Has the academy production line broke down?

[Will 2,958]

Fry starts another game, last option according to some...

[Uwe 3,545]

Fry starts another game, last option according to some...

 

I hate the way AK tries and force young players into the squad when they're clearly not ready yet. Fry should've went on loan first not thrown in the deep end to jeopardise our promoting push.

 

(Massive amount of tongue in cheek in this post :P)

[Powlay 35]

People seem to have missed the point greatly, a point which Ladyspite has seen.

 

Its not about putting our youths in for 90 minutes week in week out, its about bringing in short term loans, players who play 3, 4, 5 games (with sometimes very few minutes) and then get shipped back out.

 

And its also about NOW, the tail end of the season where we are still pushing for promotion.

 

 

All that said id like to pick up on the point of 'if theyre good enough they will play'. What proof is there of this? Its something ive seen mentioned a few times but its unfounded when ive spoken to academy level coaches, to them its all about opportunity. Players this season (youths) have trained with the first team for months at a time, some even down to be included in match day squads until loans came in. They to me just didnt get the opportunity when maybe they should have.

 

I most certainly wouldnt use Dael Fry as a stick to attack Karanka with as some people seem so ill judged to have accused me of. Fry played early in the season why? Was it because he was good enough, or because opportunity arose and he took it with both hands? Is he good enough? In my opiion yes, but would he be playing if Ayala wasnt injured? Course he wouldnt. Its opportunity! Injuries to Ayala, poor form and the returning of stephens, niggles to other players. Its the same with when David Wheater made his debut. Sent back from loans where he really didnt do well, and really struggling he came in after injuries to many a centre back and took the opportunity and learnt quickly playing alongside one, if not the best centre half to play for Middlesbrough in Southgate.

 

Of course this is all MY opinion, you're all welcome to yours.

 

I've not posted on here for a while, and from a lot of the replies, its gonna be a while before i bother again.

[Guest Changing Times]

Who are the other options?  Kalas who has been pretty poor almost every time he's played in central defence and...?

 

Why hasn't Fry been on loan btw?  Apparently that's what's best for the younger players not sitting on our bench etc. He got into the first team in August, disappeared for months and now he's back in the side on merit* and this is proof that Karanka is fine for our young players?  It's funny that a player can go from not being good enough (despite doing well) to being good enough (despite not actually doing anything at all). Cue something about seeing him in training  :rolleyes:

 

 

 

*What merit?

[Guest Changing Times]

I got the point Powlay but the problem is that a lot of people on here have very little real objectivity when it comes to Karanka so your post was seen as an attack on him and therefore you got people rushing to his defence. That's why I think it was a waste of time for those who wondered what I meant.

[Tom 2,492]

So a load of salient points are written off just because some of us happen to support the manager's decisions?

[Will 2,958]

So a load of salient points are written off just because some of us happen to support the manager's decisions?

 

It's CT's fallback whenever people actually agree with the manager.

[OldManGravz 1,350]

Surely the point of a forum is different views CT, just because they aren't all the same doesn't make a post pointless or a waste of time.

 

I didn't see Powlay's post as an attack on AK, he just has a different POV on this issue than I. As Tom said there's been some good discussion and points made on this thread, and shouldn't be written off because some people side with the manager on this issue.

[Brunners 7,982]

So a load of salient points are written off just because some of us happen to support the manager's decisions?

 

CT will continue being CT, there's really no point arguing with his holier than thou attitude at times.

[Uwe 3,545]

Let's keep this on topic please men

[Guest Changing Times]

The issue isn't different views or people siding with the manager. There is very little objectivity about Karanka on here which is why people get hammered for criticising him. The same people jump on others whenever something is said about the bloke. Sometimes it doesn't even need to be actual criticism but it gets perceived as such and away we go. We've had people on this thread seriously trying to say that because Karanka has picked Reach and Gibson this is evidence that he is giving our academy players a chance?! They were both already in our first team squad before he even arrived. It's this kind of nonsense that I'm talking about where people are stretching to prove something because they feel the need to defend the bloke.

 

Will, that comment is just stupid bud. I agree with all kinds of things that Karanka does but I don't simply agree with everything he does just because he does it. So the default opinion is that if Karanka thought they were good enough he would include them, which makes no sense at all when it comes to the only player he has given an opportunity to - Dael Fry. A player who looked fine in August, then hasn't had a look in since then despite opportunities when he could have played but now we have players missing he's in the side and looks exactly the same as he did months ago. The other argument that our younger players need to go out on loan also falls down when we see that he hasn't and yet he gets picked and doesn't look out of his depth. It can't be that a player is both not ready and selected by Karanka on merit. It has to be one or the other quite clearly as they contradict each other but that is what I've read on this thread.

