Danny-did he use the youth enough last term?

[gavtheblade]

Im not on here to criticise DW on his job last term,but looking back on it now,would we have been better with some of the fringe players coming in for the the final push instead of playing unfit players and playing them out of position.
I for 1 was hoping to see a lot more of Tonne,mcallister and philliskirk.
I thought our bench was quite weak for a lot of the season,and he never seemed to put a lot of faith in the reserve lads even when theyed played well in a brief cameo-i.e tonne vs bury(one of the best goals this season),same goes for mcallister.
I suppose he was trying to strike the right balance,but probably we`ll see much more of the `whole`utd squad next term.
discuss.........

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

Only 5 on the bench would have had a major contribution to the lack of opportunities for the youngsters to appear. That could change this season as the number of subs allowed goes back to 7

 

[SwissBlade]

I think he could've been ballsy and used more youngsters over the season. That said, I thought he liked his first 11 and tended to stick with them instead of tinkering.

In the end I just don't think that he had the confidence in the experience and preparedness of the fringe and younger players to take the calculated risk...

Mcallister for example might've done a job from the bench at wembley from 70mins, but the occasion mightve caught him out having rarely played in front of 10,000 let alone 50000+

With a summer under their belts though, we may see a few more given chances and taking the gamble - Lowton and harry Have stepped up, perhaps the other lads will start to challenge too

 

[Bergen Blade]

We definitely chose experience over blooding youngsters last season. The aim was to win promotion at the first attempt, at the expense of everything else.

Danny Wilson's priorities may be more complex next season.

 

[mickerz-blade]

He didn't use me!

 

[creswell blade]

Id like to have seen him use Philly and Mcallister last season too, especialy when we lost evans and kept playing Porter. Its alright saying they have no experience but there not going to get any whilst sat on the bench.

 

[Kev Gee]

The aim clearly was to gain promotion at the first attempt. And with that comes the added pressure of winning matches. Could have Danny trusted in our Youth and Development squad alittle more?

I think so. I think he could have used the bench alot better. How many young players were named on the bench & then used? Not many. Infact how many times did a Wilson sub come on to change the game, or be given enough time to affect a match?

I think next season may be a different situation as he may not be given a chance to shun the youth players.

Finally a quick question. Who would you rather have on a bench? A Young Sheffield United player wanting experience of first team action? Or an experienced Loanee from another team?

 

[Darren]

Im not on here to criticise DW on his job last term,but looking back on it now,would we have been better with some of the fringe players coming in for the the final push instead of playing unfit players and playing them out of position.
I for 1 was hoping to see a lot more of Tonne,mcallister and philliskirk.
I thought our bench was quite weak for a lot of the season,and he never seemed to put a lot of faith in the reserve lads even when theyed played well in a brief cameo-i.e tonne vs bury(one of the best goals this season),same goes for mcallister.
I suppose he was trying to strike the right balance,but probably we`ll see much more of the `whole`utd squad next term.
discuss.........

Tonne, McAllister and Philliskirk all went out on loan to lower division clubs and did not pull up any trees. The plain fact is they are not good enough for the top end of the third tier :-(

 

[Balham]

Tonne, McAllister and Philliskirk all went out on loan to lower division clubs and did not pull up any trees. The plain fact is they are not good enough for the top end of the third tier :-(

That may be true for Tonne and Philliskirk but McAllister got some pretty good reviews from his time at Shrewsbury; I read their fans saying they'd love to sign him permanently but feared he'd be out of their price range.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Tonne, McAllister and Philliskirk all went out on loan to lower division clubs and did not pull up any trees. The plain fact is they are not good enough for the top end of the third tier :-(

Kevin McDonald had mediocre loan spells at Scunthorpe and Notts County a few months before he started proving he was the best League One midfielder by far...

 

[ghandi]

Tonne, McAllister and Philliskirk all went out on loan to lower division clubs and did not pull up any trees. The plain fact is they are not good enough for the top end of the third tier :-(

David Beckham wasn't a roaring success during his loan spell at Preston. Sending young players out on loan is to primarily to gain experience which then can be used to the advantage the owning team on their return.

 

[Darren]

Kevin McDonald had mediocre loan spells at Scunthorpe and Notts County a few months before he started proving he was the best League One midfielder by far...

