Youth Dept success or what

[duffy2391 574]

4 minutes ago, Courtyard Bear said:

RTV usually show highlights or round ups I think. 

Cheers mate, I'll have a look just now.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

We now have a DOF, we have a good foundation at Auchenhowie already that he has come into, and whatever shortfalls he sees no doubt he will be making it a priority to deal with them. It appears our main problem is having players coming through the ranks that make it to the first team; quite probably the same problem that nearly every club in the world has to deal with. We should wait to see what this new guy brings, and wait for the work of Murty and Mulholland to be established for a bit before making any conclusions. On the plus side there a couple of players that with the right guidance could make it at Rangers; that stand out for me is Ross McCrorie, and hopefully he goes on to play for us.

[Ace 3,556]

1 hour ago, K.A.I said:

I've always enjoyed watching the youths even if I'm rarely impressed.

I think we are ambitious at what we want to do at that level but unconvinced of the people in charge i.e Mulholland.

The player development and recruitment at that level doesn't seem to be the best either. Hardie for example is the best player we've got a youth level and he's had stints on the subs bench, loaned out 3 or 4 times, starting for the unders and repeat and he's literally no closer to first team duties.

Was amused at the appointments of Lovenkrands, Wright and Little too - are they qualified or were they just ex Ger's needing some work? 

 

Mulholland turned down Southampton to stay at RFC, I would suggest if one of the best academy setups is trying to get him, then he has something about him.

Steven Wright has been involved is youth coaching for past 10yrs, being an Academy Director at Fife Elite Coaching.

Lovenkrands has done his Uefa A licence and is only in part time, working under guys like Mulholland & Nutty can only improve him & our youngest players, he can also pass his knowledge of what it means playing for RFC.

I think Little is just starting his badges but he's only at RFC part time, Again working with 8-10yr olds.

[K.A.I 36,183]

1 minute ago, Ace said:

Mulholland turned down Southampton to stay at RFC, I would suggest if one of the best academy setups is trying to get him, then he has something about him.

Steven Wright has been involved is youth coaching for past 10yrs, being an Academy Director at Fife Elite Coaching.

Lovenkrands has done his Uefa A licence and is only in part time, working under guys like Mulholland & Nutty can only improve him & our youngest players, he can also pass his knowledge of what it means playing for RFC.

I think Little is just starting his badges but he's only at RFC part time, Again working with 8-10yr olds.

Aye I knew most of that tbh but it doesn't matter if Mulholland was at Southampton, he's been here almost 3 years and I don't see anything. Some good, ambitious ideas but the proof is in the pudding in regards to first team ready talent. There's not much there.

Little, Wright and Lovenkrands - their CV's there doesn't really look great and fill me with confidence for what's required. 

[Ace 3,556]

5 minutes ago, K.A.I said:

Aye I knew most of that tbh but it doesn't matter if Mulholland was at Southampton, he's been here almost 3 years and I don't see anything. Some good, ambitious ideas but the proof is in the pudding in regards to first team ready talent. There's not much there.

Little, Wright and Lovenkrands - their CV's there doesn't really look great and fill me with confidence for what's required. 

I think they essentially gutted the youth players & are hoping that the crop of u17s etc is where the next players will come from. 

Those they have had a chance to work with from a younger age & instill a different ethos into them.

 

[GEEZABREAK 3]

11 minutes ago, Ace said:

Mulholland turned down Southampton to stay at RFC, I would suggest if one of the best academy setups is trying to get him, then he has something about him.

Steven Wright has been involved is youth coaching for past 10yrs, being an Academy Director at Fife Elite Coaching.

Lovenkrands has done his Uefa A licence and is only in part time, working under guys like Mulholland & Nutty can only improve him & our youngest players, he can also pass his knowledge of what it means playing for RFC.

I think Little is just starting his badges but he's only at RFC part time, Again working with 8-10yr olds.

Just searched for info on the net, when was that approach   

[K.A.I 36,183]

1 minute ago, Ace said:

I think they essentially gutted the youth players & are hoping that the crop of u17s etc is where the next players will come from. 

Those they have had a chance to work with from a younger age & instill a different ethos into them.

