Cameron Archer

[kidlewis]

1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

What are the situations in which Archer is good enough?

 

He’s destroyed the championship, so that’s beneath him so he’s good enough to be playing for a Prem side. 
 

if rather it be us than Forrest or Fulham 

[OutByEaster?]

3 minutes ago, kidlewis said:

He’s destroyed the championship, so that’s beneath him so he’s good enough to be playing for a Prem side. 
if rather it be us than Forrest or Fulham 

18 in 40 is very good for the Championship - he's very good at that level - finding a Premier league team to take a punt might be more difficult.

I'd rather it be Forest or Fulham than us, although I'm not sure either are in the market. 

The right club to loan him to is a good question.

Sheffield United might not be a bad place for him to be, maybe Bournemouth, Luton or even Wolves? 

In the Championship, you'd want him with a good side, perhaps Southampton?

I see him ultimately having the sort of career that Dwight Gayle had, sort of bouncing between Championship and Premier League.

 

[MWARLEY2]

13 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

18 in 40 is very good for the Championship - he's very good at that level - finding a Premier league team to take a punt might be more difficult.

I'd rather it be Forest or Fulham than us, although I'm not sure either are in the market. 

The right club to loan him to is a good question.

Sheffield United might not be a bad place for him to be, maybe Bournemouth, Luton or even Wolves? 

In the Championship, you'd want him with a good side, perhaps Southampton?

I see him ultimately having the sort of career that Dwight Gayle had, sort of bouncing between Championship and Premier League.

 

Would be a good option for Forest if they sell Brennan i was thinking  ? 

[ChicagoVillan1983]

2 hours ago, MaVilla said:

fact is, 90%+ of our youth players wont make it here.

A large part of our youth system is to develop young players, then sell them off for financial profit and to help the club grow financially, with the very, very few actually making it in to the first team squad.

It is what it is, if a youth player is good enough, they will (usually - failing mistakes) get in to the squad, if they arent, they will be loaned/sold to benefit the club.

I get the impression that some people think our youth system is solely there to develop players for our first team, it isnt, it is part that of course, but its also part cash cow to allow us to benefit from selling young players who are good, but not quite good enough, for pure profit to help the books, which then helps us sign better players.

If we can rake in 20-30m a year (or more) in youth product sales. or through that and loan income, it will seriously help our bottom line, then if the odd one of them actually makes it with us, thats also superb.

 

 

And they don’t have to. I think most people miss that. Youth is for:

- Buying a bunch of lottery tickets and giving them the best chance possible of becoming a star by having state of the art facilities and training

- If the lotto ticket doesn’t hit, sell them on to clubs below us to help with FFP

Selling a Ramsey, say, for 14m is not a failure at all. Same with Chuk for 20m.

[allani]

3 hours ago, MrBlack said:

ECL second legs where we have leads, Early ECL rounds where we're comfortable/already qualified, league Cup early stages, fa cup early stages...

Anywhere we play opposition that are championship quality or below really

How does that prove whether he is good enough to challenge Ollie?  Archer needs to be playing and developing.  If we are only using him as above then we should either be sending him out on loan for the season or looking for a sale with a good buy back clause.

[MrBlack]

1 minute ago, allani said:

How does that prove whether he is good enough to challenge Ollie?  Archer needs to be playing and developing.  If we are only using him as above then we should either be sending him out on loan for the season or looking for a sale with a good buy back clause.

If he performs in those, which won't be free of pressure, then he gets opportunities in the bigger games.  They're also games played our style of play so we know whether he works for us (which we dont if we sell/loan). If he doesn't, we sell with little regret (and can still include a buyback)

We haven't given him the opportunity so have no idea what he's really capable of. Selling now risks us being in a cahill situation, albeit a buy back mitigates that slightly. Loaning again would be pointless.

[TRO]

2 hours ago, VillanousOne said:

I remember when Jacob was given game time and he struggled from time to time and many said he wasn't ready or good enough, but we persisted and now he's probably in the top 20 midfielders in the country.

