Booo, Garlick stinks...

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
boatshed bill
Posts: 15108
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3139 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:17 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:11 pm
we needed attacking subs, not a single kid on our bench has kicked a ball in the PL.

Name another club, just one, in the PL that has 4 untried kids on the bench in a league game ?
I'll give you one reason, although it has little relevance to our current situation:
Plenty of clubs bring their young prospects on and integrate them when they can. We haven't done this,

Leisure
Posts: 18476
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 3772 times
Has Liked: 12363 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Leisure » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:17 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:11 pm
we needed attacking subs, not a single kid on our bench has kicked a ball in the PL.

Name another club, just one, in the PL that has 4 untried kids on the bench in a league game ?
And name another one with 7 squad players injured!

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Vegas Claret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:21 pm

Leisure wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:17 pm
And name another one with 7 squad players injured!
utterly irrelevant - if it was relevant to the degree you are implying then Dyche wouldn't be lambasting the numbers in our squad - which he was doing last season when we had only 2-3 missing through injury

If the manager says the squad is too thin, then it's too thin unless you are implying he doesn't realise we have 7 injured players ?
This user liked this post: Wokingclaret

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Vegas Claret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:22 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:17 pm
I'll give you one reason, although it has little relevance to our current situation:
Plenty of clubs bring their young prospects on and integrate them when they can. We haven't done this,
agree 100% with this

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:22 pm

Leisure wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:17 pm
And name another one with 7 squad players injured!
I think we're going around in circles here :)

Some people are simply refusing to acknowledge that 7 players injured is not the norm and in some cases using this as an excuse to attack the board.
This user liked this post: Leisure

ewanrob
Posts: 1331
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:52 am
Been Liked: 361 times
Has Liked: 98 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by ewanrob » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:22 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:17 pm
I'll give you one reason, although it has little relevance to our current situation:
Plenty of clubs bring their young prospects on and integrate them when they can. We haven't done this,
That's the one thing of Sean's tenure that disappoints me the most, and it starts with his lack of substitutions...he clearly doesn't like to twist. Still a great manager thou.
This user liked this post: Leisure

Leisure
Posts: 18476
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 3772 times
Has Liked: 12363 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Leisure » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:24 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:21 pm
utterly irrelevant - if it was relevant to the degree you are implying then Dyche wouldn't be lambasting the numbers in our squad - which he was doing last season when we had only 2-3 missing through injury

If the manager says the squad is too thin, then it's too thin unless you are implying he doesn't realise we have 7 injured players ?
Of course it's relevant when you're referring to why we have 4 untried kids on the bench.
PS - And they're not kids compared with the 18 year old who Wolves have just brought on.
Last edited by Leisure on Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wokingclaret
Posts: 2068
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 292 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Wokingclaret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:26 pm

Leisure, listen to the manager. Garlick has decided to keep his own council

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Vegas Claret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:28 pm

Leisure wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:24 pm
Of course it's relevant when you're referring to why we have 4 untried kids on the bench.
you look at it that way, I look at it if the investment had been there then the 4 kids would be 1 or 2 irrelevant of the injuries. Even when we are full strength we are 2-3 players short - unless of course you don't agree with the one opinion that actually matters ?

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Vegas Claret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:30 pm

Leisure wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:24 pm
Of course it's relevant when you're referring to why we have 4 untried kids on the bench.
PS - And they're not kids compared with the 18 year old who Wolves have just brought on.
you are comparing the likes of Josh Benson with a kid who cost 35 million who played for Porto ? Am I understanding that's your point correctly ?

Leisure
Posts: 18476
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 3772 times
Has Liked: 12363 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Leisure » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:32 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:28 pm
you look at it that way, I look at it if the investment had been there then the 4 kids would be 1 or 2 irrelevant of the injuries. Even when we are full strength we are 2-3 players short - unless of course you don't agree with the one opinion that actually matters ?
And just how many Ist team squad players do you want us to have on the books? Yes, we are short of some quality in a few positions but surely you can't think we should have multiple cover for all our injured squad? How many should we have signed, what positions and how much should we spend?