 

I hear this a lot but it just seems to be excuse making and buying time IMO. Convincing people the real gems are now in the under 17's and not to worry about the 20's is basically buying yourself another 3-years. I've said before on here that I don't see signs that we are improving, so do we just give him 6 years and hope it will all turn out good? 

[GEEZABREAK 3]

we need to be top of the game

 

[Ace 3,556]

2 hours ago, K.A.I said:

I hear this a lot but it just seems to be excuse making and buying time IMO. Convincing people the real gems are now in the under 17's and not to worry about the 20's is basically buying yourself another 3-years. I've said before on here that I don't see signs that we are improving, so do we just give him 6 years and hope it will all turn out good? 

I can understand the frustration but I think it's unfair to judge a group of coaches on players they haven't moulded. 

Constantly hearing people talk about "patience" is incredibly frustrating but I think it's fair.

[K.A.I 36,183]

20 minutes ago, Ace said:

I can understand the frustration but I think it's unfair to judge a group of coaches on players they haven't moulded. 

Constantly hearing people talk about "patience" is incredibly frustrating but I think it's fair.

Fair do's

[Elfideldo 4,400]

5 hours ago, cushynumber said:

some welcome for a second post.

 

@Elfideldo - are we making progress or is it too soon to judge? do you see anyone that can break through the ranks?

I don't think there is a quick answer there, I think the answer to both parts of your first question is yes. I think there is progress from the previous setup but I also think it is too soon to judge.

Most people have a bizarre and unrealistic perception when it comes to youth football. Most 16- 18 year olds can't compare to 20 - 23 year olds in football, as has been reflected in the Irn - Bru cup in the last two seasons. The big unknown is which players will take big steps in their later teenage years.

Of course nothing is perfect and everyone sees a different way forward. I don't know if the new approach to the season ahead will work or not and I can seen advantages and disadvantages. Players only improve by playing against better or stronger players, so taking on European and English opponents is a step in the right direction. In a negative sense these are essentialy friendlies so how competitive they will be is unknown. The likes of Beerman, Wilson and Barjonas probably see going back to playing in such games as a step back, but allowing them to go out loan would weaken the group and have a negative impact on our ability to compete in these games.

Personally  every game has too be looked at beyond the bare result, take two recent 17's games as an example. They beat Man City 1-0 a couple of weeks ago, nine of Man City's better 17's were playing in a different game for their 18's against Sheff Wed ( 6-0 for City), even so I would say it was a worthwhile exercise as a slightly younger Man City side would be better than most Scottish opponents. Last week the 17's hosted a Carlisle United side and won 7-0, the Carlisle side were U16. This is the opposite of what we said we would be trying to do and in my opinion rendered the game as a complete waste of time and only of benefit to the young Carlisle side, we would have been better playing Kilmarnock U17's which was the original plan.

The problem we have is how to progress the players who broke through last season and others while maintaining an improvement at first team level.

[cushynumber 25,178]

[GEEZABREAK 3]

2 hours ago, Elfideldo said:

I don't think there is a quick answer there, I think the answer to both parts of your first question is yes. I think there is progress from the previous setup but I also think it is too soon to judge.

Most people have a bizarre and unrealistic perception when it comes to youth football. Most 16- 18 year olds can't compare to 20 - 23 year olds in football, as has been reflected in the Irn - Bru cup in the last two seasons. The big unknown is which players will take big steps in their later teenage years.

Of course nothing is perfect and everyone sees a different way forward. I don't know if the new approach to the season ahead will work or not and I can seen advantages and disadvantages. Players only improve by playing against better or stronger players, so taking on European and English opponents is a step in the right direction. In a negative sense these are essentialy friendlies so how competitive they will be is unknown. The likes of Beerman, Wilson and Barjonas probably see going back to playing in such games as a step back, but allowing them to go out loan would weaken the group and have a negative impact on our ability to compete in these games.

Personally  every game has too be looked at beyond the bare result, take two recent 17's games as an example. They beat Man City 1-0 a couple of weeks ago, nine of Man City's better 17's were playing in a different game for their 18's against Sheff Wed ( 6-0 for City), even so I would say it was a worthwhile exercise as a slightly younger Man City side would be better than most Scottish opponents. Last week the 17's hosted a Carlisle United side and won 7-0, the Carlisle side were U16. This is the opposite of what we said we would be trying to do and in my opinion rendered the game as a complete waste of time and only of benefit to the young Carlisle side, we would have been better playing Kilmarnock U17's which was the original plan.

