelevant. Tough for Warburton or whoever the manager is, but this the club we are. He, and the new guy, will know this on arrival.
The alternative to not giving youth chances is signings (loan or perm). But we don’t have the resources to do this. We lose £1.5m-£2m a month. The Board is covering this for now, but it won’t I definitely, and you need an Eze sale every 2-3 years to keep with FFP.
What people don’t seem to be appreciating is that Warburton got his way the last 12 months. Johansen, Gray, Hendrick, (Sanderson to a lesser degree) were all his men, cost us a lot in salary and all blocked opportunities for our own players, or took budget away from signing young players from elsewhere. The Board (and Les) backed him even if they disagreed with him. He was supported. The trade off was “we’ll back you, but it must be play offs” (and if no promotion, promotion the year after, I’d imagine) because the backing of Warburton getting his way isn’t/wasn’t financially sustainable OR in keeping with the clear ethos and identity of the club (developing young talent/pathway to first team). We’ve then collapsed spectacularly. Warburton got his way and Warburton is accountable.
We have 12 points from 16 games and one of the best players in that run was Amos who was dropped for the first 4 games of that spell after scoring against Reading for Hendrick.
Will the team be massively better with lots more opportunities/game time for younger players? Probably not. But if one turns out to be mustard, that’s us sorted financially each year. If several turn out to be good, they may take us up or bring in a lot of cash to buy established Champ players.
It is the only approach we can take. If your first team manager does not want to engage with that, you have a problem. The Board went with Warburton’s way recently in the hope of getting promotion (and the financial windfall it brings), but when that fails as it has, either he changes (they clearly felt he wouldn’t and childish behaviour of not talking to Paul Hall, etc, supports that) or they need to change him. |
Nothing more needed to be said. End of thread. Top post. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Warbs from West London Sport on 11:14 - May 5 with 2710 views | daveB |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:58 - May 5 by Hunterhoop |
It’s still missing the point.
It’s not a choice. As a club of our size, with our tiny income, we MUST give opportunities to the better youth prospects. Whether they are good enough or not is a) subjective, and b) irrelevant. Tough for Warburton or whoever the manager is, but this the club we are. He, and the new guy, will know this on arrival.
The alternative to not giving youth chances is signings (loan or perm). But we don’t have the resources to do this. We lose £1.5m-£2m a month. The Board is covering this for now, but it won’t I definitely, and you need an Eze sale every 2-3 years to keep with FFP.
What people don’t seem to be appreciating is that Warburton got his way the last 12 months. Johansen, Gray, Hendrick, (Sanderson to a lesser degree) were all his men, cost us a lot in salary and all blocked opportunities for our own players, or took budget away from signing young players from elsewhere. The Board (and Les) backed him even if they disagreed with him. He was supported. The trade off was “we’ll back you, but it must be play offs” (and if no promotion, promotion the year after, I’d imagine) because the backing of Warburton getting his way isn’t/wasn’t financially sustainable OR in keeping with the clear ethos and identity of the club (developing young talent/pathway to first team). We’ve then collapsed spectacularly. Warburton got his way and Warburton is accountable.
We have 12 points from 16 games and one of the best players in that run was Amos who was dropped for the first 4 games of that spell after scoring against Reading for Hendrick.
Will the team be massively better with lots more opportunities/game time for younger players? Probably not. But if one turns out to be mustard, that’s us sorted financially each year. If several turn out to be good, they may take us up or bring in a lot of cash to buy established Champ players.
It is the only approach we can take. If your first team manager does not want to engage with that, you have a problem. The Board went with Warburton’s way recently in the hope of getting promotion (and the financial windfall it brings), but when that fails as it has, either he changes (they clearly felt he wouldn’t and childish behaviour of not talking to Paul Hall, etc, supports that) or they need to change him. |
brilliant post, sums it up so well | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 11:38 - May 5 with 2599 views | Rangersw12 |
End of the day if we had beaten Peterborough and Cardiff at home we wouldn't even be having this conversation or thread anyway.
