Ex Player Leon Chamber-Parillon

You cannot keep them all. The manager sees them day in and day out and I'd trust his judgement. There's players elsewhere in L1 with 50 to 75 appearances at the age of 20, LCP and Elechi would surely have made more of an impact by now and forced their way consistently into match day squads. It hasn't happened, getting rid seems absolutely the right call.
It's right that we can't keep everyone, but it seems that at the moment we're keeping no one. In the team they arrive at 17 and then they're shipped out at 20 when footballers can continue significantly developing as footballers up to the age of 23. I'm not saying that we had to keep LCP, but there's clearly something that needs improving with our pathway to the first team.
 
It's right that we can't keep everyone, but it seems that at the moment we're keeping no one. In the team they arrive at 17 and then they're shipped out at 20 when footballers can continue significantly developing as footballers up to the age of 23. I'm not saying that we had to keep LCP, but there's clearly something that needs improving with our pathway to the first team.
ditto that ^^
 
You do have to question whether the tactic of taking players who have been relesased by other clubs into our own system is really the right approach. LCP was from Fulham or Villa I think. Elechi was at Man United. On paper it should be great, and the results that the young teams keep getting suggests that it works...

...however, they don;t seem to quite make the grade at first team level. Do they just need more opportunities? Better loans? More loans? More time? I've no idea? Are they just not good enough?

I think James Golding is another who was released previously so we'll see how he goes. But the number who succeed are small.
 
Sounds good in theory, but there are a few issues:

I) senior squad cap, meaning we can't have people in u23s over a certain age to cover the first team without them counting in the 22.
2) we would need to commit to keeping a good number of u23s in order to be able to put a full XI on the pitch each game. Yes, you can supplement with u18s, but then you are either making them play twice a week as opposed to being coached, or taking them out of the u18s meaning U16s get moved up or doubled up etc etc.
3) leagues also have fixed fixture dates which risks clashes with senior midweek games, so more unavailability issues.


I saw all this play out years back when we were still in the old reserve league. I remember one week when the youth team played in Plymouth on the Saturday, then 9 of the same Xi played a reserve fixture against championship side Ipswich on the Tuesday and lost 9-0.
Similarly, midweek senior games meant very few senior players were able to feature, meaning the youngsters were very much left to fend for themselves in games. This meant the likes of an 18 year old Andy Gunn (as one example) spending games marshalling two 17 year olds and a 16 year old alongside him in a back four, rather than the perceived idea that he himself learns from playing alongside a senior player.

This is why loans and the odd friendly when the calender allows have become the preferred option

I'd chuck in the quality of u23 football as well, it isn't very competitive unlike loans to NL clubs etc which have wily experienced players and the physicality needed. There is generally something on these games and likely the distraction of a crowd (which may only be a few hundred but still) as well.
 
It's right that we can't keep everyone, but it seems that at the moment we're keeping no one. In the team they arrive at 17 and then they're shipped out at 20 when footballers can continue significantly developing as footballers up to the age of 23. I'm not saying that we had to keep LCP, but there's clearly something that needs improving with our pathway to the first team.
It's tricky though, do you want to pay him for two years between 21 and 23 while he improves but isn't in the main squad? I don't know the answer.
 
It's tricky though, do you want to pay him for two years between 21 and 23 while he improves but isn't in the main squad? I don't know the answer.
Presumably the players are released as it is deemed that they have not progressed as has been hoped and are unlikely to be able to play in the Championship ( this has to now be the aim)
 
I am sure that every seasons end there is a detailed discussion about progress of the Academy.
No doubt there will have to be answers about why the success rate is so poor at the moment.
Whether that is due to not enough time from the time that the Academy was reestablished post Kassam, recruitment has not been good enough or the coaching hasn't been at the right level, these questions will no doubt be asked.
Is anybody more informed on this?
Reading seem to have produced a lot of quality young players and I assume that is what the club is aiming for
 
The squad limits are killing youth development. If the squad limits were 25 with under 23's or home grown players not counting then many of these players would be kept on. U23/reserve games could be reintroduced meaning that not only will these players get regular game time but they also support scouting.

It's a real shame that at a time when the club have looked to develop some good youth prospects that the structure of the game actively works against this.
 
The squad limits are killing youth development. If the squad limits were 25 with under 23's or home grown players not counting then many of these players would be kept on. U23/reserve games could be reintroduced meaning that not only will these players get regular game time but they also support scouting.

