Jump to content

Lamare Bogarde


lexicon

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Really didn’t stand out in the game tonight and at fault for their second goal, time is on his side obviously. Unsure on him as a right back.

But Triston Rowe stood out a lot when he came on at RB! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought he struggled, as a youth player, playing out of position is allowed to do. It'll be exciting tp follow his and Kosta's progression, maybe we, without having to spend any money, will be able to replacd Cash, if given time and possibilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations to Lamar Bogarde on earning the status of first Villatalk Whipping Boy  of the new season!

What’s the betting these pages in six months’ time will be ringing with praise for a new rising star? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, CVByrne said:

Like it's a 99% chance he's sold in June as a sacrifice to the PSR Gods.

How depressing football has become! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/09/2024 at 07:42, CVByrne said:

Like it's a 99% chance he's sold in June as a sacrifice to the PSR Gods. So however well he does is a boost for our sale price. 

PSR does make it difficult to create an attachment to any young players these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Andy_10 said:

PSR does make it difficult to create an attachment to any young players these days.

I don’t think it’s only about PSR but the level we’re at/we aim to be, have more requirements. I don’t think if Emery rated Archer we’d have sold him for example. Young players prefer more game time as well. So for many players we’ll just smtry and sell for any profit. But for some choosing ones we’ll use them a season or two to fell the squad while raising their value then see if they’re up there to be part of the first team. 
The player that we’ve sold for psr reasons while regretting would possibly be Kellyman as his potential is another level. But all the others were really below the level (Jaden possibly but we got him back already).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, abdulaziz1 said:

I don’t think it’s only about PSR but the level we’re at/we aim to be, have more requirements. I don’t think if Emery rated Archer we’d have sold him for example. Young players prefer more game time as well. So for many players we’ll just smtry and sell for any profit. But for some choosing ones we’ll use them a season or two to fell the squad while raising their value then see if they’re up there to be part of the first team. 
The player that we’ve sold for psr reasons while regretting would possibly be Kellyman as his potential is another level. But all the others were really below the level (Jaden possibly but we got him back already).

I understand what you are saying, & I agree, to a degree, especially about Kellyman, but at the same time, isn't having a squad that doesn't cost the earth but is capable of taking on most challenges just as important.

A point that I have often made (not on here, as I have only been back for five minutes), is that having a strong squad isn't necessarily about having 25 players who are all world beaters in their positions. Mostly because we couldn't afford to do that, or keep them all happy. So how do we supplement a squad to bulk it out so that we aren't beaten in cups or knackered at the end of the season. And for me personally, I think that means developing a few youngsters who have proven that they can more than hack it at Championship level, so when we face teams in cups that are Championship standard or lower, or even in the League when we face the upper Championship standard promoted teams, we pull out a couple of the young players that we have specifically developed for that reason. We allow a first choice option a rest & give a youngster more game time. Hopefully making us not so knackered at the end of the season & with the experience of the young players, hopefully boosting their value.

And the key to my point is about how they played while out on loan in the Championship

Last season for example, there were times that I think we could have used Iroegbunam a bit after Kamara got injured & allowed Douglas Luiz to play his very best football in the position that suits him the most. And Iroegbunam may have been ready had he been given more opportunities against lower level opposition once he came back from his loans. Same with Aaron Ramsey, Archer & Philogene. Granted we purchased back Philogene, but only after he had a season similar to how Archer & A. Ramsey had prior. Each of those players excelled while on loan in the Championship. All could have played against upper Championship & below standard teams in the cups, along with the promoted teams in the Premier League. In my humble opinion.

Thats four players that we could have used in the squad across the season & could have helped us stay fresh enough to have maybe won that cup. And if we want to win things, we are going to have to be a bit more ruthless & selfish about players wanting more game time. "Want more game time? Fine. Prove you deserve it."

I do however agree about Kellyman. He is one of the more recent young players that we have invested in that are in a higher bracket of quality than a lot that have come through our academy before. And I think we will find a few more that will impress over time. And thats where both of our points really kick in for me. We have to test them to know if they are of sufficient quality. We test them as I mentioned, but send them on higher quality loans, & the cream will rise to the top & be of higher quality all round, as you mentioned. And hopefully they stick around & we don't become seen as a PSR fodder factory.

Youth development is not an exact science though & if I knew enough about it, I wouldn't be sat here discussing it on a forum on a Friday morning & would be highly paid doing it for The Villa, lol.