People can keep rewriting history but I really enjoyed the 3 years under Warburton, we played best football for years and he was a great ambassador for the club. We have an identity how to play which is something we haven't had for a long time
Now up to Hoos and Ferdinand to earn their 5 figure salary to find a better manager as otherwise they should be the next ones getting the chop and it will get toxic very quickly | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 11:50 - May 5 with 2526 views | slmrstid |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 11:38 - May 5 by Rangersw12 |
End of the day if we had beaten Peterborough and Cardiff at home we wouldn't even be having this conversation or thread anyway.
People can keep rewriting history but I really enjoyed the 3 years under Warburton, we played best football for years and he was a great ambassador for the club. We have an identity how to play which is something we haven't had for a long time
Now up to Hoos and Ferdinand to earn their 5 figure salary to find a better manager as otherwise they should be the next ones getting the chop and it will get toxic very quickly |
I don't think I am really missing the point Hunter and its a bit insulting/patronising to say I am. I made no comment about Warburton in my post (other than hinting at some sympathy to not using the current U23s), more about the current prospects of our youth set up from those who have been out on loan and not showing any signs of being able to jump into our first team next year.
Ultimately, Warburton has lost his job because this season hasn't delivered what any of us thought/hoped - I'm not arguing there because its what I think as well, although I still feel saddened by it.
But if we end up with a team full of youngsters next year who aren't good enough, then its the manager who will be carrying the can for that and the manager who is the victim of the howls of outrage on this message board/social media/the stadium etc... And we also won't have any youngsters to sell for big money, because they won't be good enough to do so.
That comes back to the argument thats been going on for years at all clubs at all levels about the long term/short term views managers have to take. And removing Warburton from the equation and bringing someone else in isn't going to magically take that away and people will be very disappointed if they think that the case. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:05 - May 5 with 2445 views | Hunterhoop |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 11:50 - May 5 by slmrstid |
I don't think I am really missing the point Hunter and its a bit insulting/patronising to say I am. I made no comment about Warburton in my post (other than hinting at some sympathy to not using the current U23s), more about the current prospects of our youth set up from those who have been out on loan and not showing any signs of being able to jump into our first team next year.
Ultimately, Warburton has lost his job because this season hasn't delivered what any of us thought/hoped - I'm not arguing there because its what I think as well, although I still feel saddened by it.
But if we end up with a team full of youngsters next year who aren't good enough, then its the manager who will be carrying the can for that and the manager who is the victim of the howls of outrage on this message board/social media/the stadium etc... And we also won't have any youngsters to sell for big money, because they won't be good enough to do so.
That comes back to the argument thats been going on for years at all clubs at all levels about the long term/short term views managers have to take. And removing Warburton from the equation and bringing someone else in isn't going to magically take that away and people will be very disappointed if they think that the case. |
Wasn’t intending to insult or patronise, but I do still think you are missing the point. I’m sorry. Perhaps I’m wrong.
Your analysis on young players is all fine, but fundamentally the QPR manager does not have a choice on whether to play/blood youngsters or not. It is a must do, not a nice to do. If they are all rubbish and fail, the youth coaches (mainly Ramsey) will carry the can as much as the manager. The manager will be judged on what he’s achieved with the resources available. Obviously we won’t be playing 11 children. So if the kids do okay but the older, more experienced, expensive players fail, the manager may well carry the can. His performance will be measured on multiple criteria NOT just league position, because we’re trying to become sustainable not just finish as high up the table as we can. If we finish 16th (our old friend) but we develop talent that makes the team better the year after and becomes saleable assists, that is far better than finishing 12th not doing so and spending above our means, because, in the long term, the former will result in us rising up the table and the latter will result in us sliding down (due to financial pressure).
I don’t have sympathy for Warburton. He knew the name of the game when he joined. He’s veered away from it this 12 months, got his way, but failed. So be it. He’s still been a good manager with a decent record, and seems a good guy (perhaps not as good/principled as some think) but if he won’t adapt to what we need, then he’s not right for us now.
