Dyche is still the man for the job without a shadow of doubt.

[spt_claret]

I disagree with a lot of this, it's a bit like having your cake and eating it. You can't say it's never been done whilst accepting that we have managed to do it for the past number of years. We've had a European finish on a shoestring budget and our squad is better than it was when we first came up and stayed up. I have no doubt that a lot of this was due to good management, but if we have proved it's possible to do it then the alternative is that we have ballsed it up by going away from (what was for us) a tried and tested formula. Specifically on the pitch we no longer play like the Burnley of old. These problems are not only down to personal, as I've said our squad is better than it has been previously imo. We have lost our ability to mix it up, to be effective and we have certainly lost some of our work rate.

Everyone keeps saying we'll no one else has done it so it's not possible- we have, so it is if we get it right. We have not got it right, from recruitment through to management. People can't go on blindly doing anything they can to not point a finger at Dyche. He isn't bigger than the club nor will he ever be and he has contributed (after several years of fantastic management) to our current problems.

That's why people are upset, because we've shown we can do it. I don't understand why people can't accept that.

You're the one having your cake and eating it by saying "we are the sole example and have done it with Dyche so therefore can do it without Dyche" even though he's been in charge for that entire sole example. And you can't argue that we've strayed too far from the successful formula of the past so need to get back to it, while also arguing that Dyche is too stubborn and static and won't move on from the past it's an inherent contradiction. Is Dyche refusing to adapt from his old methods or has he strayed from his old methods? It can't be both.
It is once again not about him being bigger than the club.
It's about the lack of any evidence to suggest there is any reasonable probability of finding someone better right now given our resources and who we could get, and this assessment obviously changes if we still decline in the Championship but at this time I and many others do not see a better option out there given the circumstances.
We've shown we can do it with Dyche. Neither Burnley or any other club in English football has shown they can do it with comparable resources with other managers, with a few rare exceptions like Unai Emery who is again miles beyond any prospect of signing and has 15 years of exceptional pedigree.

[quoonbeatz]

I disagree with a lot of this, it's a bit like having your cake and eating it. You can't say it's never been done whilst accepting that we have managed to do it for the past number of years.

Do you understand what precedent is?

Also, genuinely funny to see us compared with Newcastle, owned at the time by the billionaire Mike Ashley. And Stoke, bankrolled by the bet365 mob.

Mad how even after all this time, people still think we're anything like clubs such as them.

[quoonbeatz]

Interesting one, most teams are looking for more progressive football nowadays so I’m not sure it would be as quickly as you think. You don’t see the likes of Pulis being wanted now and Allardyce only for a rescue job.

I said he'd be back in the PL pretty quickly, so for me that's within a couple of years, either with a direct PL job or by taking a championship club up.

You might not see Pulis or Allardyce but you do still see Hodgson. Dyche is more like him than the other two, and a lot younger.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Is someone really trying to use Villarreal as a stick to beat Dyche/the club with?
That's a whole new level of absurd, even for here.

[Newcastleclaret93]

Is someone really trying to use Villarreal as a stick to beat Dyche/the club with?
That's a whole new level of absurd, even for here.

If anything that shows what Dyche can achieve if given the time to rebuild.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Any proof about Sunderland ????, also what I said is Dyche won't play or try youth even if our academy produced any and to date it hasn't

It's been well documented on here he was off to Sunderland, if you don't want to accept that due to your agenda then I'll go whizz into the wind because it will be more productive.

So Dyche hasn't played any young lads to date?
I'm pretty sure he has on occasion this season and last.

[Swizzlestick]

Aren't Villarreal owned by a billionaire?

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Aren't Villarreal owned by a billionaire?

Yeah but he's not on the level of Abramovich, estimated wealth of €1.7 billion

[Swizzlestick]

Yeah but he's not on the level of Abramovich, estimated wealth of €1.7 billion

More in response to the ridiculous Emery/Villarreal comparison above. By that bizarre logic, we should be doing better than Hoffenheim because we're a bigger town then them, again conveniently ignoring the billionaire owner.

[Quickenthetempo]

And had he done this you would have been outraged that as an established/European qualifying Premier League club we are still selling to mid table sides and need to hold on to our best players and upgrade on the weaker ones to go to the next level.
Which I think is fair, I would have been very concerned at us selling our best players. Even though Wood was out of form, unmotivated and paid for over the odds I was concerned to be losing him given his goal record.
Wanting to improve the squad and playstyle but also sell your best players to fund this are inherently at odds and an exceptionally difficult prospect without a top notch scouting, analytics and negotiating team- which with all the will in the world we don't have as those things cost money that we didn't have. We've been investing in that stuff slowly but it is a slow process when budgets are tight and has been slower than the growth of rival budgets. It's a plate spinning exercise which is extremely difficult to keep going, maybe we could have sold our best and unearthed gems to replace them AND move the squad forward, finding 3 for every 2 at an equivalent price. If we did we'd have amongst the best transfer and recruitment teams in the world.
Brentford have excellent facilities for this because they have spent years investing lots of money in this, especially relative to their rivals in the lower leagues. They started long before us and with a different starting position in terms of total and relative resources. The result is they now do have an exceptional recruitment setup relative to their resources but it is about how it's grown. It is also the one and only thing I 100% back our current owners on- they've made a lot of noise and investment in developing similar analytics setups, it's big in American Football and English football is about 10-20 years behind.

