Faith in young players

[Deloodid]

what i am sure of, is hes putting his chances away and hes creating the most where he is.

who ever wants to change that wants there head checking.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

The only picture I have currently on my wall is of the 95 Cup Final.

MOIST WAI YOU NO PLAY JOSE BAXTER

He played him against Man City when we beat them, he's clearly even better than any of their players.

 

[Brennan]

Velios has had cameo roles and I also dont think hes good enough anyway.

However, from what ive seen of batkley he is good enough.

I wouldn't say Vellios has had cameo roles. He played well off the bench a few times so Moyes promptly started him, and he did a vanishing act for 90 minutes.

Agree on Batkley though. Barkley is good too.

 

[steken1]

Or apart from Ruddy its proven that under Moyes, unless a player is already good enough , him and his staff are bloody useless at bringing young players through and developing them, every one they have at their academy are either top class naturally or complete gash so they're doing something completly wrong.

Any manager in the world would play Rooney at the age Moyes did.

The ratio of players coming through our academy and playing in the PL doesn't appear to be too dissimilar to other PL clubs.

My belief is that good players will always find thier level. Most who leave us end up at league 1 or 2 or drop out the game. I agree he's cautious, I disgaree he's ruining them. surely one of all the young lads sold or released would have come back to prove him wrong if they had the potential to?

 

[steken1]

Not really tho IMO.

Ruddy moved for football reasons, it wasnt like we got rid cos he wasnt good enough.

He was at Everton 5 Years and played once, due to Howard actually being a decent Keeper then.

Purely from a released or sold perpective I was talking. I'm sure Moyes would have kept him if he could.

 

[paulbefc]

We can't give every young player with a sliver of a chance 10+ games to find out if they're good enough ffs.

The odds are never in their favour to begin with.

 

[Michael Bazel Betschart]

Completely agree mate, you could argue Rodwell made lots of appearences but quite often he was out of position or covering for one of our more established players. If i were Moyes i'd have brought Barkley on against Norwich after 60-70 minutes gone, i think he'd have been a menace to the tired Norwich players and the rest of our midfield seemed nackered and due a shake up, i think Moyes is just a ****house at times.

Honestly? If you were 1:0 up against Norwich after 70 minutes, would you throw in a young attack oriented player? I won't blame him for not making substitutions at this stage of the game, if you look at the bench we had on that day.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

I wouldn't say Vellios has had cameo roles. He played well off the bench a few times so Moyes promptly started him, and he did a vanishing act for 90 minutes.

Agree on Batkley though. Barkley is good too.

Vellios scored a few goals in the few sub appearances he had. He then sucked when he started against Stoke but if sucking in your first start against bloody Stoke means anything there's no hope for anyone.

He's been scoring a few for the reserves.

If he was at the club who gave youth a chance he'd have got more than 2 mins on Saturday. He'd have got more than 2 mins when the striker ahead of him wasn't playing particularly well. How much time is debateable but ist certainly more than he's actually got through the managers choice.

 

[Cotto]

Vellios scored a few goals in the few sub appearances he had. He then sucked when he started against Stoke but if sucking in your first start against bloody Stoke means anything there's no hope for anyone.

He's been scoring a few for the reserves.

If he was at the club who gave youth a chance he'd have got more than 2 mins on Saturday. He'd have got more than 2 mins when the striker ahead of him wasn't playing particularly well. How much time is debateable but ist certainly more than he's actually got through the managers choice.

But why would you remove an out of form "proven" goalscorer for someone who hasnt proved anything.

Jelavic will come good again.

I dont think Velios is ever going to be as good as Jelavic. I think at best he could be as good as Anichebe. But thats also very optimistic by what ive seen.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

The ratio of players coming through our academy and playing in the PL doesn't appear to be too dissimilar to other PL clubs.

would be interesting to see the comparisons. Would aslo be very interesting to compare us to other clubs in terms of mins given to young inexperienced players whilst older more experienced players sat on the bench.

