Live stream today v FC Ausburg

[Katie Borkins 1]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]Looks like we will have the rest of the weekend free of Miserablists. [:D][/quote]

I remember in the pre-season under Gunn we beat Wigan 3-2 and drew with Man Utd. We all remember what happened against Colchester.

[93vintage 16]

I''m hoping Alex Neil will give some of the youngsters a chance to fill in and gain experience. What''s the point of keeping them here if they go and buy experienced cover instead?Alex Neil integrated youth players at Hamilton, but will he be tempted to solve problems by spending now he''s at a team with a far higher budget?I hope we go and buy a few younger prospects, particularly ones aged 19-25 with league experience that we can help nurture. By the time some of these have moved up to the Championship their price has gone up considerably.These kinds of players can help replace the youth who drop out, to ensure that a steady stream on talent is coming through. We''ll find it very hard to compete if we''re looking to buy the finished article too often.

[Van wink 2,994]

Yelloow Since 72 wrote the following post at 25/07/2015 8:21 PM:

I''m afraid it''s Les Miserables, Van Wink (plural you see). Apparently AN told Paddy Davitt after the match that he is looking for a LB, a 3rd keeper an?d a striker. Wasn''t Brady meant to cover LB? Who is leaving to make room for the 3rd keeper and the LB?

Helloo Yelloow, thanks for the correction, for the sake of completeness, as I suspect you like that sort of thing, there should also be a little slanting line over the e ( e acute you see)

Do you know what AN actually said to Paddy or are you making things up? In the interview I heard AN would not comment on the signing of Brady so why is it surprising that he would mention cover at LB.

When you say "an?d a striker" do you mean "and a striker".

I guess it was just a little slip on the keyboard but in the circumstances I feel obliged to point it out.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

We''vehad a balance of buying younger prospects alongside more complete players since Hughton days. Redmond, Miquel, Mcgrandles and Thompson to name four. The gamble is that while at the club they developed into the type of player we couldn''t afford. Don''t expect them all to come off though.

[Van wink 2,994]

It''s a good policy for a club like ours, gives good balance to the squad and I''m sure we provide an excellent environment for these younger players to develop.

The key lies in carefully managing their development both as indeviduals and as players.

[93vintage 16]

The gamble is hedged somewhat if we can sell on those who don''t quite make the grade, sometimes at a profit. The loan system also helps limit the risk.I just think we would do well if we went a bit more in this direction than at present, particularly with skillful ''overlooked'' players who are nearer their mid 20s.

[BroadstairsR 2,138]

If we were still floundering in the Championship we would have to tighten our belts in respect of the greatly reduced income and would have to forget expensive signings and resort to using youth more.

In this way, our promotion could have, perversely, hampered the progress of those knocking at the door of the first team. Reward outweighs risk.

Using the premise that if they are good enough they are not too young this might realistically indicate that our own crop are not quite good enough.

Not quite good enough for the top league though does not mean failure. A loan to the right club at the right level is then the way to go, but this needs to be carefully thought through.

If so, then they have a chance to develop to the point where they can realistically be considered for selection at the highest level.

I am inclined to think that Toffolo is virtually in the ''good enough'' camp, but that the Murphys, and the others are best served by sensible loan spells.

Has Josh M. gone backwards? I had seen him as in the ''mix'' once.