We are a selling club. We always have been as we haven't the crowds to compete financially.

I would only be concerned if we didn't reinvest the money.

The other benefit to this system is it keeps wages down. Every 2nd contract we issue will have pay rises on. Unfortunately the players ability doesn't rise 30% at the same time.

[spt_claret]

We are a selling club. We always have been as we haven't the crowds to compete financially.

I would only be concerned if we didn't reinvest the money.

The other benefit to this system is it keeps wages down. Every 2nd contract we issue will have pay rises on. Unfortunately the players ability doesn't rise 30% at the same time.

I agree with all of this. My concern is that a- we wouldn't have reinvested sufficiently or b- even if we had, the inherent struggle of improving with that reinvestment, or matching for less money, would have failed.
In hindsight I'd have sold Tarkowski last summer as good as he's been this year, in the hope of reinvesting in a new CB and CM (or CM and banking on no injuries and Collins stepping up). But even in hindsight that could have backfired.
Likewise McNeil, in hindsight you'd have cashed in given his form this season, at the time it would have felt suicidal and been a major challenge.
I'm not really arguing against selling on, so much as arguing how this opens up a host of other problems to solve which we would have been faced with, and it's very difficult to say how a counterfactual history would have gone. I agree that ideally we do buy low sell high, but we also need to ensure that if doing that we don't just reinvest and reinvest well, but aren't reliant on a small handful of saleable playing assets for both funds and performances and can retain some, sell some without cashflow or performance being too impacted. And that is a battle we are really struggling with independent of Dyche as it comes down to the funds available to acquire those playing assets to begin with. You'd hope the academy and increase in analytics and data scouting can help (the latter has done great at Brentford) but it's a slow process and one that isn't going to be sped up by changing manager.

[spt_claret]

More in response to the ridiculous Emery/Villarreal comparison above. By that bizarre logic, we should be doing better than Hoffenheim because we're a bigger town then them, again conveniently ignoring the billionaire owner.

For what it's worth I was agreeing that Villarreal is an unfair comparison, just also think that Emery is an incredible exception of a manager- you don't unearth people like him very often and you're unlikely to find one gambling on a change.
Also from the other side of it- social media was calling Villarreal Spanish Burnley after their Europa League win. It flatters us but gives some idea as to the perception of overperformance at Burnley by the wider game.

[ClaretPete001]

I disagree with a lot of this, it's a bit like having your cake and eating it. You can't say it's never been done whilst accepting that we have managed to do it for the past number of years. We've had a European finish on a shoestring budget and our squad is better than it was when we first came up and stayed up. I have no doubt that a lot of this was due to good management, but if we have proved it's possible to do it then the alternative is that we have ballsed it up by going away from (what was for us) a tried and tested formula. Specifically on the pitch we no longer play like the Burnley of old. These problems are not only down to personal, as I've said our squad is better than it has been previously imo. We have lost our ability to mix it up, to be effective and we have certainly lost some of our work rate.

Everyone keeps saying we'll no one else has done it so it's not possible- we have, so it is if we get it right. We have not got it right, from recruitment through to management. People can't go on blindly doing anything they can to not point a finger at Dyche. He isn't bigger than the club nor will he ever be and he has contributed (after several years of fantastic management) to our current problems.

That's why people are upset, because we've shown we can do it. I don't understand why people can't accept that.

In 2016/17 we had: Heaton, Pope, Keane, Mee, Lowton, Marney, Brady, Defour, Westwood, Hendrick, Barton, Boyd, Ward JBG, Tarko, Arfield and Andre Grey. All of whom were at the peak of their game.

Who in the current squad - there now but not then - would get into your team for the West Ham Game?

On the premise that the 2016/17 players are judged at that point in time - I'm thinking my team would be:

Pope
Lowton
Tarks
Mee
Taylor/Ward (Hmmm)
Arfield
Defour
Barton/Westwood
Cornet
Gray
Barnes/Vokes

Subs

Keane
Hendrick
Boyd
Westwood
Brady
Lennon
Vokes

Clearly, Mee, Westwood and Barnes were better then than now because of their age.

I wouldn't be shocked if some would argue none of the current squad could get into that team.

