[Albion] Simon Rusk interview - The Guardian

[Palacefinder General]

I wondered for a while why Duncan Ferguson seemed to be retained as a striker coach at Everton through several different regimes.......then I thought, who would want to tell the madman 'You're fired, mate'?

Lovely Hu

 

[Bold Seagull]

Hmmm... we brought a few through... Tommy E... Steve Cook... mainly defenders IIRC... never been good at strikers TBH... then Victor G scores twice for Sweden... Aaron C is PL2 player of season... did Chris give them a go? Well Victor got a little go... Celtic were chasing Aaron, Chris looked on, but no... I could go on (can't I!), but you get my drift...

Sort of, but we sold Tommy and Cook before we gave either of them a chance in the Championship, bought in the likes of Upson instead. We've hardly set the philosophical ideology that we value bringing our own youth players through have we at the club.

Why didn't Chris give them a go? Because he had a squad as it was not getting enough game time. I do partly agree with you, that perhaps it was worth a risk and a go, but got to say of the minutes I did see of some of them, including Connolly in the league cup, it wasn't anything where I thought they were ready for the Premier League. Then again, what do I know!? *

*echoed in post #45 to be fair to [MENTION=28490]Machiavelli[/MENTION]

 

[Weststander]

I give you Foden... for the champions...

In PL matches, Foden tends to play cameos when the points are as good as in the bag. Which is very doable when the other 10 players are some of the best on the planet.

 

[AZ Gull]

Steve Sidwell covered this point on TS this week, saying PL club managers understandably refrain from playing young players because it’s a huge step up to play elite level football. The PL is a results business, with all points vital to clubs.

You'd be surprised then.

In 2017-18, 15 different Premier League clubs gave a total of 40 (yes, 40) self-developed young players* at least some playing time in the Premier League. We,of course, were one of 5 clubs that didn't give a single minute to a single such player (and one of the other clubs, Huddersfield, no longer has an academy).

*Let me be clear - these are players who developed through that club's scholar system and were still young enough to qualify as U-21 players in 2017-18.

Now, of course, many of these will not ultimately make the grade; perhaps their Premier League career will consist of just a few minutes. But at least they have been given a chance, and there is encouragement for every single other youngster in that club's academy that there is a pathway.

I'll update this data for the 2018-19 season when the PL Handbook gets published later in the summer. The one thing I know for certain - Albion (again) didn't give a single home-developed youngster a minute.

 

[chaileyjem]

When [MENTION=24867]chaileyjem[/MENTION] has to resort to using Dunk and March as evidence of Hughton's commitment to youth development, it underlines just how few opportunities CH gave the kids.

Dunk had made 75 - that's 75 - league appearances before Hughton was appointed. March had made 30 league appearances (and it would have been more, but he missed the first 18 matches of the 2014-15 season with a stress fracture of the back).

Come on [MENTION=24867]chaileyjem[/MENTION], you're better than this.

Hughton has developed them into established premier league players, better players and deserves credit for that. And has worked with them for years . No more than that. But some were arguing otherwise.

Outside of that , it goes without saying that of course no other players have had first team league chances and/or only limited cup appearances. Agreed. It’s hard to evaluate whether other managers might have played their hand differently. Rusk gives no hint in that interview (of course you could say - he would say that wouldn’t he) that Hughton missed opportunities.

However he leaves behind a very promising crop of young players - let’s see if any make it ( Connolly , Molumby, Sanders, and of course Walton )

Also My view on Potter is that his likelihood to bring through u23s is overstated. It happened at Swansea through necessity rather than choice ...but you can’t argue that Daniel James didn’t benefit. But I’d bet on him being more cautious here than some are hoping/expecting.

 

[symyjym]

Nothing to do with me feeling the need to be right or wrong, you accused me of completely sidetracking your original comment. Had you just said, 'yes they both developed under Hughton', I'd have nothing to add.

I've got no interest in the late substitution or why you think it's relevant really, maybe he just forgot to do it earlier, who knows.

I didn't accuse you of side tracking, you did side track Saying they developed under Hughton stating the obvious. Were they discovered by Hughton in the dark depths of the U23s? No they weren't.

I have read on here that you do football training with the youth. I cannot remember who with, but someone with your experience, whatever the level, may have had an objective view of bothering to give a player a 15 second run out to a player, knowing that he would probably not have the time to touch the ball. There is some psychology and games behind it and being a football person you may have had an answer.

If you don't know that would make two of us and the question remains.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

And he only got his chance because of long term injuries to Nathaniel Clyne and Joe Gomez, I'm sure he'd have got in eventually but his progression has been helped massively by getting in the team.

True, but worth noting that Gomez himself was barely any older.