My belief is that good players will always find thier level. Most who leave us end up at league 1 or 2 or drop out the game. I agree he's cautious, I disgaree he's ruining them. surely one of all the young lads sold or released would have come back to prove him wrong if they had the potential to?

Its not a case of us having the next Messi in our ranks and them not getting a chance, either if they go on to play in League 1 cause we didn't bring them through right or if they go eslewhere and light up the Prem. Never has been for me.

I'm just assuming that of every group of young players who come through they much be to a decent standard in order to actually be in the academy of a top 6 Prem club. And that the best ones should be given a chance in the first team.

By that i mean slowly bought through. At the start of the season the can be included in a few match day squads, then get to sit on the bench. Maybe an appaearance in cups against lower league sides (which Moyes does sometimes do), then sub appearances in Prem games, then starts if they're doing ok and not looking awful. Thats not 2 mins at the end of games here and there, its regular 10/15 mins at least.

Been plenty of games where we have been winning comfortably in the last year where we could easily have given run outs to young kids but didn't. Been plenty of times in the lst year where first teamers have been playing awful and we could easily have given a young kid a chance for a game or 2 but didn't.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

But why would you remove an out of form "proven" goalscorer for someone who hasnt proved anything.

Jelavic will come good again.

I dont think Velios is ever going to be as good as Jelavic. I think at best he could be as good as Anichebe. But thats also very optimistic by what ive seen.

Because you give him the chance to prove himself. At home against Norwich he could have started Vellios. Of course right now Jelavic is the best option. But he's not on form at the moment so he could have given Vellios 60 mins then he either scores and you have a striker who is scoring vs one who kinda isn't, or you give him a chance and when he doesn't take it put Jelavic on.

There's no specific hard and fast right way to do things though but the above was an option.

 

[steken1]

The ratio of players coming through our academy and playing in the PL doesn't appear to be too dissimilar to other PL clubs.

would be interesting to see the comparisons. Would aslo be very interesting to compare us to other clubs in terms of mins given to young inexperienced players whilst older more experienced players sat on the bench.

My belief is that good players will always find thier level. Most who leave us end up at league 1 or 2 or drop out the game. I agree he's cautious, I disgaree he's ruining them. surely one of all the young lads sold or released would have come back to prove him wrong if they had the potential to?

Its not a case of us having the next Messi in our ranks and them not getting a chance, either if they go on to play in League 1 cause we didn't bring them through right or if they go eslewhere and light up the Prem. Never has been for me.

I'm just assuming that of every group of young players who come through they much be to a decent standard in order to actually be in the academy of a top 6 Prem club. And that the best ones should be given a chance in the first team.

By that i mean slowly bought through. At the start of the season the can be included in a few match day squads, then get to sit on the bench. Maybe an appaearance in cups against lower league sides (which Moyes does sometimes do), then sub appearances in Prem games, then starts if they're doing ok and not looking awful. Thats not 2 mins at the end of games here and there, its regular 10/15 mins at least.

Been plenty of games where we have been winning comfortably in the last year where we could easily have given run outs to young kids but didn't. Been plenty of times in the lst year where first teamers have been playing awful and we could easily have given a young kid a chance for a game or 2 but didn't.

I don't disagree with that. Like I said I believe he's a bit cautious. The last bit anyway.

 

[harryjam]

I wouldn't say Vellios has had cameo roles. He played well off the bench a few times so Moyes promptly started him, and he did a vanishing act for 90 minutes.

Agree on Batkley though. Barkley is good too.

He had Cahill behind him, no one played well up front when he played there.

 

[Walken]

didnt moyes bring westerveld in on loan rather than play Ruddy, despite him being impressive when we beat blackburn with 10 men

 

[steken1]

He had Cahill behind him, no one played well up front when he played there.

He got asked to play up top on his own and bully the stoke CB's into a mistake. Was one of the most depressing things I've seen TBH. Felt badly sorry for the kid.