The 2015/16 team would easily have got to 40 points this season and the reason that the current squad can't mix it up is because those that could are now well into their 30s.

And the point is: investment and recruitment over the last few years has been the issue and it's not clear that is Dyche's fault.

[spt_claret]

In 2016/17 we had: Heaton, Pope, Keane, Mee, Lowton, Marney, Brady, Defour, Westwood, Hendrick, Barton, Boyd, Ward JBG, Tarko, Arfield and Andre Grey. All of whom were at the peak of their game.

Who in the current squad - there now but not then - would get into your team for the West Ham Game?

On the premise that the 2016/17 players are judged at that point in time - I'm thinking my team would be:

Pope
Lowton
Tarks
Mee
Taylor/Ward (Hmmm)
Arfield
Defour
Barton/Westwood
Cornet
Gray
Barnes/Vokes

Subs

Keane
Hendrick
Boyd
Westwood
Brady
Lennon
Vokes

Clearly, Mee, Westwood and Barnes were better then than now because of their age.

I wouldn't be shocked if some would argue none of the current squad could get into that team.

The 2015/16 team would easily have got to 40 points this season and the reason that the current squad can't mix it up is because those that could are now well into their 30s.

And the point is: investment and recruitment over the last few years has been the issue and it's not clear that is Dyche's fault.

Stick Barton and Defour into our current team in central midfield and we stop up comfortably. Add prime Barnes over Jay and we probably finish 10-12th.
We are so near yet so far.

[ClaretMov]

It's been well documented on here he was off to Sunderland, if you don't want to accept that due to your agenda then I'll go whizz into the wind because it will be more productive.

So Dyche hasn't played any young lads to date?
I'm pretty sure he has on occasion this season and last.

Well documented on here, ffs lol lol lol that proves nothing, was it in the media, was it announced by Burnley or Sunderland

Being forced to play young player's because of injury or in cup's he doesn't care about hardly counts does it

[boyyanno]

You're the one having your cake and eating it by saying "we are the sole example and have done it with Dyche so therefore can do it without Dyche" even though he's been in charge for that entire sole example. And you can't argue that we've strayed too far from the successful formula of the past so need to get back to it, while also arguing that Dyche is too stubborn and static and won't move on from the past it's an inherent contradiction. Is Dyche refusing to adapt from his old methods or has he strayed from his old methods? It can't be both.
It is once again not about him being bigger than the club.
It's about the lack of any evidence to suggest there is any reasonable probability of finding someone better right now given our resources and who we could get, and this assessment obviously changes if we still decline in the Championship but at this time I and many others do not see a better option out there given the circumstances.
We've shown we can do it with Dyche. Neither Burnley or any other club in English football has shown they can do it with comparable resources with other managers, with a few rare exceptions like Unai Emery who is again miles beyond any prospect of signing and has 15 years of exceptional pedigree.

The quote button is there for a reason, it's so you don't need to "Invent" things that people have said. I've never once said that we can do it without Dyche. I acknowledged in my last post that our success has been built on good management- It would be daft to say otherwise. My point, which is quite clear if you bother to read my post is that it's posters like you who are doing exactly what you have accused me of. You acknowledge that our success was partly down to good management, but now say that our failure is not down to management- As I said you can't have it both ways, and have your cake and eat it so to speak.

You're also shifting the goalposts on the debate significantly, my response was to Spijed who said there were no examples of clubs achieving success with limited budgets and being small in size. My response is that we are the example. It is possible, we have proved it. You can remove Dyches name from the debate as it's clearly confusing you. Instead consider that a club needs the basic elements that we had, a perfect storm if you will. That involves good management, but that does not have too be Sean Dyche, to say that there is only one man in the world who could have taken us to where he has is just absolute nonsense- stop trying to make the manager bigger than the club.

To summarize: We have shown that it's possible to succeed at this level with a small team and limited money. If you acknowledge that the manager has been a large part in enabling our success then you sure as hell also have to acknowledge that he has a part to play in our failure. To do otherwise is absolute stupidity. Does that mean i'm "Dyche out", no it doesn't. But if you're saying its all the boards fault then surely it was the boards success that has enabled our achievements?

You see how you can't have it both ways now?

[Mattster]

Yep I think their net spend was almost equivelent to ours over the same period, if not lower.

It was lower I believe.

If you exclude this season and look at 16/17 - 20/21* then...

Newcastle - £98m net spend
Burnley - £58m net spend

*period of time we've both been in the Premier League

So closer to double than it is lower.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Well documented on here, ffs lol lol lol that proves nothing, was it in the media, was it announced by Burnley or Sunderland

Being forced to play young player's because of injury or in cup's he doesn't care about hardly counts does it

They didn't announce it because it didn't happen ultimately, which proved my other point that I should whizz into the wind.

So you've decided that those players he has used don't count to suit your agenda.....