I understand you think our youth may not be good enough to play in the first team because of where they have been on loan and how they have fared. But again, I don’t think it’s relevant. We still have to give them opportunities. If they are rubbish and we produce no talent for a while and what we do produce flops in the first team, then Ramsey and Les will take the blame, unless the manager is deemed to have underperformed with the whole resource/squad available to him. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:07 - May 5 with 2439 views | stantheman10 |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 14:03 - May 3 by Benny_the_Ball |
The way the board has treated these players is sadly an extension of its treatment of the manager. As I said back in January, it seemed odd to me that no one was talking to either Warburton or certain players about contract extensions given results on the pitch. It smelt like something was awry behind the scenes. |
What it's an indictment of is the fact that now we can't get in to the play offs so the club is skint and needs to off load as much wages as possible without renewing contracts that could come back and bite us a la Vinnie Jones and SWP! | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:18 - May 5 with 2380 views | Northernr |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:05 - May 5 by Hunterhoop |
Wasn’t intending to insult or patronise, but I do still think you are missing the point. I’m sorry. Perhaps I’m wrong.
Your analysis on young players is all fine, but fundamentally the QPR manager does not have a choice on whether to play/blood youngsters or not. It is a must do, not a nice to do. If they are all rubbish and fail, the youth coaches (mainly Ramsey) will carry the can as much as the manager. The manager will be judged on what he’s achieved with the resources available. Obviously we won’t be playing 11 children. So if the kids do okay but the older, more experienced, expensive players fail, the manager may well carry the can. His performance will be measured on multiple criteria NOT just league position, because we’re trying to become sustainable not just finish as high up the table as we can. If we finish 16th (our old friend) but we develop talent that makes the team better the year after and becomes saleable assists, that is far better than finishing 12th not doing so and spending above our means, because, in the long term, the former will result in us rising up the table and the latter will result in us sliding down (due to financial pressure).
I don’t have sympathy for Warburton. He knew the name of the game when he joined. He’s veered away from it this 12 months, got his way, but failed. So be it. He’s still been a good manager with a decent record, and seems a good guy (perhaps not as good/principled as some think) but if he won’t adapt to what we need, then he’s not right for us now.
I understand you think our youth may not be good enough to play in the first team because of where they have been on loan and how they have fared. But again, I don’t think it’s relevant. We still have to give them opportunities. If they are rubbish and we produce no talent for a while and what we do produce flops in the first team, then Ramsey and Les will take the blame, unless the manager is deemed to have underperformed with the whole resource/squad available to him. |
You both need to stop now or I'm not going to have a match preview left  | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:22 - May 5 with 2355 views | stantheman10 |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 15:36 - May 3 by PinnerPaul |
Kakay is a different argument altogether - simply a player the manager didn't like as much as others, as I said above, that IS football management, hardly a story or reason to sack a manager!
IF and that comes with neon lights and bells, the article comes with a grain of truth, then ANY manager is going to 'fail'
ALL managers will pick their best team - in THEIR opinion, introducing some sort of internal 'quota' based on age or the fact they have been with us since their U10 days is doomed to failure. |
Warburton hasn't been sacked. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:28 - May 5 with 2342 views | ParkRoyalR |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:58 - May 5 by Hunterhoop |
It’s still missing the point.
It’s not a choice. As a club of our size, with our tiny income, we MUST give opportunities to the better youth prospects. Whether they are good enough or not is a) subjective, and b) irrelevant. Tough for Warburton or whoever the manager is, but this the club we are. He, and the new guy, will know this on arrival.
The alternative to not giving youth chances is signings (loan or perm). But we don’t have the resources to do this. We lose £1.5m-£2m a month. The Board is covering this for now, but it won’t I definitely, and you need an Eze sale every 2-3 years to keep with FFP.