 

[GT49er]

It's a little bit rich that though given I don't remember us bringing a huge number of youngsters through in League One or the Championship as a football club either. We get to the top flight for 2 seasons and suddenly CH is the first manager not to dip into the youth set up?

Elphick and Cook were not that long ago; Fenelon and Forster-Caskey were even more recent, and all got far more of a chance than any of our current U23s. At a lower level, yes, that is true; but back then, we didn't have one of the top U23 teams in the country - we do now.

 

[symyjym]

Hughton has developed them into established premier league players, better players and deserves credit for that. And has worked with them for years . No more than that. But some were arguing otherwise.

Outside of that , it goes without saying that of course no other players have had first team league chances and/or only limited cup appearances. Agreed. It’s hard to evaluate whether other managers might have played their hand differently. Rusk gives no hint in that interview (of course you could say - he would say that wouldn’t he) that Hughton missed opportunities.

However he leaves behind a very promising crop of young players - let’s see if any make it ( Connolly , Molumby, Sanders, and of course Walton )

Also My view on Potter is that his likelihood to bring through u23s is overstated. It happened at Swansea through necessity rather than choice ...but you can’t argue that Daniel James didn’t benefit. But I’d bet on him being more cautious here than some are hoping/expecting.

We have got rid of 7 U23s so there is room for upgrading the stock.

 

[Bold Seagull]

You'd be surprised then.

In 2017-18, 15 different Premier League clubs gave a total of 40 (yes, 40) self-developed young players* at least some playing time in the Premier League. We,of course, were one of 5 clubs that didn't give a single minute to a single such player (and one of the other clubs, Huddersfield, no longer has an academy).

*Let me be clear - these are players who developed through that club's scholar system and were still young enough to qualify as U-21 players in 2017-18.

Now, of course, many of these will not ultimately make the grade; perhaps their Premier League career will consist of just a few minutes. But at least they have been given a chance, and there is encouragement for every single other youngster in that club's academy that there is a pathway.

I'll update this data for the 2018-19 season when the PL Handbook gets published later in the summer. The one thing I know for certain - Albion (again) didn't give a single home-developed youngster a minute.

You'd expect 15 more established PL teams to be giving a few youngsters more of a break. Their Premier League youth setups have been attracting a lot more cream of the crop than ours, and probably funded as such. And yet still that is under 3 players per each of those 15 clubs that could have been a minute per player.

I too would expect the data for 18-19 to be the same, as it would be likely for 3 or 4 other teams. Bit of patience needed I think. Our current crop might simply not be good enough. I guess we will find out soon enough whether it was the manager, or the talent.

 

[Weststander]

You'd be surprised then.

In 2017-18, 15 different Premier League clubs gave a total of 40 (yes, 40) self-developed young players* at least some playing time in the Premier League. We,of course, were one of 5 clubs that didn't give a single minute to a single such player (and one of the other clubs, Huddersfield, no longer has an academy).

*Let me be clear - these are players who developed through that club's scholar system and were still young enough to qualify as U-21 players in 2017-18.

Now, of course, many of these will not ultimately make the grade; perhaps their Premier League career will consist of just a few minutes. But at least they have been given a chance, and there is encouragement for every single other youngster in that club's academy that there is a pathway.

I'll update this data for the 2018-19 season when the PL Handbook gets published later in the summer. The one thing I know for certain - Albion (again) didn't give a single home-developed youngster a minute.

If it’s available, I’d like to know the minutes they played in PL matches as a proportion of the whole.

Also, I think ‘self developed young players’ includes near certs poached from other clubs across the planet. A famous example, Fabregas. I don’t think the Albion dine at that table.

 

[Weststander]

You'd expect 15 more established PL teams to be giving a few youngsters more of a break. Their Premier League youth setups have been attracting a lot more cream of the crop than ours, and probably funded as such. And yet still that is under 3 players per each of those 15 clubs that could have been a minute per player.

I too would expect the data for 18-19 to be the same, as it would be likely for 3 or 4 other teams. Bit of patience needed I think. Our current crop might simply not be good enough. I guess we will find out soon enough whether it was the manager, or the talent.

 

[Hu_Camus]

Lovely Hu

So have you and the boys of the NSC Geheime Staatspolizei any opinion about the big Slovakian striker from a mid-table French team, spotted at Lancing?
Think he'll sign?....what's the fee, if he does?
Is he a forward, or a replacement for one of the centre-backs?

 

[Bold Seagull]

I didn't accuse you of side tracking, you did side track Saying they developed under Hughton stating the obvious. Were they discovered by Hughton in the dark depths of the U23s? No they weren't.

I have read on here that you do football training with the youth. I cannot remember who with, but someone with your experience, whatever the level, may have had an objective view of bothering to give a player a 15 second run out to a player, knowing that he would probably not have the time to touch the ball. There is some psychology and games behind it and being a football person you may have had an answer.