*Looks outside to see how windy it is*

[Newcastleclaret93]

If you exclude this season and look at 16/17 - 20/21* then...

Newcastle - £98m net spend
Burnley - £58m net spend

*period of time we've both been in the Premier League

So closer to double than it is lower.

If you do it over the full span.

Ashley is 9.6m a season.
Burnley’s is 10.3m a season.

[spt_claret]

The quote button is there for a reason, it's so you don't need to "Invent" things that people have said. I've never once said that we can do it without Dyche. I acknowledged in my last post that our success has been built on good management- It would be daft to say otherwise. My point, which is quite clear if you bother to read my post is that it's posters like you who are doing exactly what you have accused me of. You acknowledge that our success was partly down to good management, but now say that our failure is not down to management- As I said you can't have it both ways, and have your cake and eat it so to speak.

You're also shifting the goalposts on the debate significantly, my response was to Spijed who said there were no examples of clubs achieving success with limited budgets and being small in size. My response is that we are the example. It is possible, we have proved it. You can remove Dyches name from the debate as it's clearly confusing you. Instead consider that a club needs the basic elements that we had, a perfect storm if you will. That involves good management, but that does not have too be Sean Dyche, to say that there is only one man in the world who could have taken us to where he has is just absolute nonsense- stop trying to make the manager bigger than the club.

To summarize: We have shown that it's possible to succeed at this level with a small team and limited money. If you acknowledge that the manager has been a large part in enabling our success then you sure as hell also have to acknowledge that he has a part to play in our failure. To do otherwise is absolute stupidity. Does that mean i'm "Dyche out", no it doesn't. But if you're saying its all the boards fault then surely it was the boards success that has enabled our achievements?

You see how you can't have it both ways now?

Your entire argument is based around us not needing to stick with Dyche so how are you not saying we can do it without him? Forgive me for thinking that someone arguing that there's other people who can do the same job (despite lack of such other people) means they think we're fine without him.
I believe our success has been down to good management given our resources at the time. Our already slim resources have stagnated and declined even further, this is a tangible change which I believe is responsible for the change in success. So yes, that is how you can argue our success is due to management and our failure is not- because other factors have changed coinciding with that failure
Spijed said there were no OTHER examples. Other meaning not us.
This is maddening.
We have slim resources, but Dyche did exceptionally well with those slim resources. We spent nothing in the summer 2020 window. This season we spent money, but less in the summer than in summer 2019 (going off reports at the time) and a net profit in January. Most other clubs in our division have ticked up in spending or on wage offers, we have not except in our existing wages due to bonus clauses.
I criticised Garlick at the time for not spending and having now seen financial information I didn't see at the time I might not like it but I understand why this happened.
Resources have been stagnant and declining relative to the league's demands for some time, and at times declined in absolute terms as well as relative. It is not hypocritical or unreasonable to point to that as why we are struggling now, while crediting Dyche based on the past. Factors have changed squeezing our resources even further, but his record with limited resources is as good as you'll find so I believe it is better to stick with him than ditch him. That doesn't make him bigger than the club as you keep spouting. It means we have naff all to work with and nothing to suggest that there's a proven or likely candidate out there, who can do better,who we can actually get. Doesn't make him unassailable or best in the world, and as I keep saying if we keep declining in the championship then yes, we need to look elsewhere.
I truthfully don't get how to get it across to you any clearer.

[ClaretPete001]

Stick Barton and Defour into our current team in central midfield and we stop up comfortably. Add prime Barnes over Jay and we probably finish 10-12th.
We are so near yet so far.

Agree substantively but not sure Wout compares to Andre Gray in his prime.

I'm not sure we'd score enough.

[Mattster]

If you do it over the full span.

Ashley is 9.6m a season.
Burnley’s is 10.3m a season.

It was you who set the 5 year timeframe to the net spend but when that's wrong you extend all the way back to 2007 (on top of ignoring this year) just to get the numbers you want...

Newcastle? They have had 5 years in the prem and always lived within there means under Ashley. Only recently have they heavily invested.

But fine, let's run with your moving of the goalposts.

That spend took Newcastle from 13th in the Premier League to 12th in the Premier League in that timeframe. Whereas Burnley went from 15th in the Championship to 17th in the Premier League in the same timeframe. For some context.

[Newcastleclaret93]

It was you who set the 5 year timeframe to the net spend but when that's wrong you extend all the way back to 2007 (on top of ignoring this year) just to get the numbers you want...



But fine, let's run with your moving of the goalposts.

That spend took Newcastle from 13th in the Premier League to 12th in the Premier League in that timeframe. Whereas Burnley went from 15th in the Championship to 17th in the Premier League in the same timeframe. For some context.

Fair point, I thought they were separate points.