What people don’t seem to be appreciating is that Warburton got his way the last 12 months. Johansen, Gray, Hendrick, (Sanderson to a lesser degree) were all his men, cost us a lot in salary and all blocked opportunities for our own players, or took budget away from signing young players from elsewhere. The Board (and Les) backed him even if they disagreed with him. He was supported. The trade off was “we’ll back you, but it must be play offs” (and if no promotion, promotion the year after, I’d imagine) because the backing of Warburton getting his way isn’t/wasn’t financially sustainable OR in keeping with the clear ethos and identity of the club (developing young talent/pathway to first team). We’ve then collapsed spectacularly. Warburton got his way and Warburton is accountable.
We have 12 points from 16 games and one of the best players in that run was Amos who was dropped for the first 4 games of that spell after scoring against Reading for Hendrick.
Will the team be massively better with lots more opportunities/game time for younger players? Probably not. But if one turns out to be mustard, that’s us sorted financially each year. If several turn out to be good, they may take us up or bring in a lot of cash to buy established Champ players.
It is the only approach we can take. If your first team manager does not want to engage with that, you have a problem. The Board went with Warburton’s way recently in the hope of getting promotion (and the financial windfall it brings), but when that fails as it has, either he changes (they clearly felt he wouldn’t and childish behaviour of not talking to Paul Hall, etc, supports that) or they need to change him. |
Rowing against the tide, but I disagree to a point, based on:
> SJ seemed to be carrying an injury and was contributing less and less
> Dozzell was the only obvious like for like replacement and imo was not ready
> Amos is not the SJ type of player as does'nt have the passing range or play on the half turn
> Willock's injury was fundamental to our losing our cutting edge in attack
So, if I am Warburton, and can get Hendrick (unfairly scape-goated imo) in, for say £ 300k, in the hope he would help maintain our push into the play-off places, its a deal I think most would agree made sense.
The reason for our collapse was that we were, given our best staring 11, totally reliant on:
> Dieng for his authority at set-pieces and ability to pass to our WB's and not just the CB's
> SJ being the fulcrum of the team between defence and attack
> Willock and Chair as the 2 no 10's gave SJ options and brought the WB's into play
With the loss of Dieng, SJ and Willock we were in trouble and Hendrick made sense for me as what I saw in Dozzell and Amos (odd thing to say but goals aside) was not 2 players who could dominate a championship midfield.
If Warburton was putting the Academy under pressure / scrutiny, that can only be a good thing, although if I was looking to sell the club, I would not want our Manager saying it was not producing and we as a club were nowhere near the 'sustainable model' that we may be selling to other investors.
Difficult to call, but imo, we have lost a hard-working self-made man which is exactly what we needed amongst those who have inherited their wealth or got to elevated positions based on their athletic abilities (Ferdinand, who I like as a person btw) rather than there qualifications as a DOF.
All likeable people, but sometimes you need a Ferguson type to bang heads and make a step change and make things happen. Bar injuries to Dieng, SJ and Willock, we were almost there imo. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:33 - May 5 with 2311 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:26 - May 5 by MungoJezza |
This all smacks of typical work place politics - conflicting agendas, staff interfering in areas beyond their remit, poor communication between staff and with outside bodies, empire building, scapegoating, buck passing.... Tedious yet tragic!!
On the point of Warbs not sticking to his remit by using loan players instead of some of our 'up and coming' youngsters or players we actually own, the question has to be asked 'who sanctioned the loans in the first place?!'. Why wasn't Warburton told you can't bring in Hendrick or Sanderson, rather you have to make use of De Wijs (rather than loan him out), or use Kakay when he was back from AFCON? These decisions have conveniently provided a stick for certain factions within the club to beat Warbs with, and so deflect attention from their own poor performance.
I also find it strange that the club seem fine with WLS being many fans' first port of call' when looking to find out what is really going on at the club. Does Dave Mc have an inside source, is there a mole? Surely big news such as Warbs' impending departure should be announced first via official club media channels (and, ideally, after telling the manager!).
Talking of WLS, I listened to their latest QPR podcast, and the point was made that it's rare for an outgoing manager to get the send-off that Warbs received at the end of Friday's game, particularly after a very poor recent run of form and having been battered and beaten by Sheff Utd on the night! I saw a recent online poll where 56% of the respondents wanted Warbs to stay and 27% were unsure and waiting to see who the new manager is. You could argue, then, that whoever the board appoints, that new manager will need to hit the ground running very quickly to get the majority of the fanbase back on side. |
Lot of people coming up with very good observations. Thought this one very good.