Indeed, but KM had a history as a reasonable player in the 2nd tier with Burnley. McAllister is 23 and Tonne and Philliskirk are nearly 21. Neither Adams nor Wilson thought they were good enough for a regular first team place. None are spring chickens in football terms and the pinnacle of their careers thus far has been to be reserves in a struggling 2nd tier/top third tier team. There is nothing to suggest that they will suddenly dramatically improve.

 

[Darren]

David Beckham wasn't a roaring success during his loan spell at Preston. Sending young players out on loan is to primarily to gain experience which then can be used to the advantage the owning team on their return.

Wasn't he? He managed 2 goals in 5 games, which is rather good for a midfielder and, besides, he was only 19 at the time and was thus a bit younger than our glorious trio when knocking around the lower divisions.

 

[Revolution]

David Beckham wasn't a roaring success during his loan spell at Preston.

That's not what Ian Bryson says in the interview linked to recently.

 

[Kenilworth]

David Beckham wasn't a roaring success during his loan spell at Preston. Sending young players out on loan is to primarily to gain experience which then can be used to the advantage the owning team on their return.

Not according to Jock Bryson - he said he could tell how special Becks would be. Stood out a mile.

 

[Kenilworth]

David Beckham wasn't a roaring success during his loan spell at Preston.

That's not what Ian Bryson says in the interview linked to recently.

Snap!

 

[judge]

If he would have played the youngsters we would got 111 points and been up by Xmas

 

[JohnDenver]

David Beckham wasn't a roaring success during his loan spell at Preston.

Funnily enough I was at the game at Deepdale where he said his farewells to PNE. The crowd reaction suggested rip-roaring cult hero runaway success.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Indeed, but KM had a history as a reasonable player in the 2nd tier with Burnley. McAllister is 23 and Tonne and Philliskirk are nearly 21. Neither Adams nor Wilson thought they were good enough for a regular first team place. None are spring chickens in football terms and the pinnacle of their careers thus far has been to be reserves in a struggling 2nd tier/top third tier team. There is nothing to suggest that they will suddenly dramatically improve.

At 21 Matt Lowton had made a total of one start in the English leagues. Apparantly we had decided to release him when someone suggested we should send him to Ferencvaros.


I think both Tønne and McAllister should be disappointed with 2011/12, I expected more from them.

But Danny Wilson offered both contract extensions some months ago. Would he have done that if he didn't believe they had the potential to play at least at our current level? Isn't it a bit early to write them off?

 

[Darren]

At 21 Matt Lowton had made a total of one start in the English leagues. Apparantly we had decided to release him when someone suggested we should send him to Ferencvaros.


I think both Tønne and McAllister should be disappointed with 2011/12, I expected more from them.

But Danny Wilson offered both contract extensions some months ago. Would he have done that if he didn't believe they had the potential to play at least at our current level? Isn't it a bit early to write them off?

Bear in mind Lowton didn't get a look in when we were a promotion/play off challenging 2nd tier team. He only started to play regularly when we were a struggling 2nd tier/3rd tier team. In other words United came down to his level. Had we stayed a team challenging for the PL, I am pretty sure we would have released him.

Perhaps Tonne and McAllister will improve, but I think it unlikely. What gets me is this general idea that "X" , who can't get a place in our team, must be our saviour, if only the manager could see it. The reality is that X can generally not get in the team because he is not good enough.

 

[Rodley]

Article in Star saying Whitehouse and Ironside will be used next year. I rate the former and Ironside has come on a lot.

 

[SwissBlade]

In many ways reading into how a player performs during a lower league loan deal is sometimes misleading.

He may not play in his favoured position either because the loan club wants him too or perhaps to gain experience in another experience...for example a centre half at fullback, Attacking mid up front.

The pace and physicality of academy and reserve games is not the same as league 1/ 2 level.

He also doesn't know his new team mates, may struggle to settle (Kyle Reid for example)

And quite simply, the players he plays with aren't as good or play the same style as us.

The important issue is that they get game time and experience.

All that said, the players might just not be good enough and we can find that out at no risk to ourselves, but at risk to the loan team.

In the cases of the lads we've loaned and retained, I'd suggest that Danny Wilson thinks they're good enough or that they have the potential to be good enough with a little more development time...

It was made clear when some of these lads came in (particularly McAllister, Conneely,Tonne and Warren) that they were development players. McAllister and Tonne are still here, the others aren't

 

[VespaBlade]

Perhaps Tonne and McAllister will improve, but I think it unlikely.

