Lots of talk about sending AMB out on loan and getting a back up for Amos, AMB is 22 years old, and surely has reached an age to be considered more than a constant "out on loan", what this does to the lads confidence is unknown, must be very disheartening
He's played what, 30 games at professional level? He's 22 later this month and has plenty of time in the game, especially as a keeper. I'm sure his confidence is just fine if he's being told how promising he is. At the moment though it is just that, potential. A season in League 2 will be the making of him.
Lots of talk about sending AMB out on loan and getting a back up for Amos, AMB is 22 years old, and surely has reached an age to be considered more than a constant "out on loan", what this does to the lads confidence is unknown, must be very disheartening
It's so difficult, and different, with goalkeepers. You can't bring them on for 20 minutes every now and then. Start them for 2 or 3 games then bring them back out again. Like you would with an out feild player.
In an ideal world Phillips would probably have spent 2 seasons out on loan then came back as our No1 when Amos first left.
It hasn't helped AMB that the last 2 seasons have both gone to the last game, with a lot at stake.
Lots of talk about sending AMB out on loan and getting a back up for Amos, AMB is 22 years old, and surely has reached an age to be considered more than a constant "out on loan", what this does to the lads confidence is unknown, must be very disheartening
Goalkeepers tend to reach their peaks much later than outfield players. 22 is still relatively young for a goalkeeper in that respect.
Don't see anything that Adkins has said to be disheartening. He clearly has a pathway into the first team, and like most other keepers will do him well to drop down a league and learn elsewhere.
Dillion Phillips was on loan at Cheltenham at 21, and Pope at 23 at Bury before they broke into the first team.
If anything I'd say this was very positive for AMB to hear as it makes it clear the manager wants him to be playing and sees him as good enough to not be stuck on a bench.
An interest development but sort of undermines what JC said about the Pompey keeper 🤷♂️
If Ben Amos does stay, and AMB goes out on loan (which to be fair he needs to for the reasons Adkins states) we will need a proper back up keeper.
Not sure any of the youth keepers are ready yet to step up to the first team, even as back up.
Seems a waste of wages having an experienced keeper as backup when you can sign a keeper on emergency loan
Yet you then take the risk of there being an emergency Goalkeeper thats good enough.
Also, if your keeper gets injured in a game then you need someone to bring on. You really don't want that to be a 17 year old academy player. Same if he gets sent off and then suspended. You always need a decent back up keeper. It's also good for competition, players can get complacent if they know they're playing no matter what
Theres always Steve Brown sitting in the commentary box, I believe he still carries his goalkeeping gloves with him, just in case.
An interest development but sort of undermines what JC said about the Pompey keeper 🤷♂️
If Ben Amos does stay, and AMB goes out on loan (which to be fair he needs to for the reasons Adkins states) we will need a proper back up keeper.
Not sure any of the youth keepers are ready yet to step up to the first team, even as back up.
Seems a waste of wages having an experienced keeper as backup when you can sign a keeper on emergency loan
Yet you then take the risk of there being an emergency Goalkeeper thats good enough.
Also, if your keeper gets injured in a game then you need someone to bring on. You really don't want that to be a 17 year old academy player. Same if he gets sent off and then suspended. You always need a decent back up keeper. It's also good for competition, players can get complacent if they know they're playing no matter what
Theres always Steve Brown sitting in the commentary box, I bet he still carries goalkeeping gloves with him just in case.
There won't be a problem with him talking to his defence!
Jake may have rejected a deal IF we put forward a low basic with a pay as you play deal?
I've seen this suggested a few times in other places for Chuks too, I really can't see us doing that. We're paying professional athletes not handing out a 0-hour contract to a teenager with performance based perks.
I could be wrong but I really can't see a professional football club offering anybody this kind of deal.
Jake may have rejected a deal IF we put forward a low basic with a pay as you play deal?
I've seen this suggested a few times in other places for Chuks too, I really can't see us doing that. We're paying professional athletes not handing out a 0-hour contract to a teenager with performance based perks.
I could be wrong but I really can't see a professional football club offering anybody this kind of deal.
Pay as you play contracts are quite common, especially for players that don't get a lot of starts for whatever reason. Injury, age, general fitness. The low basic would still be decent compared to most of us, the split could be 10/25 or even 50% of the salary.
Jake may have rejected a deal IF we put forward a low basic with a pay as you play deal?
