Bolton Under 23's the Champs.

[nicholaldo]

I understand the point about Parky, and I accept that he might genuinely be reluctant to play younger players, but it runs deeper than that in my opinion.

The primary purpose of an Academy is to produce players that are good enough to play football professionally, not necessarily just players who are good enough to play in the club's first team. That aside, we've had more players break through recently (Vela, Holding, Clough and now Connell). One of the major problems we face though is that we are geographically disadvantaged in that the best local talent don't just fall under our radar, they also fall under the radar of the major clubs in the local area. Not only that but when under a transfer embargo and restricted on the number of professionally-contracted “Established Players” we could register, we understandably sacrificed a generation of Academy prospects in favour of senior, ready-to-play-in-the-first-team players. Niall Maher and Oscar Threlkeld might never have made it but if we were able to sign them to long contracts and provide them with the opportunity to play that youngsters at, let's say, Preston North End might get, they could have been developed into first-team regulars in time. And one final thing about the under 23's, they definitely deserve credit for winning promotion but it's worth bearing in mind that they were promoted from the third tier of youth football, and there is a yawning chasm between that level of youth football and senior Championship level football. Plus what should also be factored in is that success at that age group can be deceptive because the very best are by that stage either playing in the first team already or playing senior football elsewhere.

Note also that the graphic only refers to players aged 23 and under, which presumably can mean players signed permanently or temporarily from other clubs. Because of the financial problems that we have, we aren't able to properly compete in either of those markets and the vast majority of players that we sign are, by necessity, out of contract and signed on a short-term basis. That generally tends to mean that they're older. There are other considerations too, such as with us constantly being in the fight for either promotion or relegation lately we've needed players ready to contribute straight away, which obviously hampers our ability to bed the youth in and allow them to slowly grow. But nevertheless, it's still fair to say that often young players just need a chance and can surprise people.

[officer_dibble]

It’s fair to say Parky hasn’t done a lot for homegrown / academy players. If you were Luca Connell would you sign a deal to play for him? The man has a 38!year old coach as his back up keeper over any of our younger lads - including one with England honours? Hall has to be worth a shout over the Don(key)? Neither of our strikers have scored a league goal since September I think!!

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Apparently it can ruin a kid.

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/1 ... wanderers/

[The_Gun]

Apparently it can ruin a kid.

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/1 ... wanderers/

So either our kids are worse than those of every other club in the football league, or those other clubs are all in the process of ruining their young players.

[TANGODANCER]

Apparently it can ruin a kid.

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/1 ... wanderers/

So either our kids are worse than those of every other club in the football league, or those other clubs are all in the process of ruining their young players.

I'm thinking there's a lot of sense in the sentiment of it to a high degree if you don't let the finance and fame angle jump the gun (if you'll pardon the pun )..Unfortunately, both make the rules ahead of common sense in all sports now ruled by greed and self rather than club unity. Way of the world now and Bolton kids are no different than the rest in wanting a big house, a flash car and Paris St Germaine or Real Madrid to come calling. That's what money and business have done to sport.

[The_Gun]

Apparently it can ruin a kid.

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/1 ... wanderers/

So either our kids are worse than those of every other club in the football league, or those other clubs are all in the process of ruining their young players.

I'm thinking there's a lot of sense in the sentiment of it to a high degree if you don't let the finance and fame angle jump the gun (if you'll pardon the pun )..Unfortunately, both make the rules ahead of common sense in all sports now ruled by greed and self rather than club unity. Way of the world now and Bolton kids are no different than the rest in wanting a big house, a flash car and Paris St Germaine or Real Madrid to come calling. That's what money and business have done to sport.

I'm not saying I don't agree with the general point of not playing youngsters too soon, however, I don't think Parkin can apply it with any justification in this specific context. That context being a struggling team, with serious financial issues playing young players less than any other team in the Football League despite having had demonstrable success at youth level as recent as last season.

[irie Cee Bee]

Apparently it can ruin a kid.

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/1 ... wanderers/

They are probably hiding them from Ken so that he doesn't see how good they are, and sell them to pay wages. Or they just don't fall into their football strategy.. defensive organization and hope for the best. No place for creativity or young exuberance.

[Harry Genshaw]

Apparently it can ruin a kid.

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/1 ... wanderers/

So either our kids are worse than those of every other club in the football league, or those other clubs are all in the process of ruining their young players.

We're busy ruining Everton's kids!!

It's bad enough we're bottom but if you take Williams out we'd be even further adrift!

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I understand the point about Parky, and I accept that he might genuinely be reluctant to play younger players, but it runs deeper than that in my opinion.