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Tall Paul » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:34 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:11 pm
we needed attacking subs, not a single kid on our bench has kicked a ball in the PL.

Name another club, just one, in the PL that has 4 untried kids on the bench in a league game ?
Manchester City.

Wokingclaret
Posts: 2068
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 292 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Wokingclaret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:35 pm

Leisure wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:32 pm
And just how many Ist team squad players do you want us to have on the books? Yes, we are short of some quality in a few positions but surely you can't think we should have multiple cover for all our injured squad? How many should we have signed, what positions and how much should we spend?
When the manager stops.........

Leisure
Posts: 18476
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 3772 times
Has Liked: 12363 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Leisure » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:43 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:30 pm
you are comparing the likes of Josh Benson with a kid who cost 35 million who played for Porto ?
No.

Duffer_
Posts: 2309
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 am
Been Liked: 792 times
Has Liked: 1353 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Duffer_ » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:43 pm

We are allowed 25 players in the squad. We currently have 21 as Dwight and other U21s don't count. I don't think it is unreasonable to have a squad of 25 players, particularly when you consider it is very possible that 6 or 7 could be injured at any one time. We are in the business of playing football.

Leisure
Posts: 18476
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 3772 times
Has Liked: 12363 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Leisure » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:44 pm

Wokingclaret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:35 pm
When the manager stops.........
What does that mean?

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Vegas Claret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:44 pm

Leisure wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:43 pm
No.
well what are you talking about then ? Genuinely don't know

Leisure
Posts: 18476
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 3772 times
Has Liked: 12363 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Leisure » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:46 pm

Duffer_ wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:43 pm
We are allowed 25 players in the squad. We currently have 21 as Dwight and other U21s don't count. I don't think it is unreasonable to have a squad of 25 players, particularly when you consider it is very possible that 6 or 7 could be injured at any one time. We are in the business of playing football.
OK. So how much should we spend on getting in these 4 players?

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:46 pm

Duffer_ wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:43 pm
We are allowed 25 players in the squad. We currently have 21 as Dwight and other U21s don't count. I don't think it is unreasonable to have a squad of 25 players, particularly when you consider it is very possible that 6 or 7 could be injured at any one time. We are in the business of playing football.
A very simple way of looking at things. It's not about quantity when you get to that number. I'd sooner we had 18 (plus youth players) but have better quality.

We can't have it both ways with our finances.

Wokingclaret
Posts: 2068
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 292 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Wokingclaret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:48 pm

Leisure wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:44 pm
What does that mean?
Is the manager happy? No

When and if he becomes happy

Leisure
Posts: 18476
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 3772 times
Has Liked: 12363 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Leisure » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:52 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:44 pm
well what are you talking about then ? Genuinely don't know
That's obvious. You still haven't answered my post asking how many Ist team squad players do you us to have on the books? How many players we should have signed and how much we should spend?

boatshed bill
Posts: 15108
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3139 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:53 pm

Where the money has gone
16. Burnley (£49.5m)
Game: Burnley 1-4 Manchester City (Dec 3, 2019)

Bench: Hart, Gibson, Lowton, Brady, Barnes, Rodriguez, Vydra

Next we have Burnley, who suffered a 4-1 defeat against reigning champions Manchester City in December.

Ben Gibson, Ashley Barnes and Jay Rodriguez (all valued at £9 million) were among the substitutes that day.

I know it's only speculation on the valuations, but it's clear we can't go on like this.

Duffer_
Posts: 2309
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 am
Been Liked: 792 times
Has Liked: 1353 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Duffer_ » Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:53 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:46 pm
A very simple way of looking at things. It's not about quantity when you get to that number. I'd sooner we had 18 (plus youth players) but have better quality.

We can't have it both ways with our finances.
I am not asking for the world. If our finances are so desperate then we have to sell JT to rebalance the squad. It is unacceptable to field the bench we did yesterday. The manager has no confidence in their ability to improve us, refusing to even replace a debutant signed 48 hours earlier and playing his first 90 minutes of the season in the league.

