Jump to content
Chrysalis

Players development vs the team

Recommended Posts

This seems to be a subject some people don't want to address.  It applies to any player, although in recent times its probably been most apparent with Nacho and Barnes.

 

Couple of questions for those who seem to think we can carry players for months on end.

 

How long do young players get given to improve?  Pretend you been asked by your boss so you "have" to give an answer.

 

Does a player's development needs have higher priority than the good of the team?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who from the usual starting 11 are we carrying ? Every player has made a worth while contribution this season. 

 

In terms of young players, you need give them at least a year to show they’ve got the ability to play at this level but it generally is an ongoing thing. Every players development takes time. For example, we find ourselves in an unusual position where we have quite a few youngish players at one time. Consistency takes time to development but what counter acts that is there moments in games. 

 

Its a process that requires a bit of intelligence from the watching public - off games are sometime a by product of this process. Can we go out and buy a £50 million ready made superstar ? No. So this is how the club produces their own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have just won 8 in a row, we are not carrying anyone! FFS we are second in the league, one draw and this place melts down.

Young players are inconsistent that’s a fact wherever you go.

Question back: How do you expect players to develop without playing them?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The team and what is best for the good of the team isn’t defined by  a moment in time. It is the now and the future. It’s a judgment call on a case by case basis as to how much time should be given to a player so I can’t see how there can be a definitive answer to the OP

 

Vardy didn’t have a great first season did he but he has more than repaid the patience and investment in his potential 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Given where we are in the league we're unlikely to win the title, but we're also unlikely to miss out on CL football, which means that 'all' there is to play for is the £5-6m of prize money from league position.

 

Over the next 21 games we're not likely to lose 13 more points by playing Barnes, for instance, when compared to whoever his replacement is (Albrighton? Perez?), so we wouldn't miss out on CL football as a result of him getting game time. As a result I don't see why we wouldn't continue to put our faith in him, especially as we all know what he could be capable of when he really hits his stride.

 

 

It's not like we're benching a superstar in favour of a youngster in the middle of a close-fought title race. We're rotating one good player with a promising (also good) player whilst fairly secure with our club's position.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

This seems to be a subject some people don't want to address.  It applies to any player, although in recent times its probably been most apparent with Nacho and Barnes.

 

Couple of questions for those who seem to think we can carry players for months on end.

 

How long do young players get given to improve?  Pretend you been asked by your boss so you "have" to give an answer.

 

Does a player's development needs have higher priority than the good of the team?

How long would you have given Vardy to bed in to the Championship and/or Premier League?  Would you have binned him off for that paltry hand full of goals in his first season with us, or the 5 goals in 30 odd games in his first season in the Prem? 

 

We'd be a pretty different team now if we hadn't shown faith in him by keep playing him wouldn't we!

Edited by Tommo220
Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange how Barnes draws criticism yet Albrighton and Gray have similar numbers. Neither of them get anything like 5 league goals a season.

 

Barnes was playing for WBA this time last year, in the second division, for a side that aren't half as good as they are this season. It's alright people saying "he has been in our team for a year now" but at least three of those months were under a previous manager in addition to Barnes not actually starting every week.

 

Ideally, it'd be good for him to be getting loaned out again but to another PL side but like I said our other wide options aren't exactly outstanding. We need a quality winger and we haven't had that since Mahrez.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is that while Barnes is still developing, he is also still worth a starting place and contributing.  He's not a passenger.

 

The flip side of OPs argument is to spend big which is high risk and with a good chance that it may not work whilst consigning Barnes to the bench and stalling his path to becoming the player most of us can see he has the potential to become.  Lose lose.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Fox92 said:

Strange how Barnes draws criticism yet Albrighton and Gray have similar numbers. Neither of them get anything like 5 league goals a season.

 

Barnes was playing for WBA this time last year, in the second division, for a side that aren't half as good as they are this season. It's alright people saying "he has been in our team for a year now" but at least three of those months were under a previous manager in addition to Barnes not actually starting every week.

 

Ideally, it'd be good for him to be getting loaned out again but to another PL side but like I said our other wide options aren't exactly outstanding. We need a quality winger and we haven't had that since Mahrez.

How would a loan be better for him or for us? Serious question, I just don’t follow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t get it. The whole reason we’re in a position where maybe every other club in England bar 2 is envious of us is because we have been giving young players a chance to play. And it’s the only way success is sustainable. Maybe Barnes “works out” (and I’d argue he already has), maybe he doesn’t. You win some you lose some. But when a certain percentage do work out and you essentially create a valuable asset - whether you sell or keep - out of nothing, that’s how Leicester City becomes a Champions League team. It’s literally working in front of our eyes but some people don’t see it.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Oxfordfox83 said:

How would a loan be better for him or for us? Serious question, I just don’t follow.

Plays regular in a decent side... As I said though, I meant if we actually had quality competition out wide but we don’t so it’s irrelevant really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, coalvillefox said:

Seeing us go on a winning streak is liking watching a child blow up a balloon. Each breath is equal to a win and the more we win the bigger the balloon gets, but, the bigger the balloon gets the louder the bang when the winning runs ends and the bigger the over reaction.

What a beautiful analogy 

 

Image result for leo dicaprio meme cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate themightyfin's answer of their opinion on how long to give players to develop, I think 2-3 years is a "huge" amount of time to be consistently in the first team when under performing.  But I appreciate the answer thank you, which is what I wanted.

 

Sadly everyone who replied avoided the second question, of whether a player or the team comes first.  Instead seemed more interested to bash my post instead.  It isnt a trick question, there is no right or wrong answer, its just each person's opinion which I wanted to know.

Edited by Chrysalis
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chrysalis said:

I appreciate themightyfin's answer of their opinion on how long to give players to develop, I think 2-3 years is a "huge" amount of time to be consistently in the first team when under performing.  But I appreciate the answer thank you, which is what I wanted.

 

Sadly everyone who replied avoided the second question, of whether a player or the team comes first.  Instead seemed more interested to bash my post instead.  It isnt a trick question, there is no right or wrong answer, its just each person's opinion which I wanted to know.

I think the main issue is that you seem to think the notion of playing Barnes week-in, week-out is detrimental to the team  and only positive to the player himself. I, as do most people here believe it's both positive to the team AND the player - since Barnes is a tidy player who does his bit and will hopefully improve as we play him more and is by no means a passenger.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think his eagerness to shoot is hurting the team yes.,

 

It is a bit like asking vardy to play CB, and kasper as CF.  People not doing what they best at.  It would hurt barnes development, hence I see it as a conflict of whats best for the team and whats best for the player.

 

The question is a general one tho, so even if you disagree with me on barnes, its still a question I would appreciate an opinion on, even if you think it doesnt apply to barnes or didnt previously apply to nacho.

Edited by Chrysalis
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...