Recruitment / Academy Graduates

[Ted Hastings]

I am aware that Savage has only just got his feet under the table so this isn't necessarily directed at him, but there seems to have been a general trend of recruiting experienced players who are at or fast approaching the tail-end of their football playing careers (or at least their peak) in order to get us out of jams. As a result of this there also seems to be a general lack of pace/energy/mobility in the squad in a number of positions. Going by the last few we have signed (excluding Gordon) there are quite a few who will require to be replaced in the not too distant future resulting in more squad upheaval;

 

Christophe Berra - 36 years old (think we all agree his time is done)

Michael Smith - 32 years old (Still looks like he has the legs but at 32 he may end up being moved to CH permanently in the near future)

Peter Haring - Only 27 but seems to have lost a yard or two of his pace post injury

Jamie Walker - Again only 27 but also seems to have lost whatever pace he had pre-injuries.

Gary Mackay-Steven - 30 years old

Liam Boyce - 29 years old

Steven Naismith - 34 years old 

 

Of the younger bunch there is still a few who have a nice touch and range of passing but don't seem to have the dynamism or energy to take a game by the scruff of the neck, such as Halliday or Irving. 

 

I wonder if this may have been an ideal season to give game time to the likes of McGill or Connor Smith and see if their potential could be realized, but i fully expect us to be looking at the academy and younger signings moving forward as you can't build a team with this many players at 30 years or above.

 

Thoughts? 

 

[Debut 4]

This debate could shoot off into different angles but if we stick to players coming through, I wonder what our criteria is (if there is one?) when scouting and acquiring young players?

 

I know it’s tough competition out there but in the main, some of the players getting a chance just look that bit too nice for me. Look at Kennedy for Raith on Saturday. 
 

On loan from Rangers but what hunger and determination he had. A right wee pain in the arse. That’s what we need. We’ve had these young players in the past who had the minerals, who wanted it and weren’t apprehensive. 
 

It can maybe come down to the management and nurturing aspect too, but that’s another debate.  

[RustyRightPeg]

3 minutes ago, Ted Hastings said:

I am aware that Savage has only just got his feet under the table so this isn't necessarily directed at him, but there seems to have been a general trend of recruiting experienced players who are at or fast approaching the tail-end of their football playing careers (or at least their peak) in order to get us out of jams. As a result of this there also seems to be a general lack of pace/energy/mobility in the squad in a number of positions. Going by the last few we have signed (excluding Gordon) there are quite a few who will require to be replaced in the not too distant future resulting in more squad upheaval;

 

Christophe Berra - 36 years old (think we all agree his time is done)

Michael Smith - 32 years old (Still looks like he has the legs but at 32 he may end up being moved to CH permanently in the near future)

Peter Haring - Only 27 but seems to have lost a yard or two of his pace post injury

Jamie Walker - Again only 27 but also seems to have lost whatever pace he had pre-injuries.

Gary Mackay-Steven - 30 years old

Liam Boyce - 29 years old

Steven Naismith - 34 years old 

 

Of the younger bunch there is still a few who have a nice touch and range of passing but don't seem to have the dynamism or energy to take a game by the scruff of the neck, such as Halliday or Irving. 

 

I wonder if this may have been an ideal season to give game time to the likes of McGill or Connor Smith and see if their potential could be realized, but i fully expect us to be looking at the academy and younger signings moving forward as you can't build a team with this many players at 30 years or above.

 

Thoughts? 

 

Halliday isn’t young he’s 29 so I’m presuming he goes into the Boyce category.

 

Of our current crop of youngsters I’m led to believe that Cammy Logan is the star, alongside McGill. The latter really impressed me against Raith in the Betfred at the start of the season. I’m hoping he doesn’t follow the path of the last 16 year old sensation we had however, at least thus far. 
 

I think we as a fan base need to realise we are in the middle of a gigantic rebuild. What we have endured over the past 3/4 years has been excruciating to watch. The recruitment as we all know has been abysmal. I can’t think of a single player we signed and made a decent profit on (Hickey is excluded). We were a recipe for disaster, pre Covid. 