[boyyanno]

Your entire argument is based around us not needing to stick with Dyche so how are you not saying we can do it without him? Forgive me for thinking that someone arguing that there's other people who can do the same job (despite lack of such other people) means they think we're fine without him.
I believe our success has been down to good management given our resources at the time. Our already slim resources have stagnated and declined even further, this is a tangible change which I believe is responsible for the change in success. So yes, that is how you can argue our success is due to management and our failure is not- because other factors have changed coinciding with that failure
Spijed said there were no OTHER examples. Other meaning not us.
This is maddening.
We have slim resources, but Dyche did exceptionally well with those slim resources. We spent nothing in the summer 2020 window. This season we spent money, but less in the summer than in summer 2019 (going off reports at the time) and a net profit in January. Most other clubs in our division have ticked up in spending or on wage offers, we have not except in our existing wages due to bonus clauses.
I criticised Garlick at the time for not spending and having now seen financial information I didn't see at the time I might not like it but I understand why this happened.
Resources have been stagnant and declining relative to the league's demands for some time, and at times declined in absolute terms as well as relative. It is not hypocritical or unreasonable to point to that as why we are struggling now, while crediting Dyche based on the past. Factors have changed squeezing our resources even further, but his record with limited resources is as good as you'll find so I believe it is better to stick with him than ditch him. That doesn't make him bigger than the club as you keep spouting. It means we have naff all to work with and nothing to suggest that there's a proven or likely candidate out there, who can do better,who we can actually get. Doesn't make him unassailable or best in the world, and as I keep saying if we keep declining in the championship then yes, we need to look elsewhere.
I truthfully don't get how to get it across to you any clearer.

That's not my entire argument at all. My argument is that you can't say Dyche has singlehandedly achieved all our success but has no responsibility in our failure- Which is EXACTLY what you and other posters are doing.

The board actually signed some players this year, so no doubt you'll be scrambling through the rest of the club to aportion blame to anyone but Dyche. I guess the tea ladies brews have declined in quality this year and this has also lead to our decline.

If you believe that recruitment is the problem then you must believe that recruitment was the enabling factor for our success, but you don't do you, and for good reason, it isn't true. The balance is somewhere in the middle and is the argument I am making. The failure is on a number of fronts just as the success was, Dyche has been a part in all of this. To argue otherwise is just nonsensical.

[ClaretPete001]

If you do it over the full span.

Ashley is 9.6m a season.
Burnley’s is 10.3m a season.

From 2016/17 to 20/21 they spent double and their net spend was £10 or so million more.

From 2016/17 to current the net spend is double.

[ClaretPete001]

That's not my entire argument at all. My argument is that you can't say Dyche has singlehandedly achieved all our success but has no responsibility in our failure- Which is EXACTLY what you and other posters are doing.

The board actually signed some players this year, so no doubt you'll be scrambling through the rest of the club to aportion blame to anyone but Dyche. I guess the tea ladies brews have declined in quality this year and this has also lead to our decline.

If you believe that recruitment is the problem then you must believe that recruitment was the enabling factor for our success, but you don't do you, and for good reason, it isn't true. The balance is somewhere in the middle and is the argument I am making. The failure is on a number of fronts just as the success was, Dyche has been a part in all of this. To argue otherwise is just nonsensical.

This is the problematic statement: "If you believe that recruitment is the problem then you must believe that recruitment was the enabling factor for our success, but you don't do you, and for good reason, it isn't true."

No manager is going to cope with poor recruitment so it can only be considered a meaningful variable when it is poor, which it has been since 2018/19.

It maybe Dyche's performances have got worse since 2018/19 but it's much easier to see that from 2018/19 onwards relatively few players recruited have been an improvement on what we had before with the exception of Cornet (arguably).

[ClaretMov]

They didn't announce it because it didn't happen ultimately, which proved my other point that I should whizz into the wind.

So you've decided that those players he has used don't count to suit your agenda.....

*Looks outside to see how windy it is*

He doesn't try youth because he wants to or spot's talent its only when he's forced to, the Academy has provided nothing under Dyche

[spt_claret]

That's not my entire argument at all. My argument is that you can't say Dyche has singlehandedly achieved all our success but has no responsibility in our failure- Which is EXACTLY what you and other posters are doing.

The board actually signed some players this year, so no doubt you'll be scrambling through the rest of the club to aportion blame to anyone but Dyche. I guess the tea ladies brews have declined in quality this year and this has also lead to our decline.

If you believe that recruitment is the problem then you must believe that recruitment was the enabling factor for our success, but you don't do you, and for good reason, it isn't true. The balance is somewhere in the middle and is the argument I am making. The failure is on a number of fronts just as the success was, Dyche has been a part in all of this. To argue otherwise is just nonsensical.