One growing thought post-Dave Mc article: are the suits United or are there factions within? |  |
| |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:37 - May 5 with 2270 views | stantheman10 |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 00:53 - May 4 by PunteR |
But who really wants to be just a selling club and focusing on youth development?
Players?, manager?, fans?, or owners and accountant's, DoF's and youth coaches?
What player or manager is remotely interested in the balancing of books for their club?
Maybe I'm wrong or naive but surely football is about competition on the pitch? There's always going to be problems when winning football matches is compromised to suit agendas unrelated to 3pm kick off.
I think the two things can exist at a club but the priority should be winning football matches and everybody should be on the same page and doing everything they can to do that.
The youth department just needs to get better. I've no idea how ?. Scouting, recruitment, coaching needs to improve to get up to championship standard or unfortunately the standard of the 1st team drops to L1 or L2 levels to meet what's coming the other way. |
Why do you think the club is building a new training ground! | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:52 - May 5 with 2188 views | QPROslo |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:28 - May 5 by ParkRoyalR |
Rowing against the tide, but I disagree to a point, based on:
> SJ seemed to be carrying an injury and was contributing less and less
> Dozzell was the only obvious like for like replacement and imo was not ready
> Amos is not the SJ type of player as does'nt have the passing range or play on the half turn
> Willock's injury was fundamental to our losing our cutting edge in attack
So, if I am Warburton, and can get Hendrick (unfairly scape-goated imo) in, for say £ 300k, in the hope he would help maintain our push into the play-off places, its a deal I think most would agree made sense.
The reason for our collapse was that we were, given our best staring 11, totally reliant on:
> Dieng for his authority at set-pieces and ability to pass to our WB's and not just the CB's
> SJ being the fulcrum of the team between defence and attack
> Willock and Chair as the 2 no 10's gave SJ options and brought the WB's into play
With the loss of Dieng, SJ and Willock we were in trouble and Hendrick made sense for me as what I saw in Dozzell and Amos (odd thing to say but goals aside) was not 2 players who could dominate a championship midfield.
If Warburton was putting the Academy under pressure / scrutiny, that can only be a good thing, although if I was looking to sell the club, I would not want our Manager saying it was not producing and we as a club were nowhere near the 'sustainable model' that we may be selling to other investors.
Difficult to call, but imo, we have lost a hard-working self-made man which is exactly what we needed amongst those who have inherited their wealth or got to elevated positions based on their athletic abilities (Ferdinand, who I like as a person btw) rather than there qualifications as a DOF.
All likeable people, but sometimes you need a Ferguson type to bang heads and make a step change and make things happen. Bar injuries to Dieng, SJ and Willock, we were almost there imo. |
Agree entirely. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 13:36 - May 5 with 2009 views | PunteR |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:37 - May 5 by stantheman10 |
Why do you think the club is building a new training ground! |
Well yes, like I've said ,because the academy isn't good enough atm.
Not sure I agree completely with HunterHoop. I think we are in real trouble if we are going to be relying on youth players for us to be sustainable for the foreseeable future. Pretty crazy if you ask me, and don't blame Warburton for giving it a swerve while playoffs was within touching distance.
I think whatever happened from January things were handled poorly. And you could argue that ultimately cost us the drop in form and missing out of playoffs. Regardless of whose side your on. |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 14:10 - May 5 with 1863 views | Hunterhoop |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:28 - May 5 by ParkRoyalR |
Rowing against the tide, but I disagree to a point, based on:
> SJ seemed to be carrying an injury and was contributing less and less
> Dozzell was the only obvious like for like replacement and imo was not ready
> Amos is not the SJ type of player as does'nt have the passing range or play on the half turn
> Willock's injury was fundamental to our losing our cutting edge in attack
So, if I am Warburton, and can get Hendrick (unfairly scape-goated imo) in, for say £ 300k, in the hope he would help maintain our push into the play-off places, its a deal I think most would agree made sense.
