The Players From Our Youth Setup

[MelvinBragg]

I touched upon it in the Ross County match thread but it interests me that if it seems a player from our youth setup doesn't look like he's going to become a first team regular by the age of 21, we as fans (and as a club) are happy to regard them as not good enough and cast them aside. There seems little scope for these players to be seen as good enough as backup even if they don't have what it takes to be a regular first pick. When it's generally accepted that it's a squad game these days, and we then sign players of a similar level who are older and have less potential to be late bloomers (like a Jamie Dolan or a Stephen Craigan) and who are probably on a higher wage, it seems strange.

 

A couple of examples.

 

We let Lawless go and sign Lionel Ainsworth. Now Ainsworth has been a good signing and when we let Lawless go we had Chris Humphrey but had we kept Lawless as a backup player, would we have needed to sign Ainsworth when Humphrey left?

 

This season. We have signed Robinson and let Moore go out on loan. For all that Robinson has contributed, even Moore's detractors could surely see that Moore would offer as much.

 

There have been others. Signing Nathan Thomas when Dom Thomas could easily have sat on the bench. Omar Daley when we had others who could have provided backup. Marc Fitzpatrick strikes me as another like Jack Leitch who was a jack of all trades midfielder that was never accepted (despite being a crucial part of a good McGhee team, first time round) because he never progressed the way some expected

 

Are we going to continue in this vein of letting young players go only to bring in journeymen to take their places on the bench? It seems to make no financial sense to me at a time when every penny is a prisoner.

 

Do we as fans have to accept that not every young player is going to be a McFadden, Murphy, Reynolds or Hutchinson and sometimes just being a Lasley, Hammell, Craigan or just good enough to step in for these guys from time to time is something that helps our club, not by bringing money in but by preventing us from spending it..?

 

Interested to hear opinions on this..

[weeyin]

Like I said in the other thread, McGhee gave an interview where he was pretty clear that his first target was to get 40 points - as that is what he felt would secure our SPFL status - and that would be with his more experienced players. After that, whether that happened in January or April, he was going to play more of the youngsters. The interview was immediately after he had been to see Les, and I imagine that was one of the topics of their conversation.

 

That seems like a reasonable approach, and I'm happy to wait to see if that happens.

[Lobey_Dosser]

There's nothing better than seeing a youth product making his mark but we've also been guilty of hanging onto some for too long, McHugh being the prime example in recent times.

 

In my mind, Lawless is the only one that's went on to prove Motherwell were wrong to let him go and from what we were told, this was purely due to finance.

[MelvinBragg]

There's nothing better than seeing a youth product making his mark but we've also been guilty of hanging onto some for too long, McHugh being the prime example in recent times.

 

In my mind, Lawless is the only one that's went on to prove Motherwell were wrong to let him go and from what we were told, this was purely due to finance.

Due to finance in what respect? Pretty sure that whoever we brought in to sit on the bench would have cost us more than it would having Lawless as backup.

 

Of course, assuming Lawless would have been happy with that role...

[Lobey_Dosser]

Due to finance in what respect? Pretty sure that whoever we brought in to sit on the bench would have cost us more than it would having Lawless as backup.

 

Of course, assuming Lawless would have been happy with that role...

Can't remember the exact details but I think it related to the failure of the Murphy/Blackpool deal at the time of negotiation.

[MelvinBragg]

Like I said in the other thread, McGhee gave an interview where he was pretty clear that his first target was to get 40 points - as that is what he felt would secure our SPFL status - and that would be with his more experienced players. After that, whether that happened in January or April, he was going to play more of the youngsters. The interview was immediately after he had been to see Les, and I imagine that was one of the topics of their conversation.

 

That seems like a reasonable approach, and I'm happy to wait to see if that happens.

To me, that seems utterly pointless. You then end up with a situation with Cadden, Watt, Thomas and any others getting game time when the senior professionals around them will have effectively downed tools. Hardly an environment to judge them in. Also feel you can't truly judge a player until you've seen how he responds in a game that matters. Playing Cadden on the third last week of the season and we're guaranteed to finish between 7th and 9th, what will you learn about his ability to cope under pressure?

 

Why would the experienced players have downed tools? Well, if your manager is quoted as effectively saying 40 points is job done, then win bonuses or not, you're thinking "job done". Anyone remember the performances (if you can call them that) in the run up to the Scottish Cup Final a few years back?

 

And that's one of the reasons our youth policy fails. Other clubs trust their young players. We don't...

[Desp]

And that's one of the reasons our youth policy fails. Other clubs trust their young players. We don't...

 

I understand where you're coming from, but I think this bit is a bit harsh.

 

We trusted Lee Erwin to keep us in the division last year, rather than go with John Sutton. It paid off in the end. Going back, we've put guys like Reynolds, Murphy, Carswell in the side and made them regulars. Erwin, Reynolds and Murphy alone have made the club a decent bit of money. Not too far off £1m in transfer fees I'd suggest.

 

Currently, the club is putting their trust in Ben Hall to play week in, week out. He started at Celtic Park.

 

I've always been one for saying if they are good enough, they'll get a chance. Is there anyone in the youth setup you feel deserves more of a crack (Leitch aside, as that's been covered)? The main two that are spoken about are Luke Watt & Dom Thomas. For all his critics, do you feel Josh Law deserves to be dropped in favour of Watt? Not for me. Likewise with Thomas, if McGhee gets his favoured side out, it's three midfielders and a winger. From Johnson, Ainsworth and Thomas to choose from, the youngster would be third in line in my book.

[Yassin]

I'd imagine it's more "reach 40 points,then readjust our goals once we're safe". Sort of like Ranieri coming out and saying that Leicester's initial goal of 40 points is now 79.

[capt_oats]

Given McGhee has been parachuted in this season presumably with an initial remit to turn us around, stabilise and make sure we're not cutting about the play-offs again come May then I can understand why he's talking about reaching 40 points as a shorthand for being safe then we'll look at playing the younger guys. As a general rule though it'd be fairly daft at the start of each season to say "right, we'll wait until we get until 40 points before any of the 20s get a regular run." There's an obvious danger of being far too literal in interpretation.

 

Beyond that as Desp said he's given Ben Hall a shot but equally has been at pains to point out that he's been able to do that because he's had McManus playing alongside him, given McGhee inherited this team then he's really having to work with the hand he's been dealt. Though he wasn't one of our youth players Grimshaw is 20 and was getting a game despite his run of games with us being his first shot at first team football but that was balanced out by him playing alongside Pearson and Lasley who provided experience in that area of the park. I can understand why he'd have been hesitant to put out a midfield 3 of say; Pearson, Grimshaw and Cadden or Cadden, Lasley and Leitch. That's not necessarily down to a lack of trust.

 

Either way It's fairly clear that there needs to be a balance between youth and experience even Man United's Class of 92 had a spine of Schmeichel, Bruce, Pallister, Keane, and Cantona. The one thing I would say is that you can see who the club are trying to bring through and where they fit but I think it's a case of the balance needing to be right.

 

In general I'm very much in favour of the whole "if you're good enough, you're old enough" thing however equally in the case of someone like Moore, look at the difference in his record when he's getting starts (Cowdenbeath, Ayr) vs his record with Motherwell where he's largely been coming off the bench. At his age and with his injury record the best thing for him I'd have thought would be to play and get games. Were he still at the club just now then given the form that Moult and McDonald are in it's difficult to imagine that he'd be getting any more minutes than either Clarkson or Robinson which being blunt wouldn't help him develop in any way.

[Del_Superwell]

McGhee said at the clubs AGM back in December that they have changed things around in the youth setup with the main aim of having young players ready made for first team football by the age of 18. He is the says the current under 20s set up is wrong for all clubs and they want reserve football in order to pitch kids in against more experienced pros to enhance their development further. That's why we have loaned a few boys in order to get game time and development the club doesn't feel they have at under 20s level.

[Spiderpig]

Has it ever occurred to anyone that for all the young players we have on the books there may not be any of them ready to step up.Its a big jump in standards and the quality of opposition you are playing against from the u21's to the 1st team a player might look great in one and out of his depth in the other, if McGhee and the coaching staff think they are ready they will get their chance, ie Ben Hall

[Kmcalpin]

In my mind, Lawless is the only one that's went on to prove Motherwell were wrong to let him go and from what we were told, this was purely due to finance.

This. Lawless was very much an exception and I'd struggle to name many other young lads who we discarded and then went on to success elsewhere. In his case I wonder if his off the field problems contributed to his release. I'm all for giving young lads an opportunity but they have to have talent and character. Looking at other Premiership clubs most give one or two youngsters a chance but very few play more than the odd one in their first teams.

 

A manager may look at the youngsters he has on his books and knows for sure, well almost sure, that none are ready to step up and so he may go out and sign someone, who may or may be a success. Its akin to placing a risky bet as opposed to betting on a nohoper (at that point in time).

[MelvinBragg]

Has it ever occurred to anyone that for all the young players we have on the books there may not be any of them ready to step up.Its a big jump in standards and the quality of opposition you are playing against from the u21's to the 1st team a player might look great in one and out of his depth in the other, if McGhee and the coaching staff think they are ready they will get their chance, ie Ben Hall

Indeed, that might be the case. But if playing Cadden on Saturday would have been worse than playing a right back in centre midfield and a left back at right back then he must be a mile away from first team action.

 

For me, it just sends out the wrong message to our U20 midfielders that if we're two midfielders short, we'll start with two wingers for the first time in months and play a full back in midfield rather than give them a shot. They're entitled to think "what's the point?"...

[ropy]

The point of having a squad is to plug gaps when there are absences, there was a gap in midfield so slot in a midfielder from the squad. Simple? We would soon learn if they are good enough, at the moment the managements assumption is that they are not. So get shot?

[Shaka]

Its laughable we still count Dom Thomas,Craig Moore etc as inexperienced youngsters. Teams all over the country & world blood players that are 17/18/19 all the time, our "kids" are 20/21/22. Look at the likes of Falkirk,they have 19 & 20 year old lads leaving to sign for English teams having played up to 70 or 80 first team games.We have the occasional youngster break through then 3 or 4 lads sit around the fringes for 3 years before leaving.

[MelvinBragg]

Its laughable we still count Dom Thomas,Craig Moore etc as inexperienced youngsters. Teams all over the country & world blood players that are 17/18/19 all the time, our "kids" are 20/21/22. Look at the likes of Falkirk,they have 19 & 20 year old lads leaving to sign for English teams having played up to 70 or 80 first team games.We have the occasional youngster break through then 3 or 4 lads sit around the fringes for 3 years before leaving.

Aye, and if we continue to wait until we are "safe" every season before blooding youngsters, it'll continue to be a problem.

 

And we wonder why Accies and Dundee United get larger fees. McCarthy, Hendrie, Gauld and Robertson all played around 50 games by the age our players make their debuts. Are they better than our players? Maybe, but the difference is they get a chance to prove it. Compare our treatment of Luke Watt to that of Andy Robertson at United or Hendrie at Accies...

 

EDIT Just checked. Hendrie left Accies last summer at the age of 20, having played 100 games. Gauld left United at 18 and a half having played 40 odd games.

[Onthefringes]

There's nothing better than seeing a youth product making his mark but we've also been guilty of hanging onto some for too long, McHugh being the prime example in recent times.

In my mind, Lawless is the only one that's went on to prove Motherwell were wrong to let him go and from what we were told, this was purely due to finance.

Motherwell were wrong? I'd love to know what Lawless has achieved to prove this.

[ropy]

Would Lawless get in our team? I fully accept he has made a worthwhile career at a Premiership club but would he be in our first 11?

[Joeboy]

I think our youth system majorly needs reassessing from the bottom up. It has failed so badly in recent years. The root cause of the failing has me wondering. It could be any one of

• Players not being properly nurtured, poor level of coaching
• Poor standard of players continually being recruited
• Players not fulfilling their potential
• Inability to attract sufficiently good players
• Players genuinely not being given a chance

For me, it's a common misconception that young homegrown players are given a chance at Motherwell, particularly those from our own academy. None of our managers of late have given youth a fair chance. McCall was the best manager we've had in my time, but that was his main downfall. I can actually remember 'Flow defending McCall's youth development stats by name-checking the players he had given a chance to, including Ross Stewart......who's first team experience amounted to a minute at the end of the Ross County game to give Darren Randolph a standing ovation.

 

You wonder whether it is because they genuinely aren't good enough, there is evidence to back that up. Of all our youth products currently playing professionally, only Paul Quinn, Mark Reynolds and Steven Lawless have left and are playing at the same level (Alan Martin too if you count getting a skelf in his arse on Accies bench) as Motherwell and really only Jamie Murphy and Lee Erwin are playing at a higher level than Motherwell. "Playing" perhaps an exaggeration for Erwin, again like Martin. If that is the case, then we need to evaluate why all the players that we bring through our youth coaching aren't making it, even at the top level in Scotland.

 

I think McGhee is a good manager and I'm impressed with the job he's doing so far, but his only real progress in terms of youth is the introduction of Ben Hall. Fair play to him for having faith in an 18 year old to step in, but it's not like he's pitched him in at the expense of an experienced campaigner, he's being preferred to two 22 year olds, one of whom had never played professionally till the East Fife game in August. Time will tell if McGhee is willing to put his money where his mouth is regarding youth, but Saturday would make me think against it. If he really was, I'd have thought Luke Watt would have come in instead of Chalmers and Hammell would have stayed put or alternatively Cadden would have been a straight swap for one of the central midfielders.

 

I am beginning to think that the failings of our youth system, coupled with Accies' success of theirs is beginning to cost us attracting the players we want in their formative years. If I was a parent of a child local to the area and my kid had an offer from Motherwell and from Accies, as much as it pains me to say it, I would advise them to go to Accies as they would have much more chance of making a career of it there than Motherwell, if the recent past is anything to go by.

[Lobey_Dosser]

Motherwell were wrong? I'd love to know what Lawless has achieved to prove this.

He's went on to be a solid premier league player. Not a world beater but good enough to be in a Motherwell squad. Thistle also rejected an £80k bid 6 months after we released him.

[MelvinBragg]

Would Lawless get in our team? I fully accept he has made a worthwhile career at a Premiership club but would he be in our first 11?

Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't but he's just an example of a young player who didn't get a chance at Fir Park to prove whether he was good enough or not because of managers choosing to bring in players from further afield to sit on the bench...

[Kmcalpin]

What we have to remember is that the current crop of youngsters were recruited some years ago, probably during the reign of Stuart McCall, Craig Brown or earlier. The success or otherwise of our current set up won't become clear for a few years yet. Mark McGhee is on record as saying that good prospects should be getting blooded at the age of 17/18/19.

[Shaka]

Mark McGhee is on record as saying that good prospects should be getting blooded at the age of 17/18/19.

Exactly. We have Luke Watt & Chris Cadden at the top end of that bracket, who have played a lot of U20 football and impressed at that level AND have played the odd first team game,equally impressing but when we have a chance to "blood" them properly we bypass them in favour of destroying team continuity so McGhee really has to show the courage of his convictons

[MelvinBragg]

Exactly. We have Luke Watt & Chris Cadden at the top end of that bracket, who have played a lot of U20 football and impressed at that level AND have played the odd first team game,equally impressing but when we have a chance to "blood" them properly we bypass them in favour of destroying team continuity so McGhee really has to show the courage of his convictons

Mark McGhee talks a good game on blooming young players. His track record suggests otherwise...

[capt_oats]

I think it's possible that we're conflating two different issues here in so much as Saturday, to me, was just flat out poor judgement rather than being indicative of any overall issue McGhee has with the crop of 20s. Put simply, he's shown enough faith in these players to involve them in the first team in so much as Hall started while both Cadden and Thomas were on the bench and Watt has been on the bench recently too. If he didn't have *faith* in them they wouldn't be involved in a match day squad. They'd be sat in the 20s or just out the picture in the same way someone like Jake Taylor was.

 

Have the club historically been poor at bringing through youth players and showing faith in them? Absolutely. No argument from me on that.

 

However for me that view and McGhee's team selection on Saturday aren't necessarily linked. It may be the case that McGhee simply didn't think Hearts away at Tynecastle was a good fixture to start some of the younger guys. Cadden, as an example, to the best of my knowledge isn't a holding midfielder so he'd not have been been an obvious choice to replace Lasley (if he'd be replacing anyone it'd be Grimshaw and that spot went to Ainsworth), while Laing is as untried in there as Law and Leitch for whatever reason hasn't kicked a ball in the first team for months.

 

It'd seem to me that on Saturday McGhee made the decision that he wanted to start with players who have a decent amount of first team experience this season. It's all ifs and buts however had we been playing say Killie at Fir Park then obviously I don't know but I don't think there would have been as much of a re-shuffle. Would starting Watt and Cadden have got us a better result? It may have but at the same time if we had taken a total doing then we'd probably still have the same thread on here it'd just be with a slant about how our young players aren't good enough to to compete which again rightly or wrongly is probably a discussion McGhee would have been keen for us to avoid.

 

To get back on track; The main issue I have with regards youth development at the club is that, in my opinion, in recent years we don't really seem to have done a very good job at making players *better*. We may well give some a platform however we don't necessarily improve them. Take someone like Hutchinson, he was clearly an excellent talent however equally, again in my opinion, he was still making the same mistakes and prone to the same errors when he left as he was when he stepped in to the team. Erwin as another example of someone who was given some games but was shunted out to the left wing, it was only really under Baraclough that he started to find his feet and actually improve and even more so when you look at how he benefited from playing alongside McDonald (you can probably point to how McManus is helping Hall along too).

 

It's not really enough for them simply to get into the first team, the actual development part shouldn't be a glass ceiling when they actually start getting games and I think in a way that's where the 'sink or swim' mentality fails a bit. The first team needs to be conducive to making these players better. Again, I reckon we've got more chance of seeing someone like Cadden starting games if he's partnered alongside Lasley and Pearson.