 

This isn’t going to be a quick fix, Savage has a job on his hands way bigger than an average Joe who doesn’t understand the internal dynamics of a football club could appreciate. (He seems up for the fight btw I like the early sounds of him). I’m talking a 4-5 year project again, sound familiar because it’s what Levein promised us the first time. Sad that I have more faith in Savage already than I’ve ever had in a supposed club legend. All whilst living in the brunt of a global pandemic. 
 

Early signs state that Savage has contacts and is up for the fight, I like the pedigree of the players he’s going for. His biggest job however, is getting our academy back up and running. We had great success in the early 2010’s bringing players through and moving them on for a fee. As sad as that sounds we need to get back to that and we’re off to a decent start with Hickey. 
 

 

 

 

[Famous 1874]

I feel that young players shouldn’t chucked in for the sake of it. However, I agree that some of the lads should have been utilised more this season. 
 

I have no qualms with Hearts selling / releasing players that they don’t think will make the grade here (Morrison, McDonald etc). But, if we are going to bin them we have to at least improve on them. McDonald miles better than Roberts or Frear for example. Hope we utilise McGill a bit between now and the end of the season, looked handy at the start of the season. Chris Hamilton is an interesting one, obviously highly rated enough by Hearts to be reserve team captain but not going to make it at centre back. 

 

We have talent in the youth setup but bar Irving I’m not sure any of them should be starting, squad fillers yes but then the argument comes around that are they better off on loan or not. No point sitting there and not getting games, as opposed to getting experience at another club. 
 

McDonald would have got plenty of minutes (gone now obviously), Cammy Logan would have got some occasional minutes (now on loan at Cove), Cochrane would have got minutes (playing regularly for Montrose though) but apart from that, the other talented players:

Harry Stone 

Connor Smith 

Leo Watson

Callum Flatman

Aidan Denholm 

 

Probably all not ready / no place for them at the moment but we have to at least show that there is a pathway. Imperative that we get the league wrapped up as soon as possible so that some of these lads can get minutes. 

[jr ewing]

29 minutes ago, Debut 4 said:

This debate could shoot off into different angles but if we stick to players coming through, I wonder what our criteria is (if there is one?) when scouting and acquiring young players?

 

I know it’s tough competition out there but in the main, some of the players getting a chance just look that bit too nice for me. Look at Kennedy for Raith on Saturday. 
 

On loan from Rangers but what hunger and determination he had. A right wee pain in the arse. That’s what we need. We’ve had these young players in the past who had the minerals, who wanted it and weren’t apprehensive. 
 

It can maybe come down to the management and nurturing aspect too, but that’s another debate.  

Has to have the raw talent and desire to begin with. Not too good at identifying either. 

[KirkyJambo1976]

With the current suspension of the lower leagues and no likely return date for the foreseeable, now would be the ideal time to try a couple of the promising youngsters.  Our guys are at the same level as Jack Hamilton, Andy Winter (Hamilton), Josh Doig (Hibs) and Kai Kennedy (Rangers, loan at Raith) who all hold down regular first team places now.  Aaron Hickey turned out quiet well also!!!!! They just need to be given an opportunity to learn, develop and hopefully become great assets to the club.

[OTT]

I've said before, I've been really disappointed with the academy. In 6 years we've produced 1 player we have deemed good enough and that is Andy Irving who has only just came through this year. No other youngster since the Walker/Paterson/Nicholson generation have held down a consistent spot in the first team nor been sold on for anything. (I realise Hickey exists, but he went to Celtic then came back, so I'm hesitant to include him).

 

I want to understand where the problem is. We have a huge population on our door step, and in the last 6 years clubs like Motherwell have brought through a host of players (Erwin, Hastie, Turnbull, Campbell, Scott, they've even sold a couple of prospects to big clubs down south before they've hit the first team). I don't think its outrageous to expect similar results? We have more resources so it should be manageable. Is it an academy issue? I.e are our coaches good enough? Scouting good enough? Training programme good enough? Are we failing to integrate our academy lads into the first team effectively enough? Do the tactics taught at youth level reflect what is being implemented in the first team? If not, why not? Are our head coaches putting any faith in youngsters at all? How do we get them to do this?