I have never said he singlehandedly achieved our success.
I have said I believe he is a decisive, in my opinion THE decisive, factor in our success.
I have said I do not believe there is another manager available who could do as good or better a job, given our resources, who we could realistically get.
I acknowledged we made signings in the summer- and that this was still less investment than other clubs and less than our successful period relative to rivals and I believe as an absolute. The fact we spent in 2021 doesn't negate that we spent less than 2019, or (almost) nothing in 2020, or even less relatively than previous.
I have said that I believe this stagnant and declining investment in recruitment over the past 2+ years is the primary problem behind our struggles. Especially as it is declining relative to the demands of our league.
I accept that this is partly forced by wage rises, I have not been condemning the board especially Garlick for this. I will condemn the current board as they have not reversed this investment strategy (ie have still spent less, not more) but have still put the club into debt- the worst of both worlds.
I accept that these declining resources also mean that we are now in a situation where the resources may have declined below what Dyche is capable of succeeding with. However the point is, given his track record and given other clubs' and managers track records at delivering success on tight budgets, I believe that he is still currently the likeliest to deliver success of any managers who are available,, and should he fail to do so in the Championship then this belief and assessment will be re-evaluated.
I am not saying that Dyche is beyond reproach or beyond criticism and certainly not that he is "owed a chance"- it's a sport, you earn, you're not owed. I am saying that regardless of this I believe he is the best candidate available to us ie. We cannot get someone who could do better despite any shortcomings he may have. Someone doesn't have to be perfect to be the best candidate, someone doesn't have to be perfect to not be attributed the blame for our failings, and someone doesn't have to be perfect to be given the greatest credit for our success. It is not a matter of in the middle equal credit and blame as other factors have changed and distort the picture.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

He doesn't try youth because he wants to or spot's talent its only when he's forced to, the Academy has provided nothing under Dyche

Sorry, but you're whinging he doesn't use youth players and when he does you run past dragging the goalposts to say he was forced too so it doesn't count.

I absolutely cannot take you seriously right now.

Oh and I found this earlier because it would appear your internet search engine of choice doesn't work

Screenshot_20220413-141458.png (384.72 KiB) Viewed 1637 times

[kentonclaret]

Stick Barton and Defour into our current team in central midfield and we stop up comfortably. Add prime Barnes over Jay and we probably finish 10-12th.
We are so near yet so far.

Alternatively, they could have used the Loan Market to bring in Conor Gallagher who provides not only drive and leadership but a regular supply of goals from midfield.

[DCWat]

I wish we’d stop suggesting that Dyche won’t promote youth, or will only do so if his hand is forced.

Firstly, McNeil was promoted, quite whether that was always the plan or if it was through necessity, we’ll probably never know.

Secondly, can someone tell me; of those that have had a brief taste of first team football (be that coming on or a place on bench) or indeed those that haven’t been around the first team, but are playing under 23 / reserve football, just which ones are good enough to start in the Premier League?

Now, if we appeared to have a raft of quality talent pushing for a place in the first team, that wasn’t being utilised, I’d have more sympathy for that argument. As it stands, I don’t see Dyche doing much wrong, in this respect.

[RVclaret]

I wish we’d stop suggesting that Dyche won’t promote youth, or will only do so if his hand is forced.

Firstly, McNeil was promoted, quite whether that was always the plan or if it was through necessity, we’ll probably never know.

Secondly, can someone tell me; of those that have had a brief taste of first team football (be that coming on or a place on bench) or indeed those that haven’t been around the first team, but are playing under 23 / reserve football, just which ones are good enough to start in the Premier League?

Now, if we appeared to have a raft of quality talent pushing for a place in the first team, that wasn’t being utilised, I’d have more sympathy for that argument. As it stands, I don’t see Dyche doing much wrong, in this respect.

Wasn’t McNeil set to join Cheltenham on loan before an injury to Robbie Brady meant he had to be moved into the first team?

[DCWat]

Wasn’t McNeil set to join Cheltenham on loan before an injury to Robbie Brady meant he had to be moved into the first team?

I’d not heard that but did see a post suggesting so - Tony was quick to dismiss this, I think.

[ClaretMov]

Sorry, but you're whinging he doesn't use youth players and when he does you run past dragging the goalposts to say he was forced too so it doesn't count.

I absolutely cannot take you seriously right now.

Oh and I found this earlier because it would appear your internet search engine of choice doesn't work

Screenshot_20220413-141458.png

My original point was Dyche won't try youth and no player's have come out of the academy, you can argue all you want but being forced to play a few kids in cup games hardly qualifies him bringing on the youth from the academy (his big project) does it

A few stories in daily rags are just that, stories and if you believe everything you read on the Internet then that says it all about you, unless it comes from the clubs officially then it's probably 99%BS

[warksclaret]

Alternatively, they could have used the Loan Market to bring in Conor Gallagher who provides not only drive and leadership but a regular supply of goals from midfield.

