Jump to content
oneBoro Forum
SmogDane

January transfer window 19/20 season

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, RealSlimSladeyy said:

I think the developmental difference between kids even born just a few months apart is bigger than you’re giving it credit for. You also see it mentally, children born earlier in the year as a general trend perform better at school. 

I don't think they do, mate.  I don't believe there is any evidence that physical or mental attributes have anything to do with month of birth.  Research has suggested that any differences are relatively small and are more likely to do with what year you enter school i.e. what I was talking about earlier.  A kid born in August this year will be in the year below a kid born in September this year, despite the fact that they may only have been born a few days apart.  The kid born in September could theoretically be more advanced than lots of people in his own year group because he's older but he isn't going to be more advanced than the kid born in August of the same year as him or for that matter someone born in April of that year.  It's the differences in schooling entry points that lead to that, not the actual birth month itself.  

There was some thought that environmental factors could impact on these things so for example summer births leading to kids getting more sunlight in the first few months of life or how temperatures at different stages of pregnancy could affect how foetuses develop but I don't think there has been any relationship found between intelligence and birth month.  It's also worth pointing out that if you broaden it out to think in seasonal terms, i.e. spring, summer, autumn and winter, then those seasons are at at different times of the year around the world so it wouldn't be logical for there to be a consistent advantage like that to one period of time, globally speaking.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

I would do it the other way but then I like being different because I'm an awkward get.  Kids should play more in more mixed age situations but with those who are older than them.  When I was a kid I played with lads a few years older than me quite a lot, just socially not organised.  When I started playing organised football and other sports I was put into teams in age groups above mine.  I wasn't big for my age so it had nothing to do with that.  I think playing a lot with the older kids forced me to develop certain things more quickly - technical skills and mental skills specifically.  I had to think quicker to make up for the lack of size and speed, I had to be a bit more skilful because I couldn't just sprint past everyone.  I never took any sport seriously, I just liked playing for fun and wasn't interested in coaching and stuff like that, but I can't believe that other kids who do take it seriously wouldn't benefit a lot from what I inadvertently gained a bit from.

I think that's fine if the younger kids can handle it, I think that scenario has happened more often than the opposite way round. 

I played with mixed age groups as a younger kid, I think where that becomes more difficult is when the kids are in their teens. 

I think we are thinking along the same lines about not sticking to rigid age groups, I think the priority should be finding players with exceptional talent and then allowing time for them to develop physically. 

The other thing which I think probably doesn't get enough attention in academies is the psychological side of the game. I know a few players that were a similar age group to me who went on to play professionally and they generally weren't the most talented players under the age of 18. The attributes that most of them did have were maturity, good support networks from family, a good work ethic and unbelievable discipline to sacrifice the things that most teenagers were doing. Some of those attributes are innate but some of it can be developed as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Born in February, smart, big and clever .. There must be something about it 😛 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, SmogDane said:

Born in February, smart, big and clever .. There must be something about it 😛 

You were probably held back a couple of years at school so it just made it seem that way 🤭

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

You were probably held back a couple of years at school so it just made it seem that way 🤭

I only went to school 7 years. 

1st grade, 2nd grade, 3rd grade, 3rd, grade, 3rd, grade 3rd, grade and 3rd grade ...

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SmogDane said:

I only went to school 7 years. 

1st grade, 2nd grade, 3rd grade, 3rd, grade, 3rd, grade 3rd, grade and 3rd grade ...

😀👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

I don't think they do, mate.  I don't believe there is any evidence that physical or mental attributes have anything to do with month of birth.  Research has suggested that any differences are relatively small and are more likely to do with what year you enter school i.e. what I was talking about earlier.  A kid born in August this year will be in the year below a kid born in September this year, despite the fact that they may only have been born a few days apart.  The kid born in September could theoretically be more advanced than lots of people in his own year group because he's older but he isn't going to be more advanced than the kid born in August of the same year as him or for that matter someone born in April of that year.  It's the differences in schooling entry points that lead to that, not the actual birth month itself.  

There was some thought that environmental factors could impact on these things so for example summer births leading to kids getting more sunlight in the first few months of life or how temperatures at different stages of pregnancy could affect how foetuses develop but I don't think there has been any relationship found between intelligence and birth month.  It's also worth pointing out that if you broaden it out to think in seasonal terms, i.e. spring, summer, autumn and winter, then those seasons are at at different times of the year around the world so it wouldn't be logical for there to be a consistent advantage like that to one period of time, globally speaking.

I think we agree? I meant that due to the fast rate of development when young, there’s a development gap. At school, those born in September have developed more than someone born in August and therefore as a general trend perform better. Not that those born later don’t have the capacity to be better than/worse than/the same as those born earlier, it’s just they’re handicapped by the fact their brains aren’t as developed. As you say, it’s the point of entry that counts.

Maybe I misread your original post? Or maybe I misread this post and you don’t agree with what I’ve just said? Who knows...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just on to transfers here but what will Woodgates strategy be?

Does he go for players to fit our 352 system which is working ok or does he go for players to fit his preferred and desired 433 system?

Either system will need very different players

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI Im covering the Hartlepool v Exeter game tonight and Randell Williams is on the bench. If He comes on I'll do some scouting. 😉

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Smogzilla said:

FYI Im covering the Hartlepool v Exeter game tonight and Randell Williams is on the bench. If He comes on I'll do some scouting. 😉

Covering it for whom? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2019 at 3:56 PM, Smoggydownsouth said:

Cheers Lurker... randz will be gone... also think 2 or 3 more... just a hunch.

I got some info tonight from a close friend of Randolph”s Dad. If Darren has his way he will be staying at Boro. He is really happy and settled in the area and doesn’t want to leave. There are no circumstances that he will go back to West Ham as he didn’t like the owners and generally was unhappy there. He would prefer to retire than go back there.

Take from it what you will.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Blanco said:

I got some info tonight from a close friend of Randolph”s Dad. If Darren has his way he will be staying at Boro. He is really happy and settled in the area and doesn’t want to leave. There are no circumstances that he will go back to West Ham as he didn’t like the owners and generally was unhappy there. He would prefer to retire than go back there.

Take from it what you will.

It always surprises me how much players seem to love staying in the area once they live here. The media always like to describe this area as a horrible place to live

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Latest Posts

    • The bar for strikers over the last decade or so is awfully low - is it really surprising that people rate Bamford highly, when he probably is up there in the conversation for best striker we've had in years?
    • I'm still surprised at how much people rate Bamford on here. 
    • I think it's because they are rearranged games rather than part of a midweek fixture list as to why they arent on the red button this time. Although cant explain the other weeks.
    • I'm no lawyer or accountant or anything akin to that but this seems pretty important to me and in how I judge that, even should they be otherwise abiding by the laws, they are acting in a way to circumvent them to keep spending an unsustainable amount of money for an attempt at short-term advantage. The whole reason the rules exist is to stop clubs from doing that and it seems realistic to me to expect that even in the case where there is some loophole around the rules as they are written should be dealt with in the same way as they deal with people not abiding by the rules. The intent by clubs like Derby to record a reasonable income vs. their outgoings by selling their own stadium to themselves (and in the case of Birmingham, literally making a company called 'Birmingham City Stadium Ltd' to sell it to) is surely an attempt to bypass the mistakes they've made in not abiding by the rules to try and maintain whatever financial advantage they have over other clubs. The laws may not be written to the letter but the act of operating unsustainably needs to be able to be tackled regardless of how many ways the laws are worked around.  
    • *** sky sports and the modern game
×
×
  • Create New...