um pahars Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Following on from something in the Mike Williamson thread, could we produce a team of Academy players who could all play together as we stand here today (i.e. No Shearers, Wallaces etc). They have to have come throught the Academy from a junior (i.e. no Kenwyne Jones) and still have to be playing. And where would they be in the 92 places in the league???? GK: ??? RB : ??? CB's : Monk, Cranie, Mills LB : Bridge, Bale RM : CM's : Howard LM : Bridge or Bale CF's : Best, Blackstock, Walcott, McDonald
Ivan Katalinic's 'tache Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Following on from something in the Mike Williamson thread, could we produce a team of Academy players who could all play together as we stand here today (i.e. No Shearers, Wallaces etc). They have to have come throught the Academy from a junior (i.e. no Kenwyne Jones) and still have to be playing. And where would they be in the 92 places in the league???? GK: ??? RB : ??? CB's : Monk, Cranie, Mills LB : Bridge, Bale RM : CM's : Howard LM : Bridge or Bale CF's : Best, Blackstock, Walcott, McDonald Chris Baird at right back? Darryl Flahavan (Palace & ex-Southend) in goal
The Godfather Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Matt Oakley - centre mid Although Oakley was through our youth system, he started at Arsenal I believe.
Scummer Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Although Oakley was through our youth system, he started at Arsenal I believe. Quite a few of 'our' academy players started out elsewhere. Best, McGoldrick, Walcott (although he was very young when he joined us).
saintjay77 Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 So the update so far would be? GK: Darryl Flahavan, Paul Smith? RB : Chris Baird CB's : Monk, Cranie, Mills, Williamson LB : Bridge, Bale RM : Dyer although he hasnt officially left CM's : Howard or Jay Lucas (lol) LM : Bridge or Bale or Walcott CF's : Best, Blackstock, Walcott, McDonald or that little russian kid Pernoketchi or something.
saintjay77 Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Quite a few of 'our' academy players started out elsewhere. Best, McGoldrick, Walcott (although he was very young when he joined us). I think the point is they were brought to the club when they were still at the acadamy age. What age did Oakley come to us?
Rebel Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 GK: Darryl Flahavan, Paul Smith, Alan Blayney, Andre McNeil RB : Chris Baird, Martin Cranie CB's : Gary Monk, Martin Cranie, Mathew Mills, Mike Williamson, Baird LB : Bridge, Bale RM : Dyer, Walcott CM's : Brian Howard, Jay Lucas, Tim Sparv, Yoan Folly LM : Bridge, Bale, Leandre Griffit CF's : Best, Blackstock, Walcott, Scott McDonald, Cedric Baseya
Ludwig Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Feliciano Condesso midfield. I'm not sure how good he is, but he's still on the fringes of Villarreal's team, I think.
saintjay77 Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Paul Smith came from Brentford. ah so he did
saintjay77 Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 GK: Darryl Flahavan, Paul Smith, Alan Blayney, Andre McNeil RB : Chris Baird, Martin Cranie CB's : Gary Monk, Martin Cranie, Mathew Mills, Mike Williamson, Baird LB : Bridge, Bale RM : Dyer, Walcott CM's : Brian Howard, Jay Lucas, Tim Sparv, Yoan Folly, Feliciano Condesso LM : Bridge, Bale, Leandre Griffit CF's : Best, Blackstock, Walcott, Scott McDonald, Cedric Baseya Not looking like such a bad team really. Cant say they would be anything better that CCC at best though.
um pahars Posted 18 February, 2009 Author Posted 18 February, 2009 Although Oakley was through our youth system, he started at Arsenal I believe. He was on their books as an Associate Schoolboy, but came here just before his 16th birtheday so I think that qualifies him for this team. So far this would be my team: -------------------Flahavan------------------- Baird---------Monk--------Cranie----------Bale Walcott------Oakley-------Howard-------Bridge ------------McDonald-----Blackstock---------- Certainly good in places, but definitely weak in others. Any changes to the above???? I'd have that team down as a high scoring, high conceeding Championship team. Mid table/Challenging playoffs. Any different views on how "good" this team would be???