Absolutely, and no one can say that he would not have joined a club like Burnley with the chance of PL football. He was happy to go to Charlton, Swansea and WBA before Palace. Others we missed out on included Harvey Elliott, Mount, James, and Harry Wilson (surely a better free kick taker than Brownhill). For a club so lacking in player resource a shocking decision to rule out the loan market. As I have said before SD was not accountable to anyone for large periods

[Newcastleclaret93]

I wish we’d stop suggesting that Dyche won’t promote youth, or will only do so if his hand is forced.

Firstly, McNeil was promoted, quite whether that was always the plan or if it was through necessity, we’ll probably never know.

Secondly, can someone tell me; of those that have had a brief taste of first team football (be that coming on or a place on bench) or indeed those that haven’t been around the first team, but are playing under 23 / reserve football, just which ones are good enough to start in the Premier League?

Now, if we appeared to have a raft of quality talent pushing for a place in the first team, that wasn’t being utilised, I’d have more sympathy for that argument. As it stands, I don’t see Dyche doing much wrong, in this respect.

Jimmy Dunne left and is getting rave reviews in the league below. If that continues next season he will more than likely make the step up.

Fundamentally DC how are we supposed to know unless they are given chance? We don’t even give them minutes in the cup anymore.

We rank the lowest in the league for minutes given to a academy players this season. It seems strange when this seems to be our best bunch in quite some time. When Roberts played for the u23s he was knowhere near the best player on the pitch either technically or physically.

Dyche does great with the players that he has but surely everyone can see his weakness is promoting youth.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

My original point was Dyche won't try youth and no player's have come out of the academy, you can argue all you want but being forced to play a few kids in cup games hardly qualifies him bringing on the youth from the academy (his big project) does it

A few stories in daily rags are just that, stories and if you believe everything you read on the Internet then that says it all about you, unless it comes from the clubs officially then it's probably 99%BS

I give you proof of the Sunderland connection and you're not having it.

Dyche has used young players and you're not having it

I'm not sure what else there is to say to you tbh.

*Notices the wind has built up outside*....

[DCWat]

I’d only see it as a weakness if the quality was there. Are you suggesting that there are players in the under 23’s who are ready to step up and be put into a relegation fight? I don’t watch the reserves, so it’s not a loaded question.

What I would say though is that I’d expect ‘football people’ to have a pretty good idea if someone is ready to take to step up.

Hopefully there is some quality getting nearer to the first team, we all want that. I suspect there’ll be more likelihood of that, next season.

I don’t think Dunne can be used as an example, in this instance. He left presumably because he wasn’t going to get first team football with us. If we are to be relegated, that might prove to be an error, but had we retained our status in the top flight, when was he going to play for us, unless he was happy with a career as Kevin Long mk2?

[Conroy92]

Stick Barton and Defour into our current team in central midfield and we stop up comfortably. Add prime Barnes over Jay and we probably finish 10-12th.
We are so near yet so far.

Genuinely laughing now. So you think a mixture of the two sides would have kept us up? But your banging the drum all over the thread that it's not possible for a small team like us to stop in this division? Which one is it?! Another poster rightly calls you out for having your cake and eating it too.

[Newcastleclaret93]

I’d only see it as a weakness if the quality was there. Are you suggesting that there are players in the under 23’s who are ready to step up and be put into a relegation fight? I don’t watch the reserves, so it’s not a loaded question.

What I would say though is that I’d expect ‘football people’ to have a pretty good idea if someone is ready to take to step up.

Hopefully there is some quality getting nearer to the first team, we all want that. I suspect there’ll be more likelihood of that, next season.

I don’t think Dunne can be used as an example, in this instance. He left presumably because he wasn’t going to get first team football with us. If we are to be relegated, that might prove to be an error, but had we retained our status in the top flight, when was he going to play for us, unless he was happy with a career as Kevin Long mk2?

I appreciate the comments about long, it’s difficult to tell if he would have progressed with us. However I think the players we have now are better than Dunne and Benson were.

So I think it’s fair to say they could at least do a job in the championship. I think my point is that we have a few positions on the pitch that have seriously struggled to make an impact. Perhaps it would have been worthwhile trying out the youth. Every other team in the league has given decent minutes to academy players

[GodIsADeeJay81]

I’d only see it as a weakness if the quality was there. Are you suggesting that there are players in the under 23’s who are ready to step up and be put into a relegation fight? I don’t watch the reserves, so it’s not a loaded question.

What I would say though is that I’d expect ‘football people’ to have a pretty good idea if someone is ready to take to step up.

Hopefully there is some quality getting nearer to the first team, we all want that. I suspect there’ll be more likelihood of that, next season.