People wrote off Bidace many times, even based on his loan performances and yet many now think he could be like a new signing and want him to stick around.

I will stick my neck on the line and say if Archer got game time he would score goals, not saying he would be at the level we need him to be, impossible to speculate at this point, but seem to recall him scoring against Chelsea in the cup, no one was bleating he's not good enough then.

Just funny how some use a few pre-season game 'cameos' to write him off.

I have no idea if Unai rates him either, oh wait forget to end with 'whatever Unai thinks I trust him' which is true, but don't need to state it every ten seconds.

That needs to be remembered....I still think we need to find a way of giving these players game time.....not just by circumstances, but by design.

[GingerCollins29]

7 hours ago, CVByrne said:

You have to prove yourself in training to get minutes on the pitch. You then need to prove yourself on the pitch. Gerrard and Emery have had the chance to give him more mins on pitch and haven't 

You've used Gerrard's mangerial decision making as part of your argument....

[TomC]

6 hours ago, MaVilla said:

fact is, 90%+ of our youth players wont make it here.

A large part of our youth system is to develop young players, then sell them off for financial profit and to help the club grow financially, with the very, very few actually making it in to the first team squad.

It is what it is, if a youth player is good enough, they will (usually - failing mistakes) get in to the squad, if they arent, they will be loaned/sold to benefit the club.

I get the impression that some people think our youth system is solely there to develop players for our first team, it isnt, it is part that of course, but its also part cash cow to allow us to benefit from selling young players who are good, but not quite good enough, for pure profit to help the books, which then helps us sign better players.

If we can rake in 20-30m a year (or more) in youth product sales. or through that and loan income, it will seriously help our bottom line, then if the odd one of them actually makes it with us, thats also superb.

The Athletic has something similar to say yesterday...the article is about ice hockey, so I've edited out a few things specific to that sport:

Quote

You’re overrating your prospects and young players. They’re not that good...they may even be very good. They’re just not as good as you think they are.

That’s because you’re probably falling into the same trap that virtually all fans do: You’re looking into a future where all your team’s prospects have reached their ceiling. If every one of those guys is as good as the experts say they could be, we’re in great shape! But you’re not because that’s not how prospects work.

A few of them will reach their ceiling. If you’re very lucky, one or two might even go Tage Mode and smash through that ceiling. But other guys will stall out before they reach their full potential, and some will just end up as busts who never make it. That’s true even if your team is especially good at developing. It’s just the nature of how sports work.

And you know this, of course — when it comes to other teams. But when it’s your guys, and you’ve paid close attention to everything said about them, it’s easy to get caught up in the hype and confuse a ceiling with a most-likely outcome. And once you’ve fallen into that trap, you get very mad when somebody comes along and suggests that the future isn’t exceedingly bright. Look at this prospect list, you want to yell, it’s filled with future stars. Except it isn’t.

I have nothing against Archer. I hope that he makes it. It would be a lot cheaper than buying another striker. I just don't want to fall into the trap of over-hoping. We hear so much about Cam, Iroegbunam, KKH, Louie Barry...everyone wants the prospects to make it, especially when they're local lads, but they aren't all going to do it. If one prospect makes it every couple years, we're doing OK. JPB may be "the one" from the current batch.

 

 

[Don_Simon]

I doubted JJ. So happy to have been proven wrong.

Difference now is Archer is coming into a team that is competing where there's no room for error. The Deano team JJ came into, very different.

[MrBlack]

11 minutes ago, TomC said:

The Athletic has something similar to say yesterday...the article is about ice hockey, so I've edited out a few things specific to that sport:

I have nothing against Archer. I hope that he makes it. It would be a lot cheaper than buying another striker. I just don't want to fall into the trap of over-hoping. We hear so much about Cam, Iroegbunam, KKH, Louie Barry...everyone wants the prospects to make it, especially when they're local lads, but they aren't all going to do it. If one prospect makes it every couple years, we're doing OK. JPB may be "the one" from the current batch.