Leisure
Posts: 18476
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 3772 times
Has Liked: 12363 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Leisure » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:00 pm

Wokingclaret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:48 pm
Is the manager happy? No

When and if he becomes happy
Managers are never happy! ;) They naturally always want better than what they have.

Wokingclaret
Posts: 2068
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 292 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Wokingclaret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:12 pm

Come on Leisure wakeup and smell the coffee, things are not right at Burnley

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Vegas Claret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:14 pm

Leisure wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:52 pm
That's obvious. You still haven't answered my post asking how many Ist team squad players do you us to have on the books? How many players we should have signed and how much we should spend?
sorry didn't see it, having issues with the forum loading again, not been able to get on at all for the last tens mins so assume it's the server again

I'm not the expert, but I'll offer my opinion for this window. I think we need a right winger, a creative midfielder (we could have options here, I think Brownhill could possibly do that job or we also get another option for the left and free Dwight up to do that) - so that's a minimum of 2 that I would class as essential. Then we are clearly going to need a CB especially if Tarks goes - Dyche has consistently asked for 2 or 3. I'll go with the guy who has worked miracles

edit - genuinely, what Wolves player are you talking about ?

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:18 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:14 pm
sorry didn't see it, having issues with the forum loading again, not been able to get on at all for the last tens mins so assume it's the server again

I'm not the expert, but I'll offer my opinion for this window. I think we need a right winger, a creative midfielder (we could have options here, I think Brownhill could possibly do that job or we also get another option for the left and free Dwight up to do that) - so that's a minimum of 2 that I would class as essential. Then we are clearly going to need a CB especially if Tarks goes - Dyche has consistently asked for 2 or 3. I'll go with the guy who has worked miracles

edit - genuinely, what Wolves player are you talking about ?
Since Stephens signed, he's mentioned 2. Right mid/wing - definitely. 100%, I think that goes without saying. Now let's say JT stays, then Ben Mee comes back (currently in training I'm led to believe so not too far off), then we have Long as 3rd choice. Ok - not ideal, but that could be classed as a work in progress with a new CB coming in, in January.

So we're not actually that bad. It's like I've said, the 7 out injured makes it appear a lot worse than it is. If we have 3-4 of them back, then it turns from, "We've got no bench" to "We could do with a right winger and we're sorted".

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Vegas Claret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:19 pm

Leisure wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:00 pm
Managers are never happy! ;) They naturally always want better than what they have.
agree with this, but Dyche isn't Harry Redknapp (even though he did sign Crouch!)

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Vegas Claret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:21 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:18 pm
Since Stephens signed, he's mentioned 2. Right mid/wing - definitely. 100%, I think that goes without saying. Now let's say JT stays, then Ben Mee comes back (currently in training I'm led to believe so not too far off), then we have Long as 3rd choice. Ok - not ideal, but that could be classed as a work in progress with a new CB coming in, in January.

So we're not actually that bad. It's like I've said, the 7 out injured makes it appear a lot worse than it is. If we have 3-4 of them back, then it turns from, "We've got no bench" to "We could do with a right winger and we're sorted".
so like I said, 2 or 3 - he's been consistent on that since lockdown. I must watch every single Dyche interview, I don't just make stuff up and claim it as my opinion - I clearly state that that is what he consistently asks for. If Stephens takes that down to 2 then he needs 2 !

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:25 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:21 pm
so like I said, 2 or 3 - he's been consistent on that since lockdown. I must watch every single Dyche interview, I don't just make stuff up and claim it as my opinion - I clearly state that that is what he consistently asks for. If Stephens takes that down to 2 then he needs 2 !
You said 2-3 as essential. If JT stays, I think it's 1 that's essential.

If I knew that JT was staying - which let's be fair, the board might already know, then not signing a defender can be justified. As Long can come in now and again for the odd game with Mee and JT in defence. It leaves right midfield as essential, as we can't rely on JBG.

Time will tell - I fully support the club for being adamant that it's £50 million or nothing.

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Vegas Claret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:29 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:25 pm
You said 2-3 as essential. If JT stays, I think it's 1 that's essential.