I've seen this suggested a few times in other places for Chuks too, I really can't see us doing that. We're paying professional athletes not handing out a 0-hour contract to a teenager with performance based perks.
I could be wrong but I really can't see a professional football club offering anybody this kind of deal.
Pay as you play contracts are quite common, especially for players that don't get a lot of starts for whatever reason. Injury, age, general fitness.
Are they quite common? They are quite commonly discussed/suggested on here and elsewhere, but do you know anyone at league level that actually has one?
I really hope we haven't taken advantage of his injury situation and offered him a measly contract with the knowledge he'll struggle to sign elsewhere
It should be a one year extension to his current contract, remember that was originally signed at the start of Roland's austerity, and has already been rolled over twice. It won't be that much.
JFC is one of our highest earners currently. About 5K I believe. He benefited from a promotion wage rise, relegation wage drop was significantly less.
He didn't get a promotion bonus because he was out of contract at the end of the 18/19 season and signed a year with a one year option extension in his current deal.
No way did we offer him a new deal on 5k a week then offer new signings 2ish k a week.
SalarySports.com says he gets £3100 a week, no idea if this a reliable source, but its out there on the net.
Jake may have rejected a deal IF we put forward a low basic with a pay as you play deal?
I've seen this suggested a few times in other places for Chuks too, I really can't see us doing that. We're paying professional athletes not handing out a 0-hour contract to a teenager with performance based perks.
I could be wrong but I really can't see a professional football club offering anybody this kind of deal.
Pay as you play contracts are quite common, especially for players that don't get a lot of starts for whatever reason. Injury, age, general fitness.
Are they quite common? They are quite commonly discussed/suggested on here and elsewhere, but do you know anyone at league level that actually has one?
Unfortunately I don't think any of us have access to people's pay details in depth, I believe Page was on one on his final year with us, but obviously that may be just a rumour.
Jake may have rejected a deal IF we put forward a low basic with a pay as you play deal?
I've seen this suggested a few times in other places for Chuks too, I really can't see us doing that. We're paying professional athletes not handing out a 0-hour contract to a teenager with performance based perks.
I could be wrong but I really can't see a professional football club offering anybody this kind of deal.
Pay as you play contracts are quite common, especially for players that don't get a lot of starts for whatever reason. Injury, age, general fitness.
Are they quite common? They are quite commonly discussed/suggested on here and elsewhere, but do you know anyone at league level that actually has one?
Unfortunately I don't think any of us have access to people's pay details in depth, I believe Page was on one on his final year with us, but obviously that may be just a rumour.
He signed a 2 year contract and left at the end of it. There was the option on an extension if he played a certain amount of games so I doubt you would have that and pay as you play.
I don't think there's anything in Millwall looking at Taylor.
He scored 5 goals for Forest last season, if Millwall have any play off push ambition they'll need to aim higher.
That doesn't really mean anything.
If any team set up to play to his strengths, he'll score goals plenty. But he won't score many of you expect him to fit into a different gameplan - and then leave him on the bench.
5 goals means he isn't up to top half Championship standard regardless of playing to his strengths.
Why didn't Forest do this if they saw they had a top six Championship striker on there books instead of struggling against relegation for a lot of it?
Can only see Taylor going to a lower Championship team at best, maybe even a League One team.
Providing he doesn't get done by bad injury, a player doesn't suddenly become useless overnight.
Taylor managed to score 11 goals in 22 games in the Championship playing for Charlton the previous season. Yet he sits mostly on the bench at Forest in a struggling team.
Whether he's "up to top half Championship standard" is surely equally about the quality and performance of the team he plays in. He was scoring goals for fun for Charlton in our very decent start to our last Championship season, before he got injured. And with Taylor in the side at that time Charlton were a top half Championship side.
But then we already knew how to set up to use him effectively.
Anyway who cares where he goes next? He'll chase the dollar, won't he?
Lots of talk about sending AMB out on loan and getting a back up for Amos, AMB is 22 years old, and surely has reached an age to be considered more than a constant "out on loan", what this does to the lads confidence is unknown, must be very disheartening
Phillips was around 22 / 23 before he got his opportunity - Goalkeepers always seem to wait a bit longer for their debuts than other positions
Sammy Bartram and Graham Tutt were younger on debut.
That was a long time ago ..... without today's pressure of expectation of winning promotion or bust, perhaps?
Young players generally need to feel their way in a 1st team environment, be free to make the odd mistake as part of their learning curve - without being trashed by all and sundry because there's too much at stake.
And as a previous poster pointed out, debutant/inexperienced keepers don't get the luxury of 20 minutes run out late in the game to gain experience. It's all or nothing for a young keeper. That's why they are generally loaned out at a lower level for a season or half season ..... and if they are loaned out to National League, they can be recalled after a month if needed.
AMB is almost 22 but has had only a handful of cup appearances but no League experience. He's a great prospect but he's spent most of this past season not playing. He needs to play each week to gain experience and will be a better keeper for it. He may be ready for League One, despite inexperience ..... but will Adkins take the risk when everybody knows it's promotion or bust for Charlton this next season?
If I were manager, I'd send him out on loan. I reckon Adkins will too.
Jake may have rejected a deal IF we put forward a low basic with a pay as you play deal?
I've seen this suggested a few times in other places for Chuks too, I really can't see us doing that. We're paying professional athletes not handing out a 0-hour contract to a teenager with performance based perks.
I could be wrong but I really can't see a professional football club offering anybody this kind of deal.
Agree. It's not the way to get your leading goal scorer to sign a new contract, is it?
Chuks scored 15 goals for Charlton last season - and never had penalty goals to swell his tally, unlike most leading scorers.
And some people don't think he's worth a full time wage?
Jake may have rejected a deal IF we put forward a low basic with a pay as you play deal?
I've seen this suggested a few times in other places for Chuks too, I really can't see us doing that. We're paying professional athletes not handing out a 0-hour contract to a teenager with performance based perks.
I could be wrong but I really can't see a professional football club offering anybody this kind of deal.
Agree. It's not the way to get your leading goal scorer to sign a new contract, is it?
Chuks scored 15 goals for Charlton last season - and never had penalty goals to swell his tally, unlike most leading scorers.
And some people don't think he's worth a full time wage?
I've had this discussion with so many people - He's got the best goal to minute ratio in the league by a distance - including JCH.
Aneke has a few benefits: - Proven L1 goalscorer especially off the bench. - You don't need to keep him happy by rotating him in the starting lineup. - Now we know his capabilities, if he isn't pushed to start, he should see less injuries.
Granted, he won't be a starting striker but knowing Adkins plays one up, if you have two quality strikers - Stockley and Bishop would be my ideal, you shouldn't ever need Chuks to start. For one striker to get a long-term injury is unlucky but to have your two main strikers out for a long period of time, at the same time, is very rare and I don't think you can prepare for that.
It's near impossible to sign three fit, hungry and proven strikers who can get you 15 goals a season and keep them all happy by rotating their game time. I think Aneke is the perfect super sub and given that he has 4+ contract offers proves other managers believe the same.
EDIT: Absolute worst case scenario, taking my hypothetical situation, with Stockely and Bishop doing their ACL in the same week, Washington can plug that gap while Chuks gets the last half hour - them two are better than plenty of partnerships in the League.
Lots of talk about sending AMB out on loan and getting a back up for Amos, AMB is 22 years old, and surely has reached an age to be considered more than a constant "out on loan", what this does to the lads confidence is unknown, must be very disheartening
Phillips was around 22 / 23 before he got his opportunity - Goalkeepers always seem to wait a bit longer for their debuts than other positions
Sammy Bartram and Graham Tutt were younger on debut.
That was a long time ago ..... without today's pressure of expectation of winning promotion or bust, perhaps?
Young players generally need to feel their way in a 1st team environment, be free to make the odd mistake as part of their learning curve - without being trashed by all and sundry because there's too much at stake.
And as a previous poster pointed out, debutant/inexperienced keepers don't get the luxury of 20 minutes run out late in the game to gain experience. It's all or nothing for a young keeper. That's why they are generally loaned out at a lower level for a season or half season ..... and if they are loaned out to National League, they can be recalled after a month if needed.
AMB is almost 22 but has had only a handful of cup appearances but no League experience. He's a great prospect but he's spent most of this past season not playing. He needs to play each week to gain experience and will be a better keeper for it. He may be ready for League One, despite inexperience ..... but will Adkins take the risk when everybody knows it's promotion or bust for Charlton this next season?
If I were manager, I'd send him out on loan. I reckon Adkins will too.
Generally agree with the comments here regarding AMB, but, who in league 2 is going to give him the experience of first team league football, as of now his record has been in The National League only apart from 1 cup game for us, thing is does Nige actually rate him or not, and if so, will he ever be ready for a league debut with us or anyone come to that, I say again he is 22 in a couple of weeks time, and has been with us for just short of 6 years.
I really hope we haven't taken advantage of his injury situation and offered him a measly contract with the knowledge he'll struggle to sign elsewhere
It should be a one year extension to his current contract, remember that was originally signed at the start of Roland's austerity, and has already been rolled over twice. It won't be that much.
JFC is one of our highest earners currently. About 5K I believe. He benefited from a promotion wage rise, relegation wage drop was significantly less.
He didn't get a promotion bonus because he was out of contract at the end of the 18/19 season and signed a year with a one year option extension in his current deal.
No way did we offer him a new deal on 5k a week then offer new signings 2ish k a week.
SalarySports.com says he gets £3100 a week, no idea if this a reliable source, but its out there on the net.
Comments
In an ideal world Phillips would probably have spent 2 seasons out on loan then came back as our No1 when Amos first left.
It hasn't helped AMB that the last 2 seasons have both gone to the last game, with a lot at stake.
Don't see anything that Adkins has said to be disheartening. He clearly has a pathway into the first team, and like most other keepers will do him well to drop down a league and learn elsewhere.
Dillion Phillips was on loan at Cheltenham at 21, and Pope at 23 at Bury before they broke into the first team.
Although we have had a points failure the last two seasons.
I could be wrong but I really can't see a professional football club offering anybody this kind of deal.
https://www.cafc.co.uk/news/view/5bf2cf1e02264/lewis-page-pens-new-addicks-deal-to-keep-him-at-the-valley-until-at-least-2020
A quick Google suggested semi pro clubs have players on pay as you play, John Terry on top of 150k a week basic and Owen Hargreaves at Man City.
Taylor managed to score 11 goals in 22 games in the Championship playing for Charlton the previous season.
Yet he sits mostly on the bench at Forest in a struggling team.
Whether he's "up to top half Championship standard" is surely equally about the quality and performance of the team he plays in.
He was scoring goals for fun for Charlton in our very decent start to our last Championship season, before he got injured.
And with Taylor in the side at that time Charlton were a top half Championship side.
But then we already knew how to set up to use him effectively.
Anyway who cares where he goes next? He'll chase the dollar, won't he?
Young players generally need to feel their way in a 1st team environment, be free to make the odd mistake as part of their learning curve - without being trashed by all and sundry because there's too much at stake.
And as a previous poster pointed out, debutant/inexperienced keepers don't get the luxury of 20 minutes run out late in the game to gain experience.
It's all or nothing for a young keeper. That's why they are generally loaned out at a lower level for a season or half season ..... and if they are loaned out to National League, they can be recalled after a month if needed.
AMB is almost 22 but has had only a handful of cup appearances but no League experience. He's a great prospect but he's spent most of this past season not playing. He needs to play each week to gain experience and will be a better keeper for it. He may be ready for League One, despite inexperience ..... but will Adkins take the risk when everybody knows it's promotion or bust for Charlton this next season?
If I were manager, I'd send him out on loan. I reckon Adkins will too.
Chuks scored 15 goals for Charlton last season - and never had penalty goals to swell his tally, unlike most leading scorers.
And some people don't think he's worth a full time wage?
Aneke has a few benefits:
- Proven L1 goalscorer especially off the bench.
- You don't need to keep him happy by rotating him in the starting lineup.
- Now we know his capabilities, if he isn't pushed to start, he should see less injuries.
Granted, he won't be a starting striker but knowing Adkins plays one up, if you have two quality strikers - Stockley and Bishop would be my ideal, you shouldn't ever need Chuks to start. For one striker to get a long-term injury is unlucky but to have your two main strikers out for a long period of time, at the same time, is very rare and I don't think you can prepare for that.
It's near impossible to sign three fit, hungry and proven strikers who can get you 15 goals a season and keep them all happy by rotating their game time. I think Aneke is the perfect super sub and given that he has 4+ contract offers proves other managers believe the same.
EDIT: Absolute worst case scenario, taking my hypothetical situation, with Stockely and Bishop doing their ACL in the same week, Washington can plug that gap while Chuks gets the last half hour - them two are better than plenty of partnerships in the League.