The reason for our collapse was that we were, given our best staring 11, totally reliant on:
> Dieng for his authority at set-pieces and ability to pass to our WB's and not just the CB's
> SJ being the fulcrum of the team between defence and attack
> Willock and Chair as the 2 no 10's gave SJ options and brought the WB's into play
With the loss of Dieng, SJ and Willock we were in trouble and Hendrick made sense for me as what I saw in Dozzell and Amos (odd thing to say but goals aside) was not 2 players who could dominate a championship midfield.
If Warburton was putting the Academy under pressure / scrutiny, that can only be a good thing, although if I was looking to sell the club, I would not want our Manager saying it was not producing and we as a club were nowhere near the 'sustainable model' that we may be selling to other investors.
Difficult to call, but imo, we have lost a hard-working self-made man which is exactly what we needed amongst those who have inherited their wealth or got to elevated positions based on their athletic abilities (Ferdinand, who I like as a person btw) rather than there qualifications as a DOF.
All likeable people, but sometimes you need a Ferguson type to bang heads and make a step change and make things happen. Bar injuries to Dieng, SJ and Willock, we were almost there imo. |
Your timelines are all out there.
SJ hasn’t trained properly since November supposedly but only went out of the side with a knock weeks after Hendrick arrived.
Hendrick was signed when we were 3rd an had been on a great run, with all the central midfielders fit and available.
Willock and Chair were both fit and playing.
Since Willock has been (only a handful of games ago), Hendrick hasn’t actually played much.
Dozzell had already played earlier in the season in some key wins. Agree he has his weaknesses but he has played well at times
Amos had played well in that Reading win just before Hendrick signed.
On the flip side, doubts were already creeping in on Austin’s mobility and we had only Gray and Dykes as alternatives, one of whom was injured soon after the transfer window.
I simply don’t think we needed Hendrick or most fans would have signed him. But I do agree that everyone expected him to have more of an impact and play better than he has!
Ultimately the collapse began way before Willock or Johansen were injured and before Dieng went out. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 14:19 - May 5 with 1816 views | Hunterhoop |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 13:36 - May 5 by PunteR |
Well yes, like I've said ,because the academy isn't good enough atm.
Not sure I agree completely with HunterHoop. I think we are in real trouble if we are going to be relying on youth players for us to be sustainable for the foreseeable future. Pretty crazy if you ask me, and don't blame Warburton for giving it a swerve while playoffs was within touching distance.
I think whatever happened from January things were handled poorly. And you could argue that ultimately cost us the drop in form and missing out of playoffs. Regardless of whose side your on. |
This is the hump people can’t seem to get over. I don’t want us to be wholly reliant on youth! I doubt anyone does. And we won’t. We have some experienced pros.
But we don’t have a choice about blooding young players. Whether they are dreadful or amazing, it doesn’t matter. Signing players cost money we don’t have. We did it over the last 12 months because of how last season finished and Warburton wanting it. We all wanted it so we could reach the play offs or beyond. But we can’t operate like that every year unless you’re selling an Eze every 2 years.
So you have to blood youngsters whether you want to or not. You can’t just disconnect with the youth set up and not speak with the youth coaches. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 14:42 - May 5 with 1680 views | TheChef |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 14:19 - May 5 by Hunterhoop |
This is the hump people can’t seem to get over. I don’t want us to be wholly reliant on youth! I doubt anyone does. And we won’t. We have some experienced pros.
But we don’t have a choice about blooding young players. Whether they are dreadful or amazing, it doesn’t matter. Signing players cost money we don’t have. We did it over the last 12 months because of how last season finished and Warburton wanting it. We all wanted it so we could reach the play offs or beyond. But we can’t operate like that every year unless you’re selling an Eze every 2 years.
So you have to blood youngsters whether you want to or not. You can’t just disconnect with the youth set up and not speak with the youth coaches. |
Er well quite - we're not going to have a team made up of eleven 20 years old.
