Harry Cochrane

[The Dude 20,026]

7 minutes ago, Gustav said:

I'm glad you pointed that out to him, I'm sure he wouldn't have figured it out by himself.

If Rangers' staff are to be as incompetent as some on here would have you believe, it was probably for the best that I did.

[The Dude 20,026]

6 minutes ago, Turnberry18 said:

In so many aspects it could be a big plus. Defences have to go up a notch, the yield on making a good pass, or taking a scoring opportunity. It's hard to see any negatives with it.

One thing I would like to see the club do - although it may prove difficult/pointless - is to arrange a 20's game either before or after a home game. Let ticket holders for the first-team game in for bugger all and give them experience of playing infront of a good crowd. If you can do it at a time of year where you should get decent weather I could see a good number of people making something of a day of it. Have an hour or two between the games if necessary and could even put stuff on outside the ground as a kind of 'fan day' type thing.

[Bearsden bear 2,376]

4 minutes ago, Turnberry18 said:

Had Gilmour stayed it would have erased so much of the pain of the past few years! I wish him well, but if only he had stayed!

Yeah sore one.

It is a frustrating that our best prospect in years has been snatched away without us getting any real benefit on the park. 

[Turnberry18 3,204]

6 minutes ago, Elfideldo said:

It is interesting the talk about Harry and it also shows how it is so different playing for Hearts and playing for Rangers. When he left Rangers I know a few of the scouts and coaches were disappointed as I was. I take an interest in any player released by Rangers, especially if it was one I thought we should be keeping.

Hearts more than any other club promote their young players through the age groups, Rangers have kind of dabbled but it is not the norm.

Could I see any current Rangers under 17's playing in the first team now, the answer would be no. Of the 17's only Danny Finlayson has played anywhere near regularly at 20's

It seems a risk asking you, but might we learn something from Hearts in this area?

[The Dude 20,026]

14 minutes ago, LegendofCoop said:

The only thing that slightly concerns/pisses me off is that other teams seem to be able to get younger players into their teams and actually get something from them. We struggle really badly with that, and I don't know why that is. Is it lack of faith in the youth players? Could they do a job for us if given the chance to shine....or are they just not as good? If not good enough then we should be looking at why that is. 

Or is it more to do with needing to buy seasoned pro's because we need to be winning things, rather than just being happy finishing top 6 and establishing younger players? Dunno, but it's bothered me for a long time now.

 

This is a big part of it imo. We're afraid to take the gamble and promote our own - celtic have the same problem tbh just not as much as we do - and would have rather finished 30 points ahead of everyone (both in the SPL and lower divisions) than take the punt on playing kids and maybe dropping points

[Da Kool Blue 139]

We could always buy him back, clubs do that all the time. 

It's probably not feasible, but in the longterm i'd look to put buy-back clauses in all our youths contracts. 

[kingtom80 166]

 

                                we should be getting more young talent coming through

                                 than we are lets hope thst changes soon. 

[Courtyard Bear 41,357]

1 hour ago, Elfideldo said:

Not true on both counts.

Killie offered McKay a contract, something showed up in his medical and they withdrew the offer

Given was on a YTS contract that celtic had not converted into a pro one. Blackburn stepped in signed him on freedom of contract. Anyone that watched youth games at the time will know he kept the score down in a couple of games against Rangers.

Sinclair released a lot of players that are now playing at a decent standard, and replaced them them with bigger, stronger players that are now in the main playing junior and pub football.

To be fair in Harry Cochrane's case I believe he asked to be released due to lack of game time. At the time Rangers had four players contesting two centre mid roles, one being Billy Gilmour. In saying that the HOY's job is to identify and nurture any talent, which Hearts obviously did. Falkirk also identified and developed four players he released and made close to £2 million in transfer fees.

I think Harry's father is a scout for Rangers.

He is mate, used to coach my sons with Strathaven Dynamo. Harry’s big brother played with them. 

Great guy and loves scouting for Rangers. 

[coopsleftboot 5,512]

1 hour ago, Turnberry18 said:

Really? I wonder if people may well be on to something when it is suggested, in an underlying way sometimes, that coaches too often put emphasis on strength and build and less on actual talent on the ball. I'd like to know more what criteria we are using to write players off at 13/14 years old, and often. 

The OP appears to be coming from an angle of shit stirring. 

Speaking from very direct and recent experience, it's true that many clubs and coaches go for physique over technique which is exactly the point I made to the coach who told me my son (in a  Club Academy Scotland set-up) was one of the better players but was too easily bullied...he was the youngest and smallest in his team.  Rather than develop these kids for the future, there's a demand on them to do it NOW.  Even at the age of 12/13/14.  And that's at a club nowhere near Rangers level.

I don't what Rangers is like at youth level, what they look for or how long they give kids.  But what I do know is it's very difficult to decide at such a young age which players will go on to have careers, let alone play for a club like Rangers.  I've seen loads of surprises over the years, both in making it and not, because there are sooo many variables that can influence not only the individual child, but also the coach/club when it comes to making decisions.