It's a real shame that at a time when the club have looked to develop some good youth prospects that the structure of the game actively works against this.

It's not like the FL to shoot itself in the foot....
 
Also worth noting that this year, with covid concerns and regulations, was uniquely damaging for youth players in terms of first team opportunities. That whole business with players with one appearance counting towards the 14 players that counted as first teamers you needed fit to be compelled to play a game with covid absences gave managers an incentive not to fill holes in their squads, when they arose, with youth players. It wouldn't have made sense to give young players the standard 10-15 mins at the end of games that had already been won to get a taste of first-team football if that meant the team were forced to field them in weakened sides should there have been a covid outbreak.

I think it's a real shame about LCP. Thought he really looked like he had something.
 
Agree. There is definitely a percentage that have much more growing room which doesn;t come out until they're chucked into the first team on a regular basis. But, cleary clubs will often favour a more senior, known quantity (eg. Forde).

Noone can tell me that AFC Wimbledon's Academny is much better than ours, yet they keep bringing players thorugh. Think the difference is that they have a lower budget.
But it's not just how good the player is though is it. It encompasses how good the coaching is, how accurate are the targets set, facilities, as well as how good the players actually are.
The level of teams taking our players on loan seems to have dropped a division or so, there was even one youngster who kr couldn't get a loan for a year or so ago.
 
Completely agree and it's not actually helped by Robinson playing very young players in the cup competitions and seemingly building them up, while also saying 'look at me giving these young lads a chance'. They are seemingly not good enough and/or we are not prepared to throw them in the deep end.
Or to take your last sentence, is it that they are not good enough to throw in the deep end?
 
Also worth noting that this year, with covid concerns and regulations, was uniquely damaging for youth players in terms of first team opportunities. That whole business with players with one appearance counting towards the 14 players that counted as first teamers you needed fit to be compelled to play a game with covid absences gave managers an incentive not to fill holes in their squads, when they arose, with youth players. It wouldn't have made sense to give young players the standard 10-15 mins at the end of games that had already been won to get a taste of first-team football if that meant the team were forced to field them in weakened sides should there have been a covid outbreak.

I think it's a real shame about LCP. Thought he really looked like he had something.

Same here, i thought he had something about him but his performance at the skip did him no favours at all.
 
I think that his repeated injuries had the most to do with his release. The skills were there, but he kept missing time with different injuries.
 
Off the top of my head, League debuts as teenagers (and subsequent regular first team involvement - i.e. not token one-off appearances):
Chris Hackett
Paul Powell
Simon Weatherstone (Ross too for that matter)
Simon Marsh
Jamie Brooks
Sam Ricketts

That's without going back further and listing the once in a generation type talents like Joey or Chrissy Allen.

Players from a time when the club was struggling perhaps, but even if it were a case of having to throw them in then early due to limited options - they all went on to have decent careers in professional football, largely in the 2nd and 3rd tier.

I am sympathetic to the issues Covid has caused, but the reality is that we have historically produced players capable of playing 2nd or 3rd tier football in their teens. Now we're saying it's too early to discard someone at 20 as they're still too young?
 
Also Callum o'Dowda and Dean Whitehead. Bobby Ford?
Did Stevens also make his debut as a teenager? Possibly not.
 
Off the top of my head, League debuts as teenagers (and subsequent regular first team involvement - i.e. not token one-off appearances):
Chris Hackett
Paul Powell
Simon Weatherstone (Ross too for that matter)
Simon Marsh
Jamie Brooks
Sam Ricketts

That's without going back further and listing the once in a generation type talents like Joey or Chrissy Allen.

Players from a time when the club was struggling perhaps, but even if it were a case of having to throw them in then early due to limited options - they all went on to have decent careers in professional football, largely in the 2nd and 3rd tier.

I am sympathetic to the issues Covid has caused, but the reality is that we have historically produced players capable of playing 2nd or 3rd tier football in their teens. Now we're saying it's too early to discard someone at 20 as they're still too young?

How far are you going back ? Brock, Thomas, less so Mark Jones, were key players in undoubtedly our greatest ever era. O’Dowda, latterly, was a massive player in our last successful side. You could point the finger at a whole load of clubs who only have a sprinkling of homegrown footballers. Football is about the here and now and you can’t wait around forever for 20 year olds to make the next step.
 
Has he left the club?

I saw him in the old OUFC training kit earlier this morning.
 
Back
Top Bottom