If I knew that JT was staying - which let's be fair, the board might already know, then not signing a defender can be justified. As Long can come in now and again for the odd game with Mee and JT in defence. It leaves right midfield as essential, as we can't rely on JBG.

Time will tell - I fully support the club for being adamant that it's £50 million or nothing.
Dyche wants 2-3, I would imagine he wants 7 or 8 better than what we have but knows that is unrealistic - hence the 2 or 3 essentials. He's the expert I'll go with what he says. It's up to them to sort it out.

I've said my piece based on what he asks for, not going to go around in circles (and I've got a tap to go and fit in the kitchen :lol: )

Boss Hogg
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:34 am
Been Liked: 846 times
Has Liked: 1090 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Boss Hogg » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:30 pm

That bench wouldn’t have been acceptable in The Championship and neither would the CB pairing. The buck stops with Garlick.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:32 pm

Boss Hogg wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:30 pm
That bench wouldn’t have been acceptable in The Championship and neither would the CB pairing. The buck stops with Garlick.
Hamster in its wheel.
These 2 users liked this post: BertiesBeehole Leisure

boatshed bill
Posts: 15108
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3139 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:05 pm

Boss Hogg wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:30 pm
That bench wouldn’t have been acceptable in The Championship and neither would the CB pairing. The buck stops with Garlick.
Is it beyond possibility that the bench would have looked a lot better had some of these young players occasionally been put there a lot sooner.
SD said in a recent interview that the reason these lads are looking OK is basically down to training with the first team because of f"cking Covid19! it's not even policy in normal circumstances.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:17 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:05 pm
Is it beyond possibility that the bench would have looked a lot better had some of these young players occasionally been put there a lot sooner.
I think there's a very simple explanation as to why they haven't featured more - they aren't good enough.

It's easy for fans to say that players should feature more, especially when McNeil managed to come through and set things on fire, but from what I've seen, from what friends have seen at the 'reserve' games, they just aren't good enough.

You can't force what isn't there. One thing I've learned with social media and on here - there's an awful lot of Burnley fans who liken it to a computer game. Where it's literally as simple as taking a player out and replacing him with a younger player - or selling someone and bringing someone in at the drop of a hat.

It doesn't work like that.
This user liked this post: BertiesBeehole

boatshed bill
Posts: 15108
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3139 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:21 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:17 pm
I think there's a very simple explanation as to why they haven't featured more - they aren't good enough.

It's easy for fans to say that players should feature more, especially when McNeil managed to come through and set things on fire, but from what I've seen, from what friends have seen at the 'reserve' games, they just aren't good enough.

You can't force what isn't there. One thing I've learned with social media and on here - there's an awful lot of Burnley fans who liken it to a computer game. Where it's literally as simple as taking a player out and replacing him with a younger player - or selling someone and bringing someone in at the drop of a hat.

It doesn't work like that.
The thing is , Frank, that right now they've got to be good enough.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:23 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:21 pm
The thing is , Frank, that right now they've got to be good enough.
But they aren't. And there's nothing that can be done about that in the short term. We are relying on Ben Mee and JT to stay together. If JT goes, then we need Ben Mee and a heavy investment into a new central defender.

boatshed bill
Posts: 15108
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3139 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:29 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:23 pm
But they aren't. And there's nothing that can be done about that in the short term. We are relying on Ben Mee and JT to stay together. If JT goes, then we need Ben Mee and a heavy investment into a new central defender.
Frank, I don't know how you feel about this, but I have at least been in a situation where I have been responsible for training apprentices, and i can assure you that if you don't show them the pathway they cannot take it.
Now, I'm not saying that any of these lads will be PL standard, I don't know enough about them.
I do know that opportunity helps.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:35 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:29 pm
Frank, I don't know how you feel about this, but I have at least been in a situation where I have been responsible for training apprentices, and i can assure you that if you don't show them the pathway they cannot take it.
Now, I'm not saying that any of these lads will be PL standard, I don't know enough about them.
I do know that opportunity helps.
SD sees enough of them in training to surely know if they are good enough?

But you then have to say, sure, give them an opportunity - but at what cost? We're talking Premier League points here and many millions of pounds.