 

We have spent a significant amount of money on our academy and not seen the results. I really hope part of Savages remit is to investigate this and identify how and why this has happened. Levein filled the club with his mates, and I do question if that has also happened at academy level to the extent we need to clear the decks there too. When Stendel took over it was apparent our first team weren't fit enough nor adaptable enough to play a pressing game. He didn't feel Fox or Daly were good enough coaches to keep on and promptly got rid. Kirk was promoted but now is doing womens football instead (or was offered it)? I'm just alarmed that we've not invested properly in hiring quality coaches to manage our emerging talent. These are the players who can actually earn us 7 figures, so should be trained by the best coaches we can attract. 

 

Hearts in Scottish terms I think will always struggle to compete to be the best football club in the league, but I think in not having the same expectation levels as the OF we have a competitive advantage in youth development, and should be striving to be THE premier club in Scotland for youth development. Its an attainable goal and I think that should be our long term aim. With better youngsters comes less reliance on mediocre journeymen and we can then redirect that money into tying up our better talent for longer and attracting a higher overall calibre of player - See the impact of Hughes on Souttars development as a professional. I assume Gordon on Stone, Naismith on many of the forward players (Henderson I think has specifically mentioned him before IIRC).

 

 

[Hesh]

Mind me again, is the move straight from U18 to first team squad or is there a development/U21 in between 

[Debut 4]

3 hours ago, OTT said:

I've said before, I've been really disappointed with the academy. In 6 years we've produced 1 player we have deemed good enough and that is Andy Irving who has only just came through this year. No other youngster since the Walker/Paterson/Nicholson generation have held down a consistent spot in the first team nor been sold on for anything. (I realise Hickey exists, but he went to Celtic then came back, so I'm hesitant to include him).

 

I want to understand where the problem is. We have a huge population on our door step, and in the last 6 years clubs like Motherwell have brought through a host of players (Erwin, Hastie, Turnbull, Campbell, Scott, they've even sold a couple of prospects to big clubs down south before they've hit the first team). I don't think its outrageous to expect similar results? We have more resources so it should be manageable. Is it an academy issue? I.e are our coaches good enough? Scouting good enough? Training programme good enough? Are we failing to integrate our academy lads into the first team effectively enough? Do the tactics taught at youth level reflect what is being implemented in the first team? If not, why not? Are our head coaches putting any faith in youngsters at all? How do we get them to do this?

 

We have spent a significant amount of money on our academy and not seen the results. I really hope part of Savages remit is to investigate this and identify how and why this has happened. Levein filled the club with his mates, and I do question if that has also happened at academy level to the extent we need to clear the decks there too. When Stendel took over it was apparent our first team weren't fit enough nor adaptable enough to play a pressing game. He didn't feel Fox or Daly were good enough coaches to keep on and promptly got rid. Kirk was promoted but now is doing womens football instead (or was offered it)? I'm just alarmed that we've not invested properly in hiring quality coaches to manage our emerging talent. These are the players who can actually earn us 7 figures, so should be trained by the best coaches we can attract. 

 

Hearts in Scottish terms I think will always struggle to compete to be the best football club in the league, but I think in not having the same expectation levels as the OF we have a competitive advantage in youth development, and should be striving to be THE premier club in Scotland for youth development. Its an attainable goal and I think that should be our long term aim. With better youngsters comes less reliance on mediocre journeymen and we can then redirect that money into tying up our better talent for longer and attracting a higher overall calibre of player - See the impact of Hughes on Souttars development as a professional. I assume Gordon on Stone, Naismith on many of the forward players (Henderson I think has specifically mentioned him before IIRC).

 

 

Good post 👍🏻

[Guest ToqueJambo]

22 hours ago, Debut 4 said:

This debate could shoot off into different angles but if we stick to players coming through, I wonder what our criteria is (if there is one?) when scouting and acquiring young players?

 

I know it’s tough competition out there but in the main, some of the players getting a chance just look that bit too nice for me. Look at Kennedy for Raith on Saturday. 
 