[STRUTH82 813]

I wouldnt get too carried away over this lad, there are plenty times a youngster comes on the scene looking the part, but it soon fades away. Im not sure everyone appreciates the difference in terms of pressure when playing for Rangers (or the bheasts), the majority of youngsters dont handle it, thats the truth.

[DeanMK 4,670]

How could we have known 3 years ago that he would one day score a goal against celtic? 

[The Specky Forum Organiser 64,730]

Just now, DeanMK said:

How could we have known 3 years ago that he would one day score a goal against celtic? 

Have you never heard of a crystal ball ya fucking idiot

[Turnberry18 3,204]

19 minutes ago, coopsleftboot said:

The OP appears to be coming from an angle of shit stirring. 

Speaking from very direct and recent experience, it's true that many clubs and coaches go for physique over technique which is exactly the point I made to the coach who told me my son (in a  Club Academy Scotland set-up) was one of the better players but was too easily bullied...he was the youngest and smallest in his team.  Rather than develop these kids for the future, there's a demand on them to do it NOW.  Even at the age of 12/13/14.  And that's at a club nowhere near Rangers level.

I don't what Rangers is like at youth level, what they look for or how long they give kids.  But what I do know is it's very difficult to decide at such a young age which players will go on to have careers, let alone play for a club like Rangers.  I've seen loads of surprises over the years, both in making it and not, because there are sooo many variables that can influence not only the individual child, but also the coach/club when it comes to making decisions.

Good post, and it appears there is two points to this: do we predict prematurely either way- we write off players too early; we assume they are the next best thing too early. 

[Davy Vandenbroucke 26,163]

6 minutes ago, Gustav said:

Have you never heard of a crystal ball ya fucking idiot

[TMB 14,167]

3 hours ago, plymouthranger said:

Impossible at the age of 12-13 to tell how a player made develop. 

Then what's the point of having a youth academy?

[The Specky Forum Organiser 64,730]

Just now, THE_MIGHTY_BEARS said:

Then what's the point of having a youth academy?

 

[BridgeIsBlue 66,606]

He's scored one goal

Hells bells man. 

[plymouthranger 3,872]

10 minutes ago, THE_MIGHTY_BEARS said:

Then what's the point of having a youth academy?

You have to have a pathway for kids to the first team. If an amazing player at the age of 15 is looking at clubs, he's not going to go somewhere if there's no youth set-up.

I actually agree that there isn't much point in having squads for under 13s apart from continuity. However, these younger groups don't cost much to maintain and allow you the chance of finding that next big prospect (even if it's a small chance). 

You look at the McCrories, where you've got 2 talented brothers at different ages. If we as a club couldn't offer youth football to them both, we'd have quickly found that they may both have went elsewhere to somewhere which could accommodate both kids. When you're a parent and you're driving plenty of miles on weekends to get kids through youth football, small details like having both boys at one club or having a visible pathway to the men's sides are a big plus point. 

[DeanMK 4,670]

42 minutes ago, Gustav said:

Have you never heard of a crystal ball ya fucking idiot

[ForeverAndEver 71,502]

6 minutes ago, BridgeIsBlue said:

He's scored one goal

Hells bells man. 

He pocketed the person that has ran our midfield 6 out of 7 games in the last season and a half.

[Spectre 1,663]

9 minutes ago, plymouthranger said:

You have to have a pathway for kids to the first team. If an amazing player at the age of 15 is looking at clubs, he's not going to go somewhere if there's no youth set-up.

I actually agree that there isn't much point in having squads for under 13s apart from continuity. However, these younger groups don't cost much to maintain and allow you the chance of finding that next big prospect (even if it's a small chance). 

You look at the McCrories, where you've got 2 talented brothers at different ages. If we as a club couldn't offer youth football to them both, we'd have quickly found that they may both have went elsewhere to somewhere which could accommodate both kids. When you're a parent and you're driving plenty of miles on weekends to get kids through youth football, small details like having both boys at one club or having a visible pathway to the men's sides are a big plus point. 

There's minutes between them 

[plymouthranger 3,872]

Just now, Spectre said:

There's minutes between them 

Probably a bad example, didn't realise they were twins!

[Lloyd 10,756]

15 minutes ago, BridgeIsBlue said:

He's scored one goal

Hells bells man. 

He’s a 16 year old midfielder

[STEPPS BOY 73,923]

2 hours ago, Turnberry18 said:

That we go for strength and physique might not be the case; I don't know, it might be the case or it might not, but we are developing central midfielders and defenders that get into the team, but when is the last time this club developed forward players, and creative types? We have Hardie, although whether he makes it or not is anyone's guess; he certainly shouldn't be written off at his age. It might help that Hardie has height, but there are not enough of those attacking creative players coming through for the time and attention we appear to be giving this. Is that because we place so much emphasis on height and strength? Who knows.

Aye, Billy Gilmour was a giant..

[BridgeIsBlue 66,606]

33 minutes ago, ForeverAndEver said:

He pocketed the person that has ran our midfield 6 out of 7 games in the last season and a half.

Wouldn't be hard. 

24 minutes ago, Siwel said:

He’s a 16 year old midfielder

Right...