I don’t think Dunne can be used as an example, in this instance. He left presumably because he wasn’t going to get first team football with us. If we are to be relegated, that might prove to be an error, but had we retained our status in the top flight, when was he going to play for us, unless he was happy with a career as Kevin Long mk2?

Wonder why they didn't mention Benson

In reference to the academy, I suspect the quality of players are improving which is what I'd expect to see after such a large investment and time scale involved.
It may take another year or so before we regularly produce first team quality players for championship/PL level.

This article from 2020 shows how few academy players are making it to their respective clubs first team though, so anyone expecting our academy to produce large numbers of first team players are going to be in for a shock.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... -hold-hold

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Another article about how many academy players make it into the PL.

https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/prem ... rs-1387302

[ClaretMov]

I give you proof of the Sunderland connection and you're not having it.

Dyche has used young players and you're not having it

I'm not sure what else there is to say to you tbh.

*Notices the wind has built up outside*....

A connection is a story, I said has a club come in for him, not a rumour but a official approach that counts.

Talking of rag stories, this one says Dyche flat-batted away and says it's a paper story https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... rnley.html like I said has their ever been a official approach for our so call fantastic manager and if not ask yourself why

Like I keep saying the odd cup game doesn't qualify bringing on the youth from his academy

[Newcastleclaret93]

Another article about how many academy players make it into the PL.

https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/prem ... rs-1387302

5 teams have over 15% of all minutes played have been by academy players.


The rest are all lower. But Burnley are bottom of the list with something like 17 minutes

[DCWat]

I appreciate the comments about long, it’s difficult to tell if he would have progressed with us. However I think the players we have now are better than Dunne and Benson were.

So I think it’s fair to say they could at least do a job in the championship. I think my point is that we have a few positions on the pitch that have seriously struggled to make an impact. Perhaps it would have been worthwhile trying out the youth. Every other team in the league has given decent minutes to academy players

I hope you’re right, I really do. I’d love nothing more than to see young talent that we’ve nurtured, making their way successfully into the first team.

As I said, I’ve not seen any of our youngsters playing and certainly don’t profess to have an eye for spotting talent - though I think we’ve all seen youngsters coming in who stood out at a young age (Cahill being the first name that springs to mind, even though he wasn’t ours).

It would be great to try some of these players out. I’m just of the view that unless we’ve a hell of a lot of confidence in whoever it may be, we could actually do them more harm than good. They don’t just have to be technically and physically ready, they need to be emotionally ready too, particularly into a team fighting for survival.

Football fans are usually a little more forgiving with youngsters but I suspect much less so in our current position.

Who do you think are the players ready to make that step up?

[Newcastleclaret93]

I hope you’re right, I really do. I’d love nothing more than to see young talent that we’ve nurtured, making their way successfully into the first team.

As I said, I’ve not seen any of our youngsters playing and certainly don’t profess to have an eye for spotting talent - though I think we’ve all seen youngsters coming in who stood out at a young age (Cahill being the first name that springs to mind, even though he wasn’t ours).

It would be great to try some of these players out. I’m just of the view that unless we’ve a hell of a lot of confidence in whoever it may be, we could actually do them more harm than good. They don’t just have to be technically and physically ready, they need to be emotionally ready too, particularly into a team fighting for survival.

Football fans are usually a little more forgiving with youngsters but I suspect much less so in our current position.

Who do you think are the players ready to make that step up?

I would be interested in seeing Helm, Tucker and Dodgeson given a go.

Helm must be impressing as he made the bench for the cup game and has recently been promoted to captain for the U23s. He certainly seems to have some ability in CM.

Whether they work out or not it could be interesting to see there desire and young athleticism being introduced into the team

[RVclaret]

I would be interested in seeing Helm, Tucker and Dodgeson given a go.

Helm must be impressing as he made the bench for the cup game and has recently been promoted to captain for the U23s. He certainly seems to have some ability in CM.

Whether they work out or not it could be interesting to see there desire and young athleticism being introduced into the team

Add Richardson to that now he’s back fit, although not featured in the past few 23 games which suggests he’s picked up a new knock.

[Shaggy]

It’s not necessarily the youth players from within our academy, it’s the signing of younger players and blending them into the squad. He just doesn’t do it.

Nice distraction from the Dyche can do wrong crew though.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Nice distraction from the Dyche can do wrong crew though.

There's no such crew, that's a label people like yourself throw around when you can't handle a well thought out and constructed response to your claims.

[boatshed bill]

I would be interested in seeing Helm, Tucker and Dodgeson given a go.

Helm must be impressing as he made the bench for the cup game and has recently been promoted to captain for the U23s. He certainly seems to have some ability in CM.

Whether they work out or not it could be interesting to see there desire and young athleticism being introduced into the team

I wouldn't read too much into the introduction of some of our younger players to the PL squad if I were you.