On loan from Rangers but what hunger and determination he had. A right wee pain in the arse. That’s what we need. We’ve had these young players in the past who had the minerals, who wanted it and weren’t apprehensive. 
 

It can maybe come down to the management and nurturing aspect too, but that’s another debate.  

 

Last time in the Championship we had the likes of Nicolson, Walker and King doing to other teams exactly what Kennedy did to us on Saturday. They had all got a lot of experience the previous season though so could hit the ground running under Neilson.

 

I do wonder why we haven't given Moore more time ahead of Frear as he showed up quite well under Stendel, but aside form him we didn't show enough faith in youngsters last season, aside from Hickey, so we don't have many with the experience the youngsters in 14/15 already had.

Edited January 26, 2021 by ToqueJambo

[RobboM]

6 hours ago, OTT said:

I've said before, I've been really disappointed with the academy. In 6 years we've produced 1 player we have deemed good enough and that is Andy Irving who has only just came through this year. No other youngster since the Walker/Paterson/Nicholson generation have held down a consistent spot in the first team nor been sold on for anything. (I realise Hickey exists, but he went to Celtic then came back, so I'm hesitant to include him).

 

I want to understand where the problem is. We have a huge population on our door step, and in the last 6 years clubs like Motherwell have brought through a host of players (Erwin, Hastie, Turnbull, Campbell, Scott, they've even sold a couple of prospects to big clubs down south before they've hit the first team). I don't think its outrageous to expect similar results? We have more resources so it should be manageable. Is it an academy issue? I.e are our coaches good enough? Scouting good enough? Training programme good enough? Are we failing to integrate our academy lads into the first team effectively enough? Do the tactics taught at youth level reflect what is being implemented in the first team? If not, why not? Are our head coaches putting any faith in youngsters at all? How do we get them to do this?

 

We have spent a significant amount of money on our academy and not seen the results. I really hope part of Savages remit is to investigate this and identify how and why this has happened. Levein filled the club with his mates, and I do question if that has also happened at academy level to the extent we need to clear the decks there too. When Stendel took over it was apparent our first team weren't fit enough nor adaptable enough to play a pressing game. He didn't feel Fox or Daly were good enough coaches to keep on and promptly got rid. Kirk was promoted but now is doing womens football instead (or was offered it)? I'm just alarmed that we've not invested properly in hiring quality coaches to manage our emerging talent. These are the players who can actually earn us 7 figures, so should be trained by the best coaches we can attract. 

 

Hearts in Scottish terms I think will always struggle to compete to be the best football club in the league, but I think in not having the same expectation levels as the OF we have a competitive advantage in youth development, and should be striving to be THE premier club in Scotland for youth development. Its an attainable goal and I think that should be our long term aim. With better youngsters comes less reliance on mediocre journeymen and we can then redirect that money into tying up our better talent for longer and attracting a higher overall calibre of player - See the impact of Hughes on Souttars development as a professional. I assume Gordon on Stone, Naismith on many of the forward players (Henderson I think has specifically mentioned him before IIRC).

 

 

Thanks for the post. It always makes me think back to the 2014-15 relegation season. Through financial circumstances we were forced into fielding teams based largely on those we could field from the Academy. It was a tough season, some real doings ... but by the end of the season we were pulling out wins over Hibs in the relegation derby and followed that wit a 5-0 trouncing of Kilmarnock. It's interesting to look up the line ups for those games, hopefully you can see the screen shot. It was a team with an average age of 22 and, by this stage of the season, it was competitive. 11 (not sure about Jamie Macdonald) players came through the academy. They played because they had to play, couldn't just go out and fill a slot with a more trusted, tried and tested replacement. My point would be that this is more comparable to Motherwell. Motherwell are playing, and persisting, wiht the younger players because they don't really have an alternative. So maybe we do have good enough raw materials, maybe even the coaching and development is possibly good enough but if they don't play then self evidently they will never be good enough. A big part of that is down to us supporters too. Of this team Jamie Macdonald, Jason Holt and Scott Robinson all feature in this weeks SPFL team of the week. Most of us supporters were (at the very least) content to see them go as being not as good as the replacements we could get in.