GrimsbyBoro 2,478 3.1k Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 Probably nothing in it but we had a scout at Hearts over the weekend. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobby Barnes 1,293 2.1k Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 (edited) 9 minutes ago, GrimsbyBoro said: Probably nothing in it but we had a scout at Hearts over the weekend. It's Laurence Shankland we are looking at 👍😎 As are a few other championship sides, Sunderland being one of them ! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroNBred 191 418 Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 1 hour ago, Nobby Barnes said: It's Laurence Shankland we are looking at 👍😎 As are a few other championship sides, Sunderland being one of them ! Or Cam Delvin, Musa Drammeh maybe? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverside94 1,568 2.1k Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 Can see us going for Brewster on a free in the summer. Linked with him before and he loves the treatment room Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estonpidge 2,114 6.8k Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 1 hour ago, Riverside94 said: Can see us going for Brewster on a free in the summer. Linked with him before and he loves the treatment room another one who's never lived up to his U's age group hype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce 3,777 2.8k Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 One thing I was wondering about is how good Carrick and the team have been at improving young players. It's a crucial part of the improvement plan. What I looked at is players 23 or younger with no more than 1/2 season of experience at the Championship level, who have played for us for at least 1/2 a season and who made their debut in the 22/23 season. It turns out to be 18 players though 6 of those were loans. Improved: Giles, Archer, Rogers, Rav, Morris (Good start but not so good since returning from injuries), Doak, Hackney Mixed/unsure: Forss (injuries), Ramsey (only started 8 games), Azaz (not sure he's performing any better than he was for Plymouth), Conway (he's been good but doesn't seem to be improving beyond his performances for Bristol City) Not improved: Hoppe, Muniz, Silvera, Gilbert, Greenwood, Thomas, Hamilton Other notables ELL was a bit too experienced for the criteria but was significantly improved. Obviously Akpom was one hell of an improvement under Carrick but he doesn't meet the criteria. McGree, though from before Carrick, was also looking like a real improvement under Carrick until he spent the last 18 months bouncing in and out of medlab. Out of those 18, 1/3rd looking like significant improvements though Giles, Archer and Doak were all loans. Rogers was only just starting to look really good when we sold him and he has pressed the turbo since then. No idea whether this is good, bad or average but useful to look at it in the round. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinoJo3 7,394 15.6k Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 5 minutes ago, Bruce said: One thing I was wondering about is how good Carrick and the team have been at improving young players. It's a crucial part of the improvement plan. What I looked at is players 23 or younger with no more than 1/2 season of experience at the Championship level, who have played for us for at least 1/2 a season and who made their debut in the 22/23 season. It turns out to be 18 players though 6 of those were loans. Improved: Giles, Archer, Rogers, Rav, Morris (Good start but not so good since returning from injuries), Doak, Hackney Mixed/unsure: Forss (injuries), Ramsey (only started 8 games), Azaz (not sure he's performing any better than he was for Plymouth), Conway (he's been good but doesn't seem to be improving beyond his performances for Bristol City) Not improved: Hoppe, Muniz, Silvera, Gilbert, Greenwood, Thomas, Hamilton Other notables ELL was a bit too experienced for the criteria but was significantly improved. Obviously Akpom was one hell of an improvement under Carrick but he doesn't meet the criteria. McGree, though from before Carrick, was also looking like a real improvement under Carrick until he spent the last 18 months bouncing in and out of medlab. Out of those 18, 1/3rd looking like significant improvements though Giles, Archer and Doak were all loans. Rogers was only just starting to look really good when we sold him and he has pressed the turbo since then. No idea whether this is good, bad or average but useful to look at it in the round. Pointless argument imo, far to many variables from the player themselves (attitude/ambition/talent ceiling), to the rest of the team, for example Hackney looking like a league 1 player for half the season while Barlaser was next to him, a young striker will struggle to improve if his service is bad etc. You can always tell things are bad when people start going on about academy/young players like they are the magical answer to everything, “PlAy tHE KiDs At LeASt TheYlL bUsT a GuT”. It’s always the same, you play younger players and still have problems, then people wanna see experience to ‘guide them’ etc. When we were pushing for top 2 a couple years ago nobody cared about loans, nobody screamed for academy players. The answer to everything as always is in the middle, have a balanced side and most importantly play well and win games, then everything is suddenly perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroNBred 191 418 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Kieran Scott to Palace 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jooky85 299 157 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 5 minutes ago, BoroNBred said: Kieran Scott to Palace ITK? That would be a whole house of cards falling down if true. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeaCider24 20,790 25.1k Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Jooky85 said: ITK? That would be a whole house of cards falling down if true. He's just one of the names on the list to replace Crystal Palace's Director of Football atm. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boro 86 966 2.7k Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 28 minutes ago, BoroNBred said: Kieran Scott to Palace CT will be gutted 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnglianRed 8,136 18.6k Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, Jooky85 said: ITK? That would be a whole house of cards falling down if true. Or it could be an opportunity for us to get a better DoF? Although to be fair to Keiran, as with most jobs at Boro, it seems staff are constrained to an extent, by what the club can afford. He would no doubt would be recommending PL players if we could afford them. Out of all the people who could be replaced, he's the one I'd least like to see go. ☹️ I think most of our issues are rooted in the management and coaching. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnglianRed 8,136 18.6k Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 On 3/17/2025 at 3:47 PM, Bruce said: One thing I was wondering about is how good Carrick and the team have been at improving young players. It's a crucial part of the improvement plan. What I looked at is players 23 or younger with no more than 1/2 season of experience at the Championship level, who have played for us for at least 1/2 a season and who made their debut in the 22/23 season. It turns out to be 18 players though 6 of those were loans. Improved: Giles, Archer, Rogers, Rav, Morris (Good start but not so good since returning from injuries), Doak, Hackney Mixed/unsure: Forss (injuries), Ramsey (only started 8 games), Azaz (not sure he's performing any better than he was for Plymouth), Conway (he's been good but doesn't seem to be improving beyond his performances for Bristol City) Not improved: Hoppe, Muniz, Silvera, Gilbert, Greenwood, Thomas, Hamilton Other notables ELL was a bit too experienced for the criteria but was significantly improved. Obviously Akpom was one hell of an improvement under Carrick but he doesn't meet the criteria. McGree, though from before Carrick, was also looking like a real improvement under Carrick until he spent the last 18 months bouncing in and out of medlab. Out of those 18, 1/3rd looking like significant improvements though Giles, Archer and Doak were all loans. Rogers was only just starting to look really good when we sold him and he has pressed the turbo since then. No idea whether this is good, bad or average but useful to look at it in the round. I think I'd also add that Archer & Rogers were always likely bound for better things, being part of our near PL quality squad in Carrick's first season. Bringing on talented players is likely easier than developing lesser ones. I think the injury crises have made it a lot harder to judge, since players can also struggle when returning. On balance though I don't think Carrick and the coaches have done a great job. Setting aside players' individual improvement, you just have to look at how often they look unco-ordinated as a team: failure to get up to support attacks, failure to stay onside, failure to read passes and how often we look like headless chickens when defending. Then also look at how ineffective our set pieces usually are. Some games it looks like they do no training at all! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_Moose 646 1.2k Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Personally think it’d be worse to lose Scott than it would be to lose Carrick in the summer. It’s already looking like a massive rebuild and Scott has had more hits than misses with his recruitment. The Gazette make a good point that Scott going would probably means Chris Jones goes too so we’d have to rebuild our recruitment team before trying to recruit players which could set our summer back massively. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humpty 6,204 11.2k Posted March 19 Author Share Posted March 19 On 3/17/2025 at 3:47 PM, Bruce said: One thing I was wondering about is how good Carrick and the team have been at improving young players. It's a crucial part of the improvement plan. Improved: Giles, Archer, Rogers, Rav, Morris (Good start but not so good since returning from injuries), Doak, Hackney Mixed/unsure: Forss (injuries), Ramsey (only started 8 games), Azaz (not sure he's performing any better than he was for Plymouth), Conway (he's been good but doesn't seem to be improving beyond his performances for Bristol City) Not improved: Hoppe, Muniz, Silvera, Gilbert, Greenwood, Thomas, Hamilton Other notables ELL was a bit too experienced for the criteria but was significantly improved. Obviously Akpom was one hell of an improvement under Carrick but he doesn't meet the criteria. McGree, though from before Carrick, was also looking like a real improvement under Carrick until he spent the last 18 months bouncing in and out of medlab. Out of those 18, 1/3rd looking like significant improvements though Giles, Archer and Doak were all loans. Rogers was only just starting to look really good when we sold him and he has pressed the turbo since then. Giles, Rav, Morris and Doak would go in mixed/unsure for me. I don't think Carrick has substantially improved them and in the case of Giles he's bombed him in his second spell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts