Never said anything about him being good enough for United or about his scoring/assists stats. Just saw a bullshit statement and corrected that.
Angel Gomes Watch
- Thread starter Classical Mechanic
- Start date
Never said anything about him being good enough for United or about his scoring/assists stats. Just saw a bullshit statement and corrected that.
But by your rationale Garner should be ahead because went on loan twice right??
He's a much better player, playing in a better league albeit in a team run by morons.
Well not talent has something to do with it, the point is Gomes development was hampered because didn't play first team football till he was 20
Yet the England setup clearly does not agree with you
Garner is a better player than Gomes, he was and still is miles ahead.
But by your rationale Garner should be ahead because went on loan twice right??
He's a much better player, playing in a better league albeit in a team run by morons.
If you keep posting shit takes and green smilies, I hear they come true, so keep trying.
Gomes started 34 games for a team that qualified for Europe last season and has a total of 90-odd top flight games under his belt. Garner managed 7 starts for an Everton side who are very lucky not to be a Championship team right now, and the vast majority of the rest of his experience is in the Championship itself. One of these players has proven a lot more, and it isn't Jimmy Garner.
Gomes was not fortunate, he got those minutes because that's how highly rated he was.
HIs development stalled because he needed to play at a higher level but the club didn't think he was ready to play men's football (I am saying the club made a mistake here).
Yes he may not have been ready for the physicality of English football but he could have played abroad, what is obvious is that he should not have been playing in the u23s after 17.
Here is a question do people think Sancho would have developed the way he did if he did not leave City and go and play?
Its quite a simple point I am making.
He had 10 senior appearances before turning 20, which isn't anything to scoff at, especially considering his frame.
For United a club trying to win the PL, if he was physical enough to do that he could have got 50-90 appearances for the likes of Nantes, Boavistia etc, the point is quite obvious.
Games played at senior level boosts development, I'm simply saying the club got his development all wrong (which is partly why he left for free and turned down a new contact) and why he didn't have the resale value he should have for his talent
It's not a simple point though.
Gomes was (and still is) a talented player, but that's not all it takes.
He was very fortunate to get those appearances because it's very easy for clubs with the stature and expectations of Manchester United to stick with tried and tested senior players.
Again, he was 19 when he left. The fact he'd made appearances in the four seasons prior to leaving, is very fortunate.
It really wasn't obvious that he was too good for U23s at 17 years old, and it's funny that you've mentioned the England set up in another post because he's never played up an age group there.
You seem to be vastly overstating how good Gomes was before he chose to leave, and also ignoring that it's not particularly common for players younger than 18 or 19 to be going out on loan. As I said, he'd have probably been ripe for a loan from us had he stayed, and funnily enough, he got one as soon as he did.
City are shit at giving young players a chance so Sancho isn't a fair comparison. The fact he was playing for Dortmund at 17 and jumped straight from England's U19s to the senior team does hint at him being further along than Gomes though.
You're oversimplifying things. It doesn't help anyone to send an inexperienced, small teenager to a new environment, likely with worse facilities, and where his development his going to be secondary to the club's own players. There aren't many clubs willing to take on a 17/18 year old loanee with very little experience for a regular spot in the first team. It's hard enough to find clubs willing to give older, more physically developed players a shot.
What I can say from watching games is the Gomes that left United was no better than the Gomes at 17
I can also say that Gomes himself was disappointed he was not given enough first team football development
That's not the "gotcha" you seem to think it is.
He wasn't some teenage prodigy, he was just a talented academy prospect. Very few teams are giving 17 year olds regular first team football, let alone very small 17 year old, and let alone at the level of United.
As I said, there would have also been very few, if any, clubs interested in offering him first team football as a loanee at that stage of his career.
Him not developing much (in your eyes) since he was 17 says more about his true level than it does anything else. His personal feelings on the opportunities he was given are neither here nor there. Players are generally just not loaned out at that age and he simply wasn't as good as you're making him out to be. Again, I point to his actual performances in the first team and the fact he was never called up an age group for any of the England youth sides.
One of my favourite players to watch in the youth team and a player that seemed to dominate matches regardless of his small stature. His speed of thought was what impressed me most as well as his technique and passing range.
I was disappointed when he left too as the type of talent he had/has just doesn’t disappear however I can acknowledge that before he left his trajectory had appeared to have plateaued a little. I believe this was due to injury first and foremost and the general negativity around the club at the time can’t have helped when he was looking to break through. Maybe leaving was something he needed to grow having been raised under the United umbrella from young.
Clearly physically he has had issues but playing regularly has allowed his game to grow and I think playing deeper has helped too. Weather he makes the next jump in terms of a top European team and consistent performances that match his talent remains to be seen. At 22 I think he has time on his side.
I was disappointed when he left too as the type of talent he had/has just doesn’t disappear however I can acknowledge that before he left his trajectory had appeared to have plateaued a little. I believe this was due to injury first and foremost and the general negativity around the club at the time can’t have helped when he was looking to break through. Maybe leaving was something he needed to grow having been raised under the United umbrella from young.
Clearly physically he has had issues but playing regularly has allowed his game to grow and I think playing deeper has helped too. Weather he makes the next jump in terms of a top European team and consistent performances that match his talent remains to be seen. At 22 I think he has time on his side.
Garner was injured for a large proportion of this season but if course we shouldn't let facts get in the way of someone having a different viewpoint from yourself should we!!
Its not a gotcha its a point of view
Physicality and the issues with it in England vs other leagues is obvious
Garner and Gomes just started their pro career in the top level. They still have long way to go and develop. They are both very talented. Maybe one day, when they are United-quality, they will rejoin us.
I’m not sure why you think I was trying to catch you out as my post wasn’t directed at you.
It was a perspective of the Gomes’ career so far and why I think it’s at the stage it is. On physical football, I mentioned it because I think he had to adapt his game to use his body better and adapt to less space in the final third. Maybe upper body strength too. I don’t think there’s much difference in the physicality of the french and English leagues anyway and I actually hope he returns.
Currently playing the role for England now that I’d hoped he would for us.
I replied to the wrong post my bad, was for the post above yours
Other leagues still aren't taking unproven 17 year olds on loan though.
As I said in my initial post, I agree with the general point that United could have done a lot better to make use of their academy prospects, be that giving them game-time at the club, finding appropriate loans, or simply selling when the time is right. I just think Gomes is a terrible example to use to highlight that point.
It is incredibly rare for that to happen to any youth player that is not in a lower division. For example, Sessegnon was the only one at the time who played for an older national youth side, and it was not Sancho. If you mean past the u18s, then Greenwood was called up to the u21 after finally playing for United (limited minutes) and after going on tour with United. Bellingham didn't even get that chance until he joined Dortmund. Same with Sancho.
The only way possible for Gomes to do that is to have gotten more minutes to prove himself at the time. However, that was under Mourinho, and not under Ole. Seems kind of unfair. Especially considering how United do loans.
I feel like at that point, what you think of as prodigious is different to how people view/discuss prodigious in a youth talent. Your view is more after the fact (benefit of hindsight), rather than a predictive quality (lumping very very few youth players as being prodigious, but that it does not guarantee future success). That's kind of like a Ravel and Pogba discussion. Like who could possibly tell Pogba would succeed, and Ravel not, based on talent? Or for example, being able to predict how Rashford would do?
I don't know why you've taken just one small part of my entire post (or indeed posts) to respond to, but youve completely missed my point.
I brought up England because the other guy did in comparison to James Garner.
I'm not even sure what you're on about with players playing up levels/ages. Any player that makes their full debut before turning 21 had played up, as has anyone who, for example, plays for the U19s while still eligible for the U18s (both of which Sancho did).
All of this was brought up to refute the claim that Gomes, at 17 years old, 5 and a half foot, and about 9 stone, was "clearly" too good for the U23s and ready for regular, senior football. He wasn't.
It may be rare for players to get called up an age group or to be given caps as teenagers (I haven't got the stats to see how frequently this occurs), but you can't bring that up as evidence of anything while completely ignoring that it's very rare for 17 year old to be getting regular starting spots in senior, professional football sides, and I'd wager even rarer for them to be given such a spot when they're not even contracted to that club.
This idea that United dropped the ball by not farming him out on loan at 17 or finding a spot for him in the first team is ludicrous.
The comment about prodigal talent was somewhat tongue in cheek, because it seems clear as day that Gomes wasn't actually ready for a starting spot at Manchester United, and at best was ready for a loan for just one season, before his contract ran out and he left. People are going on in here as if we let Messi go at 19.
Ultimately, I agree with the general point that United could handle young talent better. We have examples of players being kept for too long and we miss out on transfer fees (or larger fees if they were younger), we have examples of players being kept almost needlessly around the club instead of being loaned out, and we have examples of players being sent on bad loans. Gomes isn't an example of any of those, which has been my entire point.
I think he is good but feels like a player we could have got more money out of on a transfer away than exactly a player that we miss in our first team.
You serious right now? How exactly do you expect this to happen when he's playing u23 football?
I'd argue both are better than him. I do agree we didn't see many players get chances who were supposedly highly rated but only LVG ever really actually did this, other managers say they do it but they won't take the risk.
James might be a very limited player but his main strength is he is absolutely rapid which at least allowed the direct balls we thrived on under Ole to have a better chance of leading to something.
Pereira is actually a very solid 10, as made clear from his form at Fulham, but I think we all agree he's not the level we would want at United.
I liked how Gomes played but he isn't good enough, he's not even been that great in a weaker league, maybe he's the type of player who will start to shine in his mid twenties if he's as good as people think but we need much better player in our midfield. There's a separate augment as to if he would have fared better under ETH given it feels the tactics we are evolving towards would suit him better, they probably would have, but then if I ask myself is he good enough the answer is till probably no right now.
You don't think the player that was "clearly too good" for United's U23s at 17 could have been called up for England's U19s, U20s or U21s?
You already had someone reply to you and tell you "It is incredibly rare for that to happen to any youth player that is not in a lower division."
And it's rare for 17 year olds to play regular, senior football. Even rarer when they're 5 and half foot and barely weigh 9 stone. Even rarer again for them to be getting that play-time out on loan.
Do you see my point?
In England, you are completely missing the point.
As I said, it's debatable.
Gomes didn't get his chances, and we cannot know how would it have turned for him.
James and Pereira did, and not only they did not improve, but neither managed to play up to their perceived strengths (James kept running into opponents, and Pereira turned his passion into stupid fouls). They learned nothing from their more experienced teammates.
Also, the notion that Gomes is a helpess kid is rather disingenuous, his physical game is just fine. Watch him in France, very often he goes in strong, even defensively, and does well.
No I'm not. 17 year olds are rarely (if ever) sent out on loan, let alone to foreign clubs.
In fact