The primary purpose of an Academy is to produce players that are good enough to play football professionally, not necessarily just players who are good enough to play in the club's first team. That aside, we've had more players break through recently (Vela, Holding, Clough and now Connell). One of the major problems we face though is that we are geographically disadvantaged in that the best local talent don't just fall under our radar, they also fall under the radar of the major clubs in the local area. Not only that but when under a transfer embargo and restricted on the number of professionally-contracted “Established Players” we could register, we understandably sacrificed a generation of Academy prospects in favour of senior, ready-to-play-in-the-first-team players. Niall Maher and Oscar Threlkeld might never have made it but if we were able to sign them to long contracts and provide them with the opportunity to play that youngsters at, let's say, Preston North End might get, they could have been developed into first-team regulars in time. And one final thing about the under 23's, they definitely deserve credit for winning promotion but it's worth bearing in mind that they were promoted from the third tier of youth football, and there is a yawning chasm between that level of youth football and senior Championship level football. Plus what should also be factored in is that success at that age group can be deceptive because the very best are by that stage either playing in the first team already or playing senior football elsewhere.

Note also that the graphic only refers to players aged 23 and under, which presumably can mean players signed permanently or temporarily from other clubs. Because of the financial problems that we have, we aren't able to properly compete in either of those markets and the vast majority of players that we sign are, by necessity, out of contract and signed on a short-term basis. That generally tends to mean that they're older. There are other considerations too, such as with us constantly being in the fight for either promotion or relegation lately we've needed players ready to contribute straight away, which obviously hampers our ability to bed the youth in and allow them to slowly grow. But nevertheless, it's still fair to say that often young players just need a chance and can surprise people.

Some very fair points here. One quibble, on the bold: it's slightly misleading (accidentally, I'm sure) to say they're Third Division champions. Bear with me:

The youth setup has changed a lot but the top tier of U23 (it's no longer U21) football is the badly-named Premier League 2, which has two divisions of 12 teams each, with two promotion/relegation places between them. So far so correct.

However, participation in either division of the Premier League is restricted to clubs who have Category 1 academies (namely Arsenal, Blackburn, Brighton, Chelsea, Derby, Everton, Leicester, Liverpool, Man City, Swansea, Spurs and West Ham in the top 12, Villa, Fulham, the rags, Boro, Newcastle, Norwich, Reading, Southampton, Stoke, Sunderland, West Brom and Wolves in the second division).

As you may remember, the award of a Category 1 licence is partly dependent on the money a club spends on its academy, which often rules out smaller clubs - no Crewe there, you notice. (Furthermore, the money clubs can get for youth graduates they sell is also contingent on their category status: cat-2 clubs get less money than cat-1s.)

We're Category 2 (we nearly went down to Cat 3 in summer 2016 but Ken decided not to, wisely). As such, the highest level our lads can play at is at the top of the Professional Development League, which operates under the "Premier League 2". The PDL has two divisions, north and south; our boys won the north and then the end-of-season play-off which decides the national winner.

None of which is to argue with the drift of your point, but I thought it worth clarifying. The lads last season did as well as they could. (Worth noting that this season, they're mid-table.)

[nicholaldo]

I understand the point about Parky, and I accept that he might genuinely be reluctant to play younger players, but it runs deeper than that in my opinion.

The primary purpose of an Academy is to produce players that are good enough to play football professionally, not necessarily just players who are good enough to play in the club's first team. That aside, we've had more players break through recently (Vela, Holding, Clough and now Connell). One of the major problems we face though is that we are geographically disadvantaged in that the best local talent don't just fall under our radar, they also fall under the radar of the major clubs in the local area. Not only that but when under a transfer embargo and restricted on the number of professionally-contracted “Established Players” we could register, we understandably sacrificed a generation of Academy prospects in favour of senior, ready-to-play-in-the-first-team players. Niall Maher and Oscar Threlkeld might never have made it but if we were able to sign them to long contracts and provide them with the opportunity to play that youngsters at, let's say, Preston North End might get, they could have been developed into first-team regulars in time. And one final thing about the under 23's, they definitely deserve credit for winning promotion but it's worth bearing in mind that they were promoted from the third tier of youth football, and there is a yawning chasm between that level of youth football and senior Championship level football. Plus what should also be factored in is that success at that age group can be deceptive because the very best are by that stage either playing in the first team already or playing senior football elsewhere.

Note also that the graphic only refers to players aged 23 and under, which presumably can mean players signed permanently or temporarily from other clubs. Because of the financial problems that we have, we aren't able to properly compete in either of those markets and the vast majority of players that we sign are, by necessity, out of contract and signed on a short-term basis. That generally tends to mean that they're older. There are other considerations too, such as with us constantly being in the fight for either promotion or relegation lately we've needed players ready to contribute straight away, which obviously hampers our ability to bed the youth in and allow them to slowly grow. But nevertheless, it's still fair to say that often young players just need a chance and can surprise people.

Some very fair points here. One quibble, on the bold: it's slightly misleading (accidentally, I'm sure) to say they're Third Division champions. Bear with me:

The youth setup has changed a lot but the top tier of U23 (it's no longer U21) football is the badly-named Premier League 2, which has two divisions of 12 teams each, with two promotion/relegation places between them. So far so correct.

However, participation in either division of the Premier League is restricted to clubs who have Category 1 academies (namely Arsenal, Blackburn, Brighton, Chelsea, Derby, Everton, Leicester, Liverpool, Man City, Swansea, Spurs and West Ham in the top 12, Villa, Fulham, the rags, Boro, Newcastle, Norwich, Reading, Southampton, Stoke, Sunderland, West Brom and Wolves in the second division).

As you may remember, the award of a Category 1 licence is partly dependent on the money a club spends on its academy, which often rules out smaller clubs - no Crewe there, you notice. (Furthermore, the money clubs can get for youth graduates they sell is also contingent on their category status: cat-2 clubs get less money than cat-1s.)

We're Category 2 (we nearly went down to Cat 3 in summer 2016 but Ken decided not to, wisely). As such, the highest level our lads can play at is at the top of the Professional Development League, which operates under the "Premier League 2". The PDL has two divisions, north and south; our boys won the north and then the end-of-season play-off which decides the national winner.

None of which is to argue with the drift of your point, but I thought it worth clarifying. The lads last season did as well as they could. (Worth noting that this season, they're mid-table.)

If I were to be an arse I could argue that there's also the Premier League International Cup ( ), but ,no, you right. And we didn't get promoted either, I don't know why I suggested we did. I wanted to highlight though, that our youngsters, whilst certainly having done well, aren't playing at the highest level anymore. Of course, that's not to say that it should necessarily be a barrier to progression to the first team.

[The_Gun]

I understand the point about Parky, and I accept that he might genuinely be reluctant to play younger players, but it runs deeper than that in my opinion.

The primary purpose of an Academy is to produce players that are good enough to play football professionally, not necessarily just players who are good enough to play in the club's first team. That aside, we've had more players break through recently (Vela, Holding, Clough and now Connell). One of the major problems we face though is that we are geographically disadvantaged in that the best local talent don't just fall under our radar, they also fall under the radar of the major clubs in the local area. Not only that but when under a transfer embargo and restricted on the number of professionally-contracted “Established Players” we could register, we understandably sacrificed a generation of Academy prospects in favour of senior, ready-to-play-in-the-first-team players. Niall Maher and Oscar Threlkeld might never have made it but if we were able to sign them to long contracts and provide them with the opportunity to play that youngsters at, let's say, Preston North End might get, they could have been developed into first-team regulars in time. And one final thing about the under 23's, they definitely deserve credit for winning promotion but it's worth bearing in mind that they were promoted from the third tier of youth football, and there is a yawning chasm between that level of youth football and senior Championship level football. Plus what should also be factored in is that success at that age group can be deceptive because the very best are by that stage either playing in the first team already or playing senior football elsewhere.

Note also that the graphic only refers to players aged 23 and under, which presumably can mean players signed permanently or temporarily from other clubs. Because of the financial problems that we have, we aren't able to properly compete in either of those markets and the vast majority of players that we sign are, by necessity, out of contract and signed on a short-term basis. That generally tends to mean that they're older. There are other considerations too, such as with us constantly being in the fight for either promotion or relegation lately we've needed players ready to contribute straight away, which obviously hampers our ability to bed the youth in and allow them to slowly grow. But nevertheless, it's still fair to say that often young players just need a chance and can surprise people.

Some very fair points here. One quibble, on the bold: it's slightly misleading (accidentally, I'm sure) to say they're Third Division champions. Bear with me:

The youth setup has changed a lot but the top tier of U23 (it's no longer U21) football is the badly-named Premier League 2, which has two divisions of 12 teams each, with two promotion/relegation places between them. So far so correct.

However, participation in either division of the Premier League is restricted to clubs who have Category 1 academies (namely Arsenal, Blackburn, Brighton, Chelsea, Derby, Everton, Leicester, Liverpool, Man City, Swansea, Spurs and West Ham in the top 12, Villa, Fulham, the rags, Boro, Newcastle, Norwich, Reading, Southampton, Stoke, Sunderland, West Brom and Wolves in the second division).

As you may remember, the award of a Category 1 licence is partly dependent on the money a club spends on its academy, which often rules out smaller clubs - no Crewe there, you notice. (Furthermore, the money clubs can get for youth graduates they sell is also contingent on their category status: cat-2 clubs get less money than cat-1s.)

We're Category 2 (we nearly went down to Cat 3 in summer 2016 but Ken decided not to, wisely). As such, the highest level our lads can play at is at the top of the Professional Development League, which operates under the "Premier League 2". The PDL has two divisions, north and south; our boys won the north and then the end-of-season play-off which decides the national winner.

None of which is to argue with the drift of your point, but I thought it worth clarifying. The lads last season did as well as they could. (Worth noting that this season, they're mid-table.)

If I were to be an arse I could argue that there's also the Premier League International Cup ( ), but ,no, you right. And we didn't get promoted either, I don't know why I suggested we did. I wanted to highlight though, that our youngsters, whilst certainly having done well, aren't playing at the highest level anymore. Of course, that's not to say that it should necessarily be a barrier to progression to the first team.

Well our first team definitely aren't playing atvyhr highest level anymore either...

[nicholaldo]

I understand the point about Parky, and I accept that he might genuinely be reluctant to play younger players, but it runs deeper than that in my opinion.

The primary purpose of an Academy is to produce players that are good enough to play football professionally, not necessarily just players who are good enough to play in the club's first team. That aside, we've had more players break through recently (Vela, Holding, Clough and now Connell). One of the major problems we face though is that we are geographically disadvantaged in that the best local talent don't just fall under our radar, they also fall under the radar of the major clubs in the local area. Not only that but when under a transfer embargo and restricted on the number of professionally-contracted “Established Players” we could register, we understandably sacrificed a generation of Academy prospects in favour of senior, ready-to-play-in-the-first-team players. Niall Maher and Oscar Threlkeld might never have made it but if we were able to sign them to long contracts and provide them with the opportunity to play that youngsters at, let's say, Preston North End might get, they could have been developed into first-team regulars in time. And one final thing about the under 23's, they definitely deserve credit for winning promotion but it's worth bearing in mind that they were promoted from the third tier of youth football, and there is a yawning chasm between that level of youth football and senior Championship level football. Plus what should also be factored in is that success at that age group can be deceptive because the very best are by that stage either playing in the first team already or playing senior football elsewhere.

Note also that the graphic only refers to players aged 23 and under, which presumably can mean players signed permanently or temporarily from other clubs. Because of the financial problems that we have, we aren't able to properly compete in either of those markets and the vast majority of players that we sign are, by necessity, out of contract and signed on a short-term basis. That generally tends to mean that they're older. There are other considerations too, such as with us constantly being in the fight for either promotion or relegation lately we've needed players ready to contribute straight away, which obviously hampers our ability to bed the youth in and allow them to slowly grow. But nevertheless, it's still fair to say that often young players just need a chance and can surprise people.

Some very fair points here. One quibble, on the bold: it's slightly misleading (accidentally, I'm sure) to say they're Third Division champions. Bear with me:

The youth setup has changed a lot but the top tier of U23 (it's no longer U21) football is the badly-named Premier League 2, which has two divisions of 12 teams each, with two promotion/relegation places between them. So far so correct.

However, participation in either division of the Premier League is restricted to clubs who have Category 1 academies (namely Arsenal, Blackburn, Brighton, Chelsea, Derby, Everton, Leicester, Liverpool, Man City, Swansea, Spurs and West Ham in the top 12, Villa, Fulham, the rags, Boro, Newcastle, Norwich, Reading, Southampton, Stoke, Sunderland, West Brom and Wolves in the second division).

As you may remember, the award of a Category 1 licence is partly dependent on the money a club spends on its academy, which often rules out smaller clubs - no Crewe there, you notice. (Furthermore, the money clubs can get for youth graduates they sell is also contingent on their category status: cat-2 clubs get less money than cat-1s.)

We're Category 2 (we nearly went down to Cat 3 in summer 2016 but Ken decided not to, wisely). As such, the highest level our lads can play at is at the top of the Professional Development League, which operates under the "Premier League 2". The PDL has two divisions, north and south; our boys won the north and then the end-of-season play-off which decides the national winner.

None of which is to argue with the drift of your point, but I thought it worth clarifying. The lads last season did as well as they could. (Worth noting that this season, they're mid-table.)

If I were to be an arse I could argue that there's also the Premier League International Cup ( ), but ,no, you right. And we didn't get promoted either, I don't know why I suggested we did. I wanted to highlight though, that our youngsters, whilst certainly having done well, aren't playing at the highest level anymore. Of course, that's not to say that it should necessarily be a barrier to progression to the first team.

Well our first team definitely aren't playing atvyhr highest level anymore either...

No, but they are playing at the second highest. And when we've previously brought youngsters through at this level (Vela, Clough, Holding) we had a Category 1 Academy and were playing against the very best youth teams regularly. Now we don't and aren't, which, as posted above, shouldn't have to mean that they can't make it, but it is worth noting.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

If I were to be an arse I could argue that there's also the Premier League International Cup ( ), but ,no, you right. And we didn't get promoted either, I don't know why I suggested we did. I wanted to highlight though, that our youngsters, whilst certainly having done well, aren't playing at the highest level anymore. Of course, that's not to say that it should necessarily be a barrier to progression to the first team.

All completely fair enough, was just neatening a point of order.

Notable also that things don't always go through a smooth succession in the proscribed age order. Connell's still only 17, and as far as I can see didn't make his U23 debut until mid-September: the last eight minutes in a 0-0 at home to Ipswich. If they're good enough, they're old enough - the debate will always be whether they're good enough, and our guess is simply not as well-informed as those who see them every day, from Didsy to Parky.

[TonyDomingos]

The u23s lost their 5th in 7 this evening. 2-4 v Burnley. They were leading 2-0 at ht and it was 2-2 with 10 mins to go.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

The u23s lost their 5th in 7 this evening. 2-4 v Burnley. They were leading 2-0 at ht and it was 2-2 with 10 mins to go.

Get ‘em in the first team! Managed by Didsy! Etc...

Naw, it’s a pity they’ve lost their way a bit. You do worry how bone-deep the club’s malaise is. And of course the first team now share space with the kids - which is great for intra-club relationships, progression paths etc, but what if the first team reeks of mortality?

[TANGODANCER]

The u23s lost their 5th in 7 this evening. 2-4 v Burnley. They were leading 2-0 at ht and it was 2-2 with 10 mins to go.

Get ‘em in the first team! Managed by Didsy! Etc...

Naw, it’s a pity they’ve lost their way a bit. You do worry how bone-deep the club’s malaise is. And of course the first team now share space with the kids - which is great for intra-club relationships, progression paths etc, but what if the first team reeks of mortality?

I'm thinking its time now for all the younger Wanderers to step forth and be famous. We're creaking at the seams everywhere and (football -wise) some of our lads are reaching their zeniths. Nothing lasts forever; it isn't even certain that Wizard and Slade will figure in next years Christmas charts, or that ripped jeans and tattoos won't cause a financial crisis by going out of fashion. The new "You get what you wished for" era is upon us and trips to the moon will soon replace a fortnight in Benidorm or Alicante. Stride forth the new Wanderers, Tripe and Trotters step down in favour of Sushi and caviar, French bulldogs called Piere and Angelique will replace Collies and Boxer dogs and the Burnden, Reebok and Macron venues will become distant memories as the University of Bolton Stadium is bought by the Sultan of Abracadabra .If it all goes wrong, well, you can always blame the older generation...

The times they have a-changed Mr Dylan ....

[TonyDomingos]

The u23s lost their 5th in 7 this evening. 2-4 v Burnley. They were leading 2-0 at ht and it was 2-2 with 10 mins to go.

Tonight they were 3-1 up v Barnsley with five minutes to go. Ended 3-3.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

The u23s lost their 5th in 7 this evening. 2-4 v Burnley. They were leading 2-0 at ht and it was 2-2 with 10 mins to go.

Tonight they were 3-1 up v Barnsley with five minutes to go. Ended 3-3.

But at least we may have set a new mark for the finest-named Wanderers scorer ever: Darren Raekwon McIntosh-Buffonge.

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/1 ... -barnsley/

[TANGODANCER]

The u23s lost their 5th in 7 this evening. 2-4 v Burnley. They were leading 2-0 at ht and it was 2-2 with 10 mins to go.

Tonight they were 3-1 up v Barnsley with five minutes to go. Ended 3-3.

Obviously been training with the first XI . Shame. That's in real need of addressing.

[TonyDomingos]

The u23s lost their 5th in 7 this evening. 2-4 v Burnley. They were leading 2-0 at ht and it was 2-2 with 10 mins to go.

Tonight they were 3-1 up v Barnsley with five minutes to go. Ended 3-3.

But at least we may have set a new mark for the finest-named Wanderers scorer ever: Darren Raekwon McIntosh-Buffonge.

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/1 ... -barnsley/

He of "there's only one .... " fame?