It's difficult. We're in a difficult current situation. It won't last forever but fans can be fickle and the majority of them won't give a crap about the injuries.

Duffer_
Posts: 2309
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 am
Been Liked: 792 times
Has Liked: 1353 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Duffer_ » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:36 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:29 pm
Frank, I don't know how you feel about this, but I have at least been in a situation where I have been responsible for training apprentices, and i can assure you that if you don't show them the pathway they cannot take it.
Now, I'm not saying that any of these lads will be PL standard, I don't know enough about them.
I do know that opportunity helps.
Very true but the typical pathway is lower league experience. Only exceptional talents such as McNeil learn their trade in the Premier League.

boatshed bill
Posts: 15108
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3139 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:43 pm

Duffer_ wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:36 pm
Very true but the typical pathway is lower league experience. Only exceptional talents such as McNeil learn their trade in the Premier League.
Yes, it is that, Duffer, not a system that I am pleased with TBH.
we've spent a lot on youth development in recent years, with just Dwight McNeil to show for it . and he's gone straight from the youth team without a loan, bypassing up to 5 years in the U23s.
There's something not quite happening.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:48 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:43 pm
Yes, it is that, Duffer, not a system that I am pleased with TBH.
we've spent a lot on youth development in recent years, with just Dwight McNeil to show for it . and he's gone straight from the youth team without a loan, bypassing up to 5 years in the U23s.
There's something not quite happening.
I thought it was only quite recently that we'd upgraded our youth academy, no?

boatshed bill
Posts: 15108
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3139 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:51 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:48 pm
I thought it was only quite recently that we'd upgraded our youth academy, no?
Yes, this season.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:56 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:51 pm
Yes, this season.
So to expect much from it yet is a bit unrealistic. I think we got lucky with Dwight.

What I'm basically saying is I think we're being a bit harsh to the board. Look at the finances - you pin it all together and it's understandable with what they are doing.

boatshed bill
Posts: 15108
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3139 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Sep 27, 2020 11:06 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:56 pm
So to expect much from it yet is a bit unrealistic. I think we got lucky with Dwight.

What I'm basically saying is I think we're being a bit harsh to the board. Look at the finances - you pin it all together and it's understandable with what they are doing.
No, Frank, you are getting me wrong here. I'm not blaming the board in any way at all. MG has put money in place for a fantastic training complex showing faith in development.
What I am trying to show is that the progression from youth through U23s to potential first team has been poor. That's a (up to) 5 year period in theory. We pay these young men. Something appears to be stalling their progress.

Leisure
Posts: 18476
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 3772 times
Has Liked: 12363 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Leisure » Sun Sep 27, 2020 11:28 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:14 pm


edit - genuinely, what Wolves player are you talking about ?
Fabio Silva, 18 years old and signed on a deal worth £35 mil.

Leisure
Posts: 18476
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 3772 times
Has Liked: 12363 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Leisure » Sun Sep 27, 2020 11:30 pm

Wokingclaret wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:12 pm
Come on Leisure wakeup and smell the coffee, things are not right at Burnley
No-one said that they were but to start writing off the team after 2 games is just a bit ott, even for Burnley fans!
This user liked this post: FactualFrank

Wokingclaret
Posts: 2068
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 292 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Wokingclaret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 11:37 pm

Nobody is writing the team off, you can be bottom by Christmas and still survive. Its not a happy ship at the moment and that is being loudly communicated. There is only days until the Transfer window shuts. As a supporter you have to be concerned.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by FactualFrank » Sun Sep 27, 2020 11:47 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 11:06 pm
What I am trying to show is that the progression from youth through U23s to potential first team has been poor. That's a (up to) 5 year period in theory. We pay these young men. Something appears to be stalling their progress.
I guess the McNeil breakthrough could make all of that worthwhile over 5 years.

I know what you're saying though. You want X number of players coming through over Y seasons.

Wokingclaret
Posts: 2068
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 292 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: Booo, Garlick stinks...

Post by Wokingclaret » Sun Sep 27, 2020 11:57 pm

Problem is not many young players establish themselves in the premier league until 22+

Post Reply