 

Other than Fry, has Karanka given a league start to any academy product that wasn't already in the first team squad before he arrived? Are they all not good enough or is it that they've never been given an opportunity to show that they are and who is responsible for that? I don't see how we will know if a player can be ready to play at our level until we've given them the chance to show it. Fry has been given the chance by necessity and is showing what he can do.

[Guest Changing Times]

[video=youtube]

 

Yeah Brunners keep it on topic you swine  :@

[MattyBoro 4]

simple answer is no, adam reach and ben gibson come through and have play lots of first team football last 2/3 seasons. Dael Fry coming through now and Harry Chapman wont be far behind. We also have Brad Fewster doing well at York. Adam Jackson doing well at Hartlepool and other decent youngsters such as Brad Halliday and Jonny Burn getting football league loans this season too. Young Mitchell Curry looking to have bags of potential too. if anything academy is looking better than it has done for years

[Will 2,958]

The issue isn't different views or people siding with the manager.  There is very little objectivity about Karanka on here which is why people get hammered for criticising him.  The same people jump on others whenever something is said about the bloke.  Sometimes it doesn't even need to be actual criticism but it gets perceived as such and away we go.  We've had people on this thread seriously trying to say that because Karanka has picked Reach and Gibson this is evidence that he is giving our academy players a chance?!  They were both already in our first team squad before he even arrived.  It's this kind of nonsense that I'm talking about where people are stretching to prove something because they feel the need to defend the bloke.

 

Will, that comment is just stupid bud.  I agree with all kinds of things that Karanka does but I don't simply agree with everything he does just because he does it.  So the default opinion is that if Karanka thought they were good enough he would include them, which makes no sense at all when it comes to the only player he has given an opportunity to - Dael Fry.  A player who looked fine in August, then hasn't had a look in since then despite opportunities when he could have played but now we have players missing he's in the side and looks exactly the same as he did months ago.  The other argument that our younger players need to go out on loan also falls down when we see that he hasn't and yet he gets picked and doesn't look out of his depth.  It can't be that a player is both not ready and selected by Karanka on merit.  It has to be one or the other quite clearly as they contradict each other but that is what I've read on this thread.

 

Other than Fry, has Karanka given a league start to any academy product that wasn't already in the first team squad before he arrived?  Are they all not good enough or is it that they've never been given an opportunity to show that they are and who is responsible for that?  I don't see how we will know if a player can be ready to play at our level until we've given them the chance to show it.  Fry has been given the chance by necessity and is showing what he can do.

 

It is no more stupid than you writing off many peoples opinions because they regularly agree with our managers decisions. I don't believe anybody on this forum genuinely thinks that every decision that Karanka makes is right, and I also don't believe that you believe that because it'd be stupid. You perceive people disagreeing with anybody criticising Karanka as them being 'hammered' , what would you rather the people that disagree do?

 

Downing :D

 

As for the third bit I put in bold, I know you wont like this but we've got a manager and an entire team of coaching staff to make that decision based on what they see when our youngsters train with the seniors, that's how they know if a player is ready to play at our level.

[Brunners 7,982]

Other than Fry, has Karanka given a league start to any academy product that wasn't already in the first team squad before he arrived?  Are they all not good enough or is it that they've never been given an opportunity to show that they are and who is responsible for that?  I don't see how we will know if a player can be ready to play at our level until we've given them the chance to show it.  Fry has been given the chance by necessity and is showing what he can do.

 

The thing is..we're going for promotion. Why should Karanka risk games by trying out youngsters when he has a plethora of more experienced and already proven options to choose from.

 

As for bringing in outside youth loans to take bench places, again it's an experience thing. When you're chasing promotion I'd rather have Zuculini and his near 100 league games against men (albeit in the Argentine division) rather than an untried and untested player like Cooke, regardless of how good he MIGHT be. 

 

This season is not the year to be experimenting with youth players, IMO. Dael Fry got the start at Preston and impressed and as such as got to do the exact thing that people in here want and start breaking in to the first team. He only played that first game because it was game 1 of the season.

 

I'd put money on Kalas taking that spot had that situation arose deeper into the season when the game mattered more.

 

Not sure if I'm making any sense now but it's what I feel.