How does this team selection look...

[calscot 0]

it's not a team that would play every game, as i said in the post.

 

They would play, at most, once a month in lesser fixtures in the league and cup.

 

I understand your concerns too, but if you read what i wrote under the team, can you not see why it is time to try and push these guys through to first team experience with lesser important fixtures?

 

I'm not a believer of putting out second or third string teams, it rarely works, even against paltry opposition and is usually an invite to a bloody nose.

 

I think we need to play a strong experienced team and introduce youngsters gradually and not too many at a time.

 

Rangers is not a club where you take unnecessary risks. Many fans would turn on the management if we played teams like that and lost badly. We all think the League cup is a diddy tournament but none of us want knocked out by a lower division side.

 

I think some fans forget that experience is important in football and an experienced lesser team can often take a team of more talented youngsters apart.

[Bluedell 5,599]

I'd agree with Calscot. Let's remember that the team that got relegated last season managed to beat us at Ibrox.

 

There are no easy games in the SPL that we can afford to blood 4 or 5 youngsters.

[John Barr 0]

I'm not a believer of putting out second or third string teams, it rarely works, even against paltry opposition and is usually an invite to a bloody nose.

 

I think we need to play a strong experienced team and introduce youngsters gradually and not too many at a time.

 

Rangers is not a club where you take unnecessary risks. Many fans would turn on the management if we played teams like that and lost badly. We all think the League cup is a diddy tournament but none of us want knocked out by a lower division side.

 

I think some fans forget that experience is important in football and an experienced lesser team can often take a team of more talented youngsters apart.

 

Thats fine, and i think it is a good point.

 

However, you have to remember we have brought NO-ONE into the club.

 

So, to play a strong team your going to ask the same players to play around 50 games, 2 games a week? The modern player isn't up to that.

 

Maybe i am asking too much to play 7 youths at a time, i admit that much.

 

But, your idea of playing the strongest team week in and week out with no break for those stronger players will subject them to lethargy and fatigue sooner rather than later.

 

And when that happens, where do we go for the next best thing?

Walter has rid us of 8 players and cut the first team squad dramatically. So, the whole first team squad could have been utilised for say 40 games before they feel fatigued.

 

But, if we don't have strong youth players to come in and give them a rest say once a month, i think it's asking for a disaster.

 

My 7 players IS asking too much and your right it will caause problems. But that doesn't mean to say we should leave them out the squad and don't play as many as we can and for as long as we can.

 

Having revised my initial post, i feel it may be better to play 1 or 2 youths at most every 3-4 games(the weaker games), and maybe another 1 or 2 on the bench coming on for 30mins at a time.

 

If we followed that plan, they would be playing with 9 or 10 stronger first team players which wouldnt make the team as weak.

 

This would enable at least 4 or 5 youth players to get around 6-10 games each(including sub appearances) before the next transfer window.

 

Well, it's either that i feel, or enter the transfer market and beef the squad up with 2 or 3 good players to replace the 8 gotten rid of.

[craig 5,199]

But John I dont think calscot is suggesting we simply dont use the youth players. Now more than ever for us this is a squad game.

 

These players will get playing time but the ONLY way to do that in my opinionis to have a couple of youngsters at a time playing. To rest the better players, put out a team of reserves against, say, Accies in the "hopes" that we take 3 points is folly.

 

We would be better served by having a couple of youngsters starting games, secure the 3 points, increase their confidence and look to keep them involved.

 

To throw 6 or 7 young players into the 1st team all at the same time makes no sense to me. When the crowd gets on their back, when the oppo are right in their face, who can they turn to for support ? No-one, because they only have each other.

 

The right way to do it is gentle integration.

 

One way that the team could resolve some of the issues surrounding fatigue would be to start games with a much higher tempo, take it to the opposition, get a comfortable lead and that gives WS the opportunity of bringing some youngsters off the bench for the last half hour (or even 45 mins if winning comfortably at the break - remember ICT at home anyone when we took it to them in the 1st half ?) and the experienced members of the team who are suffering from fatigue get to come off and rest the legs.

 

I have said it for 2 years now - our opening approach to games is pitiful. Best team in Scotland and we use the 1st half as a training exercise and play at a snail's pace. If we come out high tempo and make a statement to the opposition that we are here to put them to the sword, they wont know what has hit them. Game could be over by half time and THEN you bring the young lads on.

[calscot 0]

I'm pretty confident a few youngsters will be quite involved this season. Fleck and Aaron are teenagers but I think they will feature. However, don't forget we have quite a young squad and many have already had quite a few games.

 

Whittaker, Smith, Davis, Thomson, Edu, Lafferty are Naismith in their early twenties and becoming key players. The likes of Broadfoot, Bougherra, Beasly and Boyd are not that old either and MacGregor is young for a keeper.

 

The older players are Alexander, Weir, Papac, McCulloch, Mendes, Novo, Velicka and Miller. Take Weir out and it's hardly dad's army.

 

Maybe we need to think about developing some of the younger players mentioned above before we worry too much about our U19's. The latter are now our back up and will get games when we are desperate, but I hope it doesn't get that bad.