The problem we have is how to progress the players who broke through last season and others while maintaining an improvement at first team level.

Man City play 9 U17 players in there U18 team and win 6-0 , Are we doing the same with our youth players or is it as you suggest regards opponents 

[Elfideldo 4,400]

2 hours ago, GEEZABREAK said:

Man City play 9 U17 players in there U18 team and win 6-0 , Are we doing the same with our youth players or is it as you suggest regards opponents 

To a certain extent we do - last night's Challenge Cup game could have been two overage players and nine 19 year olds (if we actually had nine 19 year olds) - apart from the over age players we fielded one 19 year old - six 18 year olds and two 17 year olds, both subs used were 17 year olds.

The next competitive level in Scotland is U17's when the league starts I expect up to five U16's to be in the starting lineup.

Just to be clear about the Man City team, it was a pre-season friendly against Sheff Wed, not all the U17's started, there were a lot of substituions, nine U17's played some part in the game. In their first league game at the weekend against Newcastle  four 2001's (U17) started, one of whom was signed from Barcelona for £1.5 million, they won 2-1

Chelsea started their U18 League at the weekend with a 2-0 win over Aston Villa, they used one 2001 (U17) and one 2002 (U16), Billy Gilmour wasn't involved.

[RangersMedia 35,961]

The problem with a youth set up is... it requires a lot of patience.

Writing things off as a failure after 3-4yrs is no use, when the reality is it probably takes between 5-10yrs from the start to seeing some fruit. For example, folk were moaning about Warburton with youth, when the guy was only at the club for 20mths or so - nowhere near enough time.

Of course the flip side here is, if you've been going about youth policy the wrong way, well you've spent 5-10yrs barking up the wrong tree.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

1 hour ago, Elfideldo said:

To a certain extent we do - last night's Challenge Cup game could have been two overage players and nine 19 year olds (if we actually had nine 19 year olds) - apart from the over age players we fielded one 19 year old - six 18 year olds and two 17 year olds, both subs used were 17 year olds.

The next competitive level in Scotland is U17's when the league starts I expect up to five U16's to be in the starting lineup.

Just to be clear about the Man City team, it was a pre-season friendly against Sheff Wed, not all the U17's started, there were a lot of substituions, nine U17's played some part in the game. In their first league game at the weekend against Newcastle  four 2001's (U17) started, one of whom was signed from Barcelona for £1.5 million, they won 2-1

Chelsea started their U18 League at the weekend with a 2-0 win over Aston Villa, they used one 2001 (U17) and one 2002 (U16), Billy Gilmour wasn't involved.

Is there a figure in anyone's head about the number of players we would like to see, over a period, progress into the first team, or is it a case that each player is viewed as a potential first team player one day and we take it from there? I would imagine that those like yourself with a great deal of experience in this must have your thoughts about that?

[Thewhitesettler 2,711]

Whenever we get a really good youth player coming through, he gets whisked away by some top EPL team, offering him more money now, than we could in the future. We'll only see some decent players come through, as late bloomer's. For the amount of money we've put into it, we've got a poor return. I'm not saying that we should forget all about our youth teams, more find a better way of brinigng players through the system.

I think that there should be a 'Colts League' for Premiership teams, and it should be a part of our league structure. A League 3 perhaps? The Colts teams can get promoted, and relegated, the same asked any other team, but they can't enter the Premiership, or cup games where the first team is involved.

There would probably be bigger crowds at these games than there are at League 1, &, 2, games now. I'd never think of going to watch a Ross Co v Forfar game, if County were relegated, and I lived in Dingwall. However I would definitely think about going, if Rangers Colts were involved.

This could also help the Scottish national team with players being involved in competitive games earlier, bringing them on quicker, although I'm not all that fussed about the national team, it's a selling point to the SFA.

We need to do something different. More of the same old, same old, isn't working. We have had the best chance we'll ever have of bringing young players through, the past five years, yet all we've had is Lewis McLeod, and Barrie McKay.