 

 

It's not helped by the United class of 92... bleurgh. That will happen again, maybe, but with the international scouting network the way it is its pretty unlikely

[TomC]

49 minutes ago, MrBlack said:

It's not helped by the United class of 92... bleurgh. That will happen again, maybe, but with the international scouting network the way it is its pretty unlikely

You raise a good point...the game is so international now, and the PL, as the richest league, is at the centre of it. Back in 1992, most of the players were British. A talented Englishman was competing against a talent pool of 60m. Now they're competing against players from Ghana, Brazil, Croatia, Japan, Morocco...everywhere...a talent pool nearing 8 billion. Cam is competing against Duran from Colombia. That wouldn't have been the case in 1992.

 

[lexicon]

JJ is not the right comparison here. Not only did he come through when the team was weaker, he was playing in a less key position. Striker for us is pivotal to how we play and attack, and Archer is a long way off Watkins' all-round game and level. We don't play with an off-the-shoulder old school striker, we have a guy who drops deep, is comfortable on the ball and can make quick interchanges with the other attackers and then run quickly into an attacking position. Watkins is massively underrated and underappreciated by a section of our fans. 

[Villaphan04]

I imagine that he might be closer to leaving now as we will need to get another CB and we have to keep FFP in mind

[TRO]

On 11/08/2023 at 21:15, Don_Simon said:

I doubted JJ. So happy to have been proven wrong.

Difference now is Archer is coming into a team that is competing where there's no room for error. The Deano team JJ came into, very different.

After Ollies miss yesterday, It might have been a good time, to remind him, that those kind of misses have consequences.

I love Ollie and could wax lyrical.....but his performance yesterday, left a lot to be desired....it was passive and lack lustre, he can't expect to get away with that too often....He looked off it, and it seemed to me, it was allowed to drift.

I love UE too....but he has to let players know, in no uncertain terms, that poor execution, will result in action.....That was a time to say to Cam, "its now your chance grab it".

[TRO]

On 11/08/2023 at 23:02, lexicon said:

JJ is not the right comparison here. Not only did he come through when the team was weaker, he was playing in a less key position. Striker for us is pivotal to how we play and attack, and Archer is a long way off Watkins' all-round game and level. We don't play with an off-the-shoulder old school striker, we have a guy who drops deep, is comfortable on the ball and can make quick interchanges with the other attackers and then run quickly into an attacking position. Watkins is massively underrated and underappreciated by a section of our fans. 

I agree

I love Ollie, and think overall, he is great.....but he wasn't yesterday.....and it may have been a chance to let him know.

[lexicon]

1 minute ago, TRO said:

I agree

I love Ollie, and think overall, he is great.....but he wasn't yesterday.....and it may have been a chance to let him know.

He got an assist and missed the one chance that was created for him. Tbh, I'm not going to be particularly critical of any of our players yesterday due to the extenuating circumstances of Mings' horrible injury - it completely threw them all out of whack. How they respond next game is important and will be a fairer time to judge them IMO. 

[VillaChris]

Clearly got no future here.

Big shame for me.

[markavfc40]

I think it was telling that we went 3-1 down after 58 mins yesterday and desperately needed a goal and Archer wasn't brought on. At 4-1 after 77 mins the game was done anyway. It suggests that Emery doesn't have that much belief that Archer is ready to step up to the plate. If that is the case I'd let him go but we have to bring in a replacement that Emery does consider ready because an injury to Watkins that keeps him out for months (and we have seen two of those to other players in the last 4 days) then we are in a whole heap of mire. 

Edited August 13, 2023 by markavfc40

[TRO]

16 minutes ago, lexicon said:

He got an assist and missed the one chance that was created for him. Tbh, I'm not going to be particularly critical of any of our players yesterday due to the extenuating circumstances of Mings' horrible injury - it completely threw them all out of whack. How they respond next game is important and will be a fairer time to judge them IMO. 

I usually judge a player over the period of the game......yes Ollies flick on was crucial to a well taken goal.