Junior Mullet Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Replace Monk with Mills and McDonald with Best and you have a decent team!
saintjay77 Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 He was on their books as an Associate Schoolboy, but came here just before his 16th birtheday so I think that qualifies him for this team. So far this would be my team: -------------------Flahavan------------------- Baird---------Monk--------Cranie----------Bale Walcott------Oakley-------Howard-------Bridge ------------McDonald-----Blackstock---------- Certainly good in places, but definitely weak in others. Any changes to the above???? I'd have that team down as a high scoring, high conceeding Championship team. Mid table/Challenging playoffs. Any different views on how "good" this team would be??? When put like that it doesnt look bad at all. I would probably have Mills in ahead of Crainie though and swap Bridge for Bale to stregnthen the defence. I think the point from the other thread was more about how many we have lost to others gain and I was thinking that we have lost much more than most other teams in the leagues. Looking above at that and its easy to see what made me think that. I would actually consider having that team ahead of the one we have right now.
norwaysaint Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Poke James Lancashire Imudia J. Mills Thompson Surman Gillett Gobern McGoldrick Lallana
Andy_Porter Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Bridge at left back with Bale at left wing and Craine right back with Baird centre back would be the two changes i'd make. Also not sure who i'd play between Monk and Mills, who ever is the more dominant centre back really since they're playing alongside Baird.
Ponty Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Poke James Lancashire Imudia J. Mills Thompson Surman Gillett Gobern McGoldrick Lallana Are you Rupert Lowe?
Sheff Saint Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 When put like that it doesnt look bad at all. I would probably have Mills in ahead of Crainie though and swap Bridge for Bale to stregnthen the defence. I think the point from the other thread was more about how many we have lost to others gain and I was thinking that we have lost much more than most other teams in the leagues. Looking above at that and its easy to see what made me think that. I would actually consider having that team ahead of the one we have right now. It does look good. But i'll repeat my point from the other thread; Can we count Bridge, Bale and Walcott as they weren't released or ask to go because they weren't playing. They were established first teamers who were sold for cash. If you take them out, because the decision was out the clubs hands, all of a sudden that team doesn't look as good.
norwaysaint Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 I was wondering the other day if we can make a team of reasonably big name signings (albeit well past their best) who played fewer than ten league matches for us. I thought of Sammy Lee, Petrescu, Chris Woods, Kanchelskis, Peter Reid and Kerry Dixon. Can we make eleven without scraping the barrel any lower?
um pahars Posted 18 February, 2009 Author Posted 18 February, 2009 It does look good. But i'll repeat my point from the other thread; Can we count Bridge, Bale and Walcott as they weren't released or ask to go because they weren't playing. They were established first teamers who were sold for cash. If you take them out, because the decision was out the clubs hands, all of a sudden that team doesn't look as good. I understand what you're saying, but they were still produced by the Academy so I think they should be included. Of course if this team of Academy players was challenging for a Champions League place then they may have stayed put!!!! However, I would counter that looking at that team, even including those 3, it is not of a Premiership standard.
a1ex2001 Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 I was wondering the other day if we can make a team of reasonably big name signings (albeit well past their best) who played fewer than ten league matches for us. I thought of Sammy Lee, Petrescu, Chris Woods, Kanchelskis, Peter Reid and Kerry Dixon. Can we make eleven without scraping the barrel any lower? Don't forget David Hirst, Stuart Ripley, Mark Hughes and Beresford!
Lets B Avenue Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Don't forget David Hirst, Stuart Ripley, Mark Hughes and Beresford! Paul Allen. Crap for us and then wouldnt buy us. Bastard!!
Frank's cousin Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 I understand what you're saying, but they were still produced by the Academy so I think they should be included. Of course if this team of Academy players was challenging for a Champions League place then they may have stayed put!!!! However, I would counter that looking at that team, even including those 3, it is not of a Premiership standard. UP, I know what you are getting at, but I dont believe the intention would be to use JUST academy players if we could afford others - The reason why we have them now is because the board rightly or wrongly believe that we can not afford the more experienced contracts -If still in the prem and all things being equal we would have had the blend - if you add the best of the kids to players we had in 2003 that are still playing we would more likely have... Davis Baird Crainie Higgy Bridge Walcott Delap Svensson/Surman Bale Beattie McDonald Still light in defence and centre midfield - after the end of Claus and Svennsons carrers but we would surely have bought 2 or 3 prem quality replacements if the academy was not bringing these through on time... As you have said the best approach would be a blend, and thats what we used to have, albeit some mangers resisting the inclusion of the kids, but as sated the current use of kids is considered a necessity by the board.
um pahars Posted 18 February, 2009 Author Posted 18 February, 2009 UP' date=' I know what you are getting at, [/quote'] You've lost me Frank, what are you trying to say?