 

To me the season is more about the development of Whittaker, Davis, Edu, Thomson and Lafferty with a bit of time for Fleck, Aaron and perhaps Little. I'd also like to see Mendes, Miller, Boyd, Beasley and Velicka improve.

 

I'm probably rambling but basically I'm saying we need to develop the first team before the U19's.

[craig 5,199]

I'm pretty confident a few youngsters will be quite involved this season. Fleck and Aaron are teenagers but I think they will feature. However, don't forget we have quite a young squad and many have already had quite a few games.

 

Whittaker, Smith, Davis, Thomson, Edu, Lafferty are Naismith in their early twenties and becoming key players. The likes of Broadfoot, Bougherra, Beasly and Boyd are not that old either and MacGregor is young for a keeper.

 

The older players are Alexander, Weir, Papac, McCulloch, Mendes, Novo, Velicka and Miller. Take Weir out and it's hardly dad's army.

 

Maybe we need to think about developing some of the younger players mentioned above before we worry too much about our U19's. The latter are now our back up and will get games when we are desperate, but I hope it doesn't get that bad.

 

To me the season is more about the development of Whittaker, Davis, Edu, Thomson and Lafferty with a bit of time for Fleck, Aaron and perhaps Little. I'd also like to see Mendes, Miller, Boyd, Beasley and Velicka improve.

 

I'm probably rambling but basically I'm saying we need to develop the first team before the U19's.

 

Every player should be constantly striving for further development, that is for sure.

 

I agree but disagree about developing guys like Thomson, Edu, Lafferty, Naismith etc etc. I agree because they should constantly be looking to develop. Where I disagree is because these guys are already established first teamers. It has already been stated that we will have a squad of 20 and augment it with the youngsters. Youngsters generally need more development, training, coaching (in terms of positional sense, where and when to make you run, marking etc etc) and the fact that we will be potentially relying on some of these younger guys means we should be dedicating time to them.

 

I guess what I am saying is that those young players already established, on a scale of 1 to 100 (where 100 is perfection) are on, say, 70 - but the younger players might be on 40. Given we may have to rely on these youngsters (and lets not forget that this whole reliance on youngsters is unlikely to be a one season thing) then we need to get them to 60+ as soon as we can.

 

That said, there is no reason why the club can't concentrate on developing ALL of them. The management team will see all of them in training each day and it shouldnt take too much to have some one-on-one with these younger guys. Plus, if they have the dedication, then they should be happy to stay behind after training and ASK for further coaching.

[Gazza_8 233]

Whittaker, Smith, Davis, Thomson, Edu, Lafferty are Naismith in their early twenties and becoming key players. The likes of Broadfoot, Bougherra, Beasly and Boyd are not that old either and MacGregor is young for a keeper.

 

What do you class as a young player these days?

 

I certainly don't class Whittaker (25), Thomson (24), Davis (24), Smith (24) and Edu (23)

 

Naismith is 23 and Broadfoot is 25.

 

I don't class these players as old ie Papac, McCulloch etc but the line between young and old was crossed a year or two ago for the majority of those players. It's funny how you classed Whittaker as young but named Broadfoot as "not that old" when in actual fact they are of the same age.

 

Personally, I'd class Fleck, Aaron, Lafferty and Ness as youngsters.

 

Re your statement about McGregor being "young for a keeper", what do you mean by that? Have you to be a certain age before being classed as GK?

 

GKs generally find their best form the older they get but that doesn't mean they can't class themselves as a GK when they are 26 like McGregor.

[calscot 0]

I think players between 20 and 24 are still young and I thought whittaker was 24. I think 25 to 27 isn't that old.

 

I see under 20 as very young and don't expect them to play many games.

 

I think most players are probably considered "seasoned" or "mature" between about 27 and 31.

 

Once they hit 32 they are in their twilight years and after 34 are considered due for retirement unless they keep themselves in exceptional shape and form.

 

Some young players are exceptionally mature and fully develop earlier. Some of these players develop so soon that they peak young as well and never really fulfill they're promise as you always expect players to peak about 29.

 

Examples are Paul McStay, Barry Ferguson and Ryan Giggs. Some don't even make the grade like Derek Ferguson, Charlie Miller and Chris Burke.

 

I don't think of our "young" (in my parlance) category players as fully developed yet and hope to see a massive improvement in the next year or two where they really establish themselves which they they haven't quite done yet.

 

If most of them can fill out their all round game and play like "seasoned" players, then I think we could have a great team.

 

If they stay as they are, then I think we're worse off than in the last two seasons.

 

I think these guys need games and most of them haven't had enough under their belt yet. That's why I don't think there is much room to introduce ALL the youngsters to the team.

 

I certainly think we'll see Fleck and Aaron but they won't be regular picks without injuries or bad form from others.

[Big Spliff 0]

CIS Cup, yeah no problem.

 

SPL? Wouldn't go near it tbh.

 

We are in a two-horse race and we have to win it; the consequences are horrendous if we don't. Sad but true. Interesting idea though!

[CammyF 7,886]

Andrew Little isn''t a right back

 

Agree with the majority of the responses, sorry m8, but the team you posted would have problems defeating East Stirlingshire never mind SPL teams.

 

Cammy F