Why do you say that? Have you seen enough of them?

 

[Darren]

Why do you say that? Have you seen enough of them?

Because they have reached the ages of 21 and 23 and can't make the first team of a third tier team.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Im not on here to criticise DW on his job last term,but looking back on it now,would we have been better with some of the fringe players coming in for the the final push instead of playing unfit players and playing them out of position.
I for 1 was hoping to see a lot more of Tonne,mcallister and philliskirk.
I thought our bench was quite weak for a lot of the season,and he never seemed to put a lot of faith in the reserve lads even when theyed played well in a brief cameo-i.e tonne vs bury(one of the best goals this season),same goes for mcallister.
I suppose he was trying to strike the right balance,but probably we`ll see much more of the `whole`utd squad next term.
discuss.........

Maguire 53 appearances. Lowton 51 appearances. If the "youth" were good enough, he used them.
Evans and McDonald are the same age as McAlllister and were used plenty also.

I think the whole concept of signing "Development" players not chosen by the first team manager and his staff is flawed. This became apparent when Micky Adams was asked about the signings and said "That's the Development squad, it's not me". It was obvious then that he had no interest in playing the likes of Tonne, Lokberg, Conneely, Mcallister, Philliskirk, Warren, Gardos etc etc.....and he didn't!

A clear distinction needs to be drawn between the Youth teams (under 18) and the so-called "Development" squad. Any players we sign who are aged 19 or over should only be signed by the first team manager. Especially when we are potentially wasting first team funds as I believe we did on Lokberg and Conneely.

 

[Kenilworth]

Article in Star saying Whitehouse and Ironside will be used next year. I rate the former and Ironside has come on a lot.

If true that is a worrying admission. Shows that the current pot is overflowing and the new one has less than half the capacity of the old one - and yet it still might overflow if shaken with only the slightest vigour.

 

[VespaBlade]

Because they have reached the ages of 21 and 23 and can't make the first team of a third tier team.

Not always (Ian Wright was still playing non league at 21) although I think I agree with your thinking on it all overall.
Sometimes its not just down to ability but mental attitude and confidence - maybe a small run in the first team would give them that however the last few games of the season maybe isn't the right time to do it.

Dw did use 'youth' last season but only when it was to the teams advantage- if players are good enough then they are old enough!

 

[Bergen Blade]

Maguire 53 appearances. Lowton 51 appearances. If the "youth" were good enough, he used them.
Evans and McDonald are the same age as McAlllister and were used plenty also.

I think the whole concept of signing "Development" players not chosen by the first team manager and his staff is flawed. This became apparent when Micky Adams was asked about the signings and said "That's the Development squad, it's not me". It was obvious then that he had no interest in playing the likes of Tonne, Lokberg, Conneely, Mcallister, Philliskirk, Warren, Gardos etc etc.....and he didn't!

A clear distinction needs to be drawn between the Youth teams (under 18) and the so-called "Development" squad. Any players we sign who are aged 19 or over should only be signed by the first team manager. Especially when we are potentially wasting first team funds as I believe we did on Lokberg and Conneely.

Gary Speed was our manager when those players mentioned were signed. He thought the Development squad was a good idea.

I agree that the current manager must be keen on these players for the scheme to work. Bear in mind also that the likes of Løkberg weren't on much more than the academy kids.

 

[Revolution]

Has anyone signed as part of the "development squad" become a first team regular? McAllister seems to have played the most, but he's not played for the first team for months.

I do wonder whether the cash is better spent elsewhere: if we have budget constraints we are better spending the money on people who are actually going to play...

 

[Bergen Blade]

Bear in mind Lowton didn't get a look in when we were a promotion/play off challenging 2nd tier team. He only started to play regularly when we were a struggling 2nd tier/3rd tier team. In other words United came down to his level. Had we stayed a team challenging for the PL, I am pretty sure we would have released him.

Perhaps Tonne and McAllister will improve, but I think it unlikely. What gets me is this general idea that "X" , who can't get a place in our team, must be our saviour, if only the manager could see it. The reality is that X can generally not get in the team because he is not good enough.

You may be right that we may well have released Lowton and signed another Sun Jihai for 20k a week.

Having read your posts for a few years Darren I know that it is a bugbear of yours. But I think you should be careful that it doesn't become an automatic reaction from you where you don't even give the player in question a fair evaluation before dismissing them. In this instance you're being more harsh than the manager who have given both players new deals.