So yes you need to have that blend of youth and experience, and of the best players coming through the academy/u23s you need to give them first team opportunities otherwise you'll never know if they're good enough or not. |  |
| |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 15:01 - May 5 with 1582 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:27 - May 5 by slmrstid |
Something that has been raised on this thread, I think, or certainly elsewhere on this board, that is worth bearing in mind regarding the current crop of U23s...
Those players that have broke through to our first team and have since been sold or are still within the team, did go out on loan at decent levels and flourished, suggesting they would do well in our first team.
Examples...
- Darnell Furlong - did very well at Cambridge United and Northampton Town in Lgs 1/2
- Seny Dieng - was well liked at Dundee in the SPL, and Doncaster in League 1
- Ebere Eze - stormed it at Wycombe in Lg1
- Ilias Chair - "best player ever" at Stevenage in Lg2
- Joe Lumley - kept a ridiculous number of clean sheets at Blackpool and Bristol Rovers in Lgs 1/2 (I remember NorthernR once describing him as "statistical porn" for his clean sheet stats at those levels)
- Ryan Manning - had been in and around the first team but then went to Rotherham in that McLaren spell and did OK there - certainly scored a lot of penalties...
A anomaly, of sorts, here is Osman Kakay - if I remember rightly he had a fairly unremarkable spell at Chesterfield but then to be fair to him had the guts to go up to Scotland with Partick Thistle - looked down on by Todd Kane of course infamously but it must have been a hell of a culture shock for him and he should receive great credit for willing to go up there to play football. But then is Kakay really a top half Championship player? Probably not.
Looking at the current crop, have any of them gone to good levels and pulled up trees? Arguably not this year to suggest they could come in next year and be effective.
- Bettache - OK Oldham have been chaotic, which probably hasn't helped him, but you can argue cream should still rise to the top and he doesn't appear to have
- Kelman - not really done much at Gillingham
- Masterson - as above, same with Cambridge this year
- Armstrong - obviously doing well in the Conference this year but its a hell of a jump to say he could do it in the Championship next year - probably needs a good Lg1/Lg2 loan spell first - so could still change
- Duke-McKenna - see Armstrong really
All the others have gone to Conference South levels or lower, so they could come on strong still but again its a hell of a jump to say they could come in and be competitive in the Championship straight away. Even Jamie Vardy took a year going from Fleetwood to Leicester before he became more effective.
Given a managers job rests on results, I'm sure if Warburton thought any U18/U23 player could come in and have an impact he would have done so. So I'd be a bit wary of the Academy side foisting players onto the first team squad who aren't good enough as well. |
I remember when Harry Kane and his cream rose to the top during his 4 months at norwich where he started 1 league game and scored one goal. |  |
| |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 15:07 - May 5 with 1558 views | LythamR |
I dont think we will get to the truth of this unless we got all the main protagonists in a room and injected them with truth serum
My own feeling is that Warburtons remit was changed along the line, in all probability due to pressure from the board and CEO to deliver a play off spot and hopefully promotion, he realises that he cant achieve that with what is available to come through internally but the board makes budget available and the die is cast, signals for this include the permanant signings of Johansson and Austin and season long loans of players we couldnt afford to buy, Gray and McCallum
It was a big punt and it nearly came off apart from above average bad luck with injuries and some poor performances, if Willock and Dieng had stayed fit we would probably have at least made the play offs and once there you always have a punchers chance as we know.
Warburton doesnt decide what budget is available and he certainly couldnt authorise the spending of it, that comes from above. MW is paying the price for a deviation from our avowed strategy and business model.
If that is the case shouldn't a significant finger be pointing at whoever sanctioned the punt and if i am wrong and its all down to Warburtons ambition and megalomania shouldn't the finger also be pointing at those responsible for letting him get away with it and setting us back 1/2 years in terms of the strategy.
I am not saying warburton covered himself in glory in the last few months but it does rather feel like he has been tossed under the bus whilst those around and above him walk away scott free |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