Frank's cousin Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 You've lost me Frank, what are you trying to say? Come on uP , we are not that naive, I suspect its a subtle (or not so subtle) intended dig at the current Lowe policy of JUST relying on the academy .... eg 'The academy is not as good as Lowe likes to believe'?
eesti matty Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 I was wondering the other day if we can make a team of reasonably big name signings (albeit well past their best) who played fewer than ten league matches for us. I thought of Sammy Lee, Petrescu, Chris Woods, Kanchelskis, Peter Reid and Kerry Dixon. Can we make eleven without scraping the barrel any lower? Delgado! Although I do not know enough about the guy to know whether he was already past his best when he joined us. He certainly did well in the 2006 World Cup. David Howells is another.
um pahars Posted 18 February, 2009 Author Posted 18 February, 2009 Come on uP ' date=' we are not that naive, I suspect its a subtle (or not so subtle) intended dig at the current Lowe policy of JUST relying on the academy ....[/quote'] In which case, you're getting paranoid and/or defensive. The original thread was about players we released or had lost their way etc etc and people (including myself) were just saying it happens all the time in football and we are probably no worse/or better at avoiding it. Put it up to see if we could come up with a team of players who had "made" it since they left us. Nothing sinister I'm afraid, so you need to stop being so defensive or paranoid.
labibs Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 I thought Souness actually bought Monk from Torquay? I don't know if he qualifies as having come through our academy?
Frank's cousin Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 In which case, you're getting paranoid and/or defensive. The original thread was about players we released or had lost their way etc etc and people (including myself) were just saying it happens all the time in football and we are probably no worse/or better at avoiding it. Put it up to see if we could come up with a team of players who had "made" it since they left us. Nothing sinister I'm afraid, so you need to stop being so defensive or paranoid. Clever response but then the best PR is equally subtle and as a gret man once said, 'just because your paronoid.....' ;-)
eurosaint Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Poke James Lancashire Imudia J. Mills Thompson Surman Gillett Gobern McGoldrick Lallana That lot will struggle in League 1 (3rd div) and sadly we won't have to wait long to find out !!!!!!! Ps. I do realise that you were using a strong dose of sarcasm..
charliemiller Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Kevin Phillips , Dennis wise , mat oakley . How about this kid lol HCDAJFU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJtC-2ITx10&NR=1
um pahars Posted 18 February, 2009 Author Posted 18 February, 2009 Clever response but then the best PR is equally subtle and as a gret man once said' date=' 'just because your paronoid.....' ;-)[/quote'] With all due respect, you're now just coming across as a *****. I know what I posted, and I know why I posted it. So kindly fck off and stop trying to suggest there was something in my posts which had never even entered my mind. That thread was started by someone having a pop at the CLub saying that we always lose talent, and my premise was that we are no different to any other team and we could easily make up a team of late developers, just as every other team in the league could. The other day I had you down as more of a hypocrite than a fool, it looks like today you're determined to grab the latter.
um pahars Posted 18 February, 2009 Author Posted 18 February, 2009 Kevin Phillips , Dennis wise , mat oakley . How about this kid lol HCDAJFU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJtC-2ITx10&NR=1 I've got Oakley, but you're quite right with Phillips. Not sure we can include Wise (unless of course you're putting him forward as manager). It's getting a bit stronger now and maybe it could hold it's own in the top flight: -------------------Flahavan------------------- Cranie---------Monk----Baird--------------Bale Walcott------Oakley-------Howard-------Bridge ------------McDonald-----Phillips---------- Still think we need another keeper (definitely weak), centre half (neither really Prem standard) and maybe centre mid (although Oaks did the business and Howard was being tapped up). There's definitely some talent in there though.
Frank's cousin Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 With all due respect, you're now just coming across as a *****. I know what I posted, and I know why I posted it. So kindly fck off and stop trying to suggest there was something in my posts which had never even entered my mind. That thread was started by someone having a pop at the CLub saying that we always lose talent, and my premise was that we are no different to any other team and we could easily make up a team of late developers, just as every other team in the league could. The other day I had you down as more of a hypocrite than a fool, it looks like today you're determined to grab the latter. Oh for f*cks sake get a grip and lighten up - I suggest you re-read your first line because a suggest 'due respect' and then the rest of the diatribe suggest hypocacy... This was intended as you surely are intelligent enough to recognise as a light hearted response based on our recent verbal jousting - hens ethe ;-) - but obviously if you take this and yourself so very seriously... due respect forbids me from mentioning what I now have you down as,...
um pahars Posted 18 February, 2009 Author Posted 18 February, 2009 Oh for f*cks sake get a grip and lighten up - I suggest you re-read your first line because a suggest 'due respect' and then the rest of the diatribe suggest hypocacy... This was intended as you surely are intelligent enough to recognise as a light hearted response based on our recent verbal jousting - hens ethe ;-) - but obviously if you take this and yourself so very seriously... due respect forbids me from mentioning what I now have you down as,... Behave yourself you fool. You're the one on this thread accusing me of some "subtle" PR attack against Lowe, which is patently not the case, so please forgive me if I give you a broadside for being a ****** and accusing me of something that had never crossed my mind. I know what I posted, I know why I popsted it and in this instance your attempt at second guessing is wide of the mark and paranoid.