[GEEZABREAK 3]

11 hours ago, Elfideldo said:

To a certain extent we do - last night's Challenge Cup game could have been two overage players and nine 19 year olds (if we actually had nine 19 year olds) - apart from the over age players we fielded one 19 year old - six 18 year olds and two 17 year olds, both subs used were 17 year olds.

The next competitive level in Scotland is U17's when the league starts I expect up to five U16's to be in the starting lineup.

Just to be clear about the Man City team, it was a pre-season friendly against Sheff Wed, not all the U17's started, there were a lot of substituions, nine U17's played some part in the game. In their first league game at the weekend against Newcastle  four 2001's (U17) started, one of whom was signed from Barcelona for £1.5 million, they won 2-1

Chelsea started their U18 League at the weekend with a 2-0 win over Aston Villa, they used one 2001 (U17) and one 2002 (U16), Billy Gilmour wasn't involved.

any idea why lad Gilmour wasn't selected , could we see him back at us on loan

[Elfideldo 4,400]

16 minutes ago, GEEZABREAK said:

any idea why lad Gilmour wasn't selected , could we see him back at us on loan

Billy's focus this season will be getting into the Chelseas U18''s, he won't go on loan anywhere until he is 18 minimum, which is two seasons away

[WeirFleckNRothen 1,789]

It's fucking embarassing, the amount of tarrier accusations that are thrown around here, these days.

I was accused in the Generic Laugh at Celtic topic because I gave my honest assessment of ours and their current situation which some people simply couldn't handle or accept.

"Reeking" is 110% the worst patter imaginable.

To answer the guys question, the past five years have been testing for our youth development. Many young boys were thrown in at the deep end in the Third, Second & First Divisions (Macleod, McKay, Crawford, Mitchell, McAusland, Gallacher, Hegarty, Aird, Walsh, etc.), but when we failed to live up to expectation, the atmosphere became toxic and it was counter productive. Most sank, as opposed to swimming.

The batch before that, as far as I recall, won plenty at youth level, but those who hung around simply didn't cut it (Hutton, Perry, Little, etc.) while others went on to achieve little or more (Fleck, Ness, Loy, Shinnie, etc.).

If we're going further back, then you have to admit that Alan Hutton, Charlie Adam, Stevie Smith, Ross McCormack, Allan McGregor, Danny Wilson and Barry Ferguson demonstrate an element of success.

[GEEZABREAK 3]

22 minutes ago, WeirFleckNRothen said:

It's fucking embarassing, the amount of tarrier accusations that are thrown around here, these days.

I was accused in the Generic Laugh at Celtic topic because I gave my honest assessment of ours and their current situation which some people simply couldn't handle or accept.

"Reeking" is 110% the worst patter imaginable.

To answer the guys question, the past five years have been testing for our youth development. Many young boys were thrown in at the deep end in the Third, Second & First Divisions (Macleod, McKay, Crawford, Mitchell, McAusland, Gallacher, Hegarty, Aird, Walsh, etc.), but when we failed to live up to expectation, the atmosphere became toxic and it was counter productive. Most sank, as opposed to swimming.

The batch before that, as far as I recall, won plenty at youth level, but those who hung around simply didn't cut it (Hutton, Perry, Little, etc.) while others went on to achieve little or more (Fleck, Ness, Loy, Shinnie, etc.).

If we're going further back, then you have to admit that Alan Hutton, Charlie Adam, Stevie Smith, Ross McCormack, Allan McGregor, Danny Wilson and Barry Ferguson demonstrate an element of success.

Thank You

[cushynumber 25,178]

without being negative, I really wonder what kind of success we are going to get from the youth setup when arguably our best prospect in years is snapped up by Chelsea at the first opportunity. How do we get another Barry Ferguson through the ranks when this is the case? hope nobody notices them (i.e. they aren't actually that good)? or that they are absolute die-hard Rangers fans? wasn't Gilmour in the latter bracket?

[broomloanjamie 256]

23 hours ago, GEEZABREAK said:

So everyone who's a new poster gets the Tim or Taig shit from you? 

No just him, there's a good few at it. everybody with under 20 posts is a fenien catholic scum cunt. Just give them some back. I've been here since 2009 and only posted for the first time last week and got the same shite ??

[WeirFleckNRothen 1,789]

3 minutes ago, GEEZABREAK said:

Thank You

That's plenty.