If you don't know that would make two of us and the question remains.

Well, that should never happen in a grass roots youth football match, and certainly not at the level I manage at because if I ask a player to be there as a sub, then they'll get a decent bit of game time regardless.

Professional football is not something I can relate to in that respect, so I have no idea why to be honest. All I can echo is that it does seem odd.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Elphick and Cook were not that long ago; Fenelon and Forster-Caskey were even more recent, and all got far more of a chance than any of our current U23s. At a lower level, yes, that is true; but back then, we didn't have one of the top U23 teams in the country - we do now.

So that is 4 players in 8 years or so?

 

[Weststander]

Hughton has developed them into established premier league players, better players and deserves credit for that. And has worked with them for years . No more than that. But some were arguing otherwise.

Outside of that , it goes without saying that of course no other players have had first team league chances and/or only limited cup appearances. Agreed. It’s hard to evaluate whether other managers might have played their hand differently. Rusk gives no hint in that interview (of course you could say - he would say that wouldn’t he) that Hughton missed opportunities.

However he leaves behind a very promising crop of young players - let’s see if any make it ( Connolly , Molumby, Sanders, and of course Walton )

Also My view on Potter is that his likelihood to bring through u23s is overstated. It happened at Swansea through necessity rather than choice ...but you can’t argue that Daniel James didn’t benefit. But I’d bet on him being more cautious here than some are hoping/expecting.

Good post.

I’m not hoping/expecting on that one. I trust GP and the club to do whatever’s necessary to keep us in the PL, and don’t care if initially it includes homegrown youth or not.

 

[GT49er]

So that is 4 players in 8 years or so?

Yes - or to put it another way, 224 appearances..........................

 

[AZ Gull]

You'd expect 15 more established PL teams to be giving a few youngsters more of a break. Their Premier League youth setups have been attracting a lot more cream of the crop than ours, and probably funded as such.

The hole in this argument is that a number of Premier League clubs don't even have Category One academies (Bournemouth, Burnley, Crystal Palace and Watford). Swansea City achieved Category One status two years after Albion did.

Bit of patience needed I think. Our current crop might simply not be good enough.

Our U-23 side achieved promotion from PL2 Division Two in 2017-18 (ahead of sides such as Southampton and Newcastle). This season they finished 3rd in Division One and were still in with a shout of the title with two matches to play. If the side were consistently near the bottom of PL2 Division Two then I might agree that our players were inferior to the youngsters at other PL clubs, but the evidence of the last two seasons strongly suggests we have decent players in the academy.

I guess we will find out soon enough whether it was the manager, or the talent.

We will, and I'm really looking forward to the answer.....

 

[Whitechapel]

I don't think you want me to define chance, but to provide a list a little bit like [MENTION=29779]Whitechapel[/MENTION] has done. I witnessed most of those minutes played by the u23s in the flesh. I think two of those that played in the League Cup (or whatever it's now called) have now been released. Connolly came on in that game too and looked overwhelmed.
Gyokeres has played the most minutes, and did have one good run and IIRC a weak shot but he looked way, way short of PL standard.

You may wish for multiple starts/appearances for our DS squad players, but that's most likely to be accompanied with relegation. @Chailey Jem has this right in that so many people are investing their fantasies in Potter's arrival, that many are going to be disappointed.
I suspect that Potter may well give our DS players more of a 'chance' than Hughton but, ultimately, he'll be given the remit to keep us in the PL, and if they're not up to it -- which the vast majority won't be -- they won't have too much in the way of 'chances'.
Read what Rusk says, because he captures the situation as well as any. He's fully aware that the gulf is so vast, and that his job is as much about preparing them for life, and being honest with them, rather than expecting them to make an appearance in the Cups/PL, let alone make it.

Genuinely curious as to how someone comes on in the 90th minute and looks overwhelmed?

 

[Whitechapel]

So your strategy would be to play them regardless, so that they had more time at the expense of say Kayal, Bong, Andone, Locadia, Burn, Bruno, Bissouma etc. who also weren't getting much game time when the cup fixtures were on?

For an U23 player to take game time off the full squad, to my mind they have to be exceptional, not just stick them in because you feel it is insulting to the youth set up not to.

Is there not a whole host of middle ground between ‘playing them regardless’ and giving them less than 2% of the minutes available. It’s understandable that we didn’t want to risk throwing young players in to league games, however I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect them to get more of a chance in the cup. Let’s be honest, we treated it as a distraction until a route to the semis dropped in to our lap. I don’t think I’m being too extreme to think the likes of Molumby, Sanders, Ostigard & Sanchez deserves some minutes, or that Gyokeres deserved to start more than one game.