Lets B Avenue Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Kevin Phillips , Dennis wise , mat oakley . How about this kid lol HCDAJFU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJtC-2ITx10&NR=1 Nah, he's too one-footed. Got to wonder why he couldn't have been coached to use his left. Wouldn't happen at our academy.
Frank's cousin Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Behave yourself you fool. You're the one on this thread accusing me of some "subtle" PR attack against Lowe, which is patently not the case, so please forgive me if I give you a broadside for being a ****** and accusing me of something that had never crossed my mind. You're either really paranoid or really defensive on this one. 'Behave yourself you fool' ..... I suspect when you calm down, you might see that you are making yourself look rather foolish with this OTT reaction. Talk about Paranoia?
Lets B Avenue Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 With all due respect, you're now just coming across as a *****. I know what I posted, and I know why I posted it. So kindly fck off and stop trying to suggest there was something in my posts which had never even entered my mind. That thread was started by someone having a pop at the CLub saying that we always lose talent, and my premise was that we are no different to any other team and we could easily make up a team of late developers, just as every other team in the league could. The other day I had you down as more of a hypocrite than a fool, it looks like today you're determined to grab the latter. I was just about to praise FC for keeping his posts brief and without his normal verbal diahorrea. However, he has made himself to look a right tit on this one.
Frank's cousin Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 I was just about to praise FC for keeping his posts brief and without his normal verbal diahorrea. However, he has made himself to look a right tit on this one. Brown noser ;-) Someone else who seems to be taaking this way too seriously...jeez....
saintjay77 Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 this thread was started due to some questions I had with UP on a different thread. I thought it was quite interesting to come up with players that we have either lost or sold that we brought through from the acadamy and UP made the thread before I had a chance. I think we were both thinking the same thing but from different directions. I figured that the past few years we had produced more tallent that have gone on to be relativly successful elsewhere than most other teams can take credit for. UP came up with a few and since then that has grown to a pretty full team and we could even come up with some fairly decent subs. I didnt see it as a dig at anyone in particular and it was nice to have a thread without the usual Lowe luvvie bashing that every other thread turns into. FC if you were trying to be funny it didnt work. UP you bit to something that wasnt worth biting too. now can we get back to the original thread please? Think someone has mentioned that Monk was bought from Torquay so dont think he came through our acadamy so looks like Cranie and Mills in the middle. Wise was in our acadamy but as was said in the OP the players should still be playing and I dont think Wise puts his boots on anymore but Phillips is a good shout.
saintjay77 Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 It does look good. But i'll repeat my point from the other thread; Can we count Bridge, Bale and Walcott as they weren't released or ask to go because they weren't playing. They were established first teamers who were sold for cash. If you take them out, because the decision was out the clubs hands, all of a sudden that team doesn't look as good. I dont think the point is how they left as when Bridge, Bale and Theo left the emphasis wasnt on building a team from our acadamy. I know it was slowly heading that way as thats what Lowe wanted, but all the same the management was always looking to stregnthen from anywhere other than the acadamy. I still think that we have lost/let go more players that have come through our acadamy than most teams throughout the leagues have done.
Frank's cousin Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 FC if you were trying to be funny it didnt work. UP you bit to something that wasnt worth biting too.. Fair enough, if UP had waved the finger at the naughty schoolboy at the back of the class, I would have hung my head in shame and ...said sorry sir.... but the reaction was well OOT... OK so its a fair point that we should not want all threads to decend into the old debate, ar... sod it....
saintjay77 Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Fair enough, if UP had waved the finger at the naughty schoolboy at the back of the class, I would have hung my head in shame and ...said sorry sir.... but the reaction was well OOT... OK so its a fair point that we should not want all threads to decend into the old debate, ar... sod it.... Not debating what followed but thought it was worth pointing out that there was no need for it to start
once_bitterne Posted 18 February, 2009 Posted 18 February, 2009 Behave yourself you fool. There's no doubt that Lowe is an arrogant, conceited individual unable to take any form of criticism, with delusions of granduer and an inflated idea of his own self worth.... I can see why Steve hates him so much, they always say people who are far too similar never get on. I haven't a shadow of doubt that if, instead of telling him to "shut up", Lowe had in fact pandered to Godwin's ego and given him the 'tea boy on the board' position he so desperatly wanted/wants to gain through his ill fated forrays into the 'True Saints' (LOL) and Saints Trust then Mr Godwin would now be such a staunch 'Lowe Luvvie' that even Scooby would pale in comparison. Instead we have what FC correctly identified, a carefully calculated PR war where Um never wastes a single post. If only Lowe had employed PR plants as thorough as you eh Steve? I'll be awaiting my ultra-patronisng and condescending reply and if he doesn't use at least 23 smiley's I will be feeling short changed.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now