Edited by Andy_10
Spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Andy_10 said:

PSR does make it difficult to create an attachment to any young players these days.

Completely

Squad cost rule is a step in right direction. 

Next step should be allowing an owner to top up the "income" side of the squad cost to tune of say £50m or something. Allowing clubs some mobility to invest without making it limitless for nation states to spend recklessly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

Completely

Squad cost rule is a step in right direction. 

Next step should be allowing an owner to top up the "income" side of the squad cost to tune of say £50m or something. Allowing clubs some mobility to invest without making it limitless for nation states to spend recklessly. 

I think that there should be some sort of cap related to either the lowest spenders or the highest.

So that we ALL have the ability to spend 'up to' £XXX amount, NOT tied to revenue.

And in that we should obviously need to show evidence that we not only have the ability to spend £XXX in the short term, but also to be able to sustain that spending in the long term too. If you have debt, you clearly cant afford to spend the same as those that don't. 

That for me is the only way that keeps it fair to all teams involved & is actually about not spending over one's means.

I know Im being naive, probably wilfully ignorant, because the rules are probably set up the way they are for a reason & my knowledge of finances & budgets is limited to my own direct debits & standing orders to pay my bills, lol, but I dream about a day when the football playing field is level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Andy_10 said:

I understand what you are saying, & I agree, to a degree, especially about Kellyman, but at the same time, isn't having a squad that doesn't cost the earth but is capable of taking on most challenges just as important.

A point that I have often made (not on here, as I have only been back for five minutes), is that having a strong squad isn't necessarily about having 25 players who are all world beaters in their positions. Mostly because we couldn't afford to do that, or keep them all happy. So how do we supplement a squad to bulk it out so that we aren't beaten in cups or knackered at the end of the season. And for me personally, I think that means developing a few youngsters who have proven that they can more than hack it at Championship level, so when we face teams in cups that are Championship standard or lower, or even in the League when we face the upper Championship standard promoted teams, we pull out a couple of the young players that we have specifically developed for that reason. We allow a first choice option a rest & give a youngster more game time. Hopefully making us not so knackered at the end of the season & with the experience of the young players, hopefully boosting their value.

And the key to my point is about how they played while out on loan in the Championship

Last season for example, there were times that I think we could have used Iroegbunam a bit after Kamara got injured & allowed Douglas Luiz to play his very best football in the position that suits him the most. And Iroegbunam may have been ready had he been given more opportunities against lower level opposition once he came back from his loans. Same with Aaron Ramsey, Archer & Philogene. Granted we purchased back Philogene, but only after he had a season similar to how Archer & A. Ramsey had prior. Each of those players excelled while on loan in the Championship. All could have played against upper Championship & below standard teams in the cups, along with the promoted teams in the Premier League. In my humble opinion.

Thats four players that we could have used in the squad across the season & could have helped us stay fresh enough to have maybe won that cup. And if we want to win things, we are going to have to be a bit more ruthless & selfish about players wanting more game time. "Want more game time? Fine. Prove you deserve it."

I do however agree about Kellyman. He is one of the more recent young players that we have invested in that are in a higher bracket of quality than a lot that have come through our academy before. And I think we will find a few more that will impress over time. And thats where both of our points really kick in for me. We have to test them to know if they are of sufficient quality. We test them as I mentioned, but send them on higher quality loans, & the cream will rise to the top & be of higher quality all round, as you mentioned. And hopefully they stick around & we don't become seen as a PSR fodder factory.

Youth development is not an exact science though & if I knew enough about it, I wouldn't be sat here discussing it on a forum on a Friday morning & would be highly paid doing it for The Villa, lol.

I agree on that, but is that a PSR issue? For me, the approach should be as you mentioned. We use those youngsters as squad players for awhile then see who can get us money (while us not really rating that high).

Archer isn’t rated but Unai, Ramsey was far from starting. So having money for them was really good. We could’ve used other players such as Tim.

This season we have Bogarde, Swinkles. I’d say Young can play (not sure if he wasn’t loaned).  I also think the new midfielder from City should be tried as well. I think we have games where we’re expected to dominate we shall use those players. That’s why I was happy with Bogarde starting despite it being his first minutes. 

It seems this season we’re having that approach especially with sending Iling and Enzo, which we shouldn’t write off as well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better today, still our weakest defender and was exposed a bit but will again have learnt a lot. 

Getting through these games, winning with Hom getting experience is huge as a team. Over time he will improve and learn how to do things like keep the line better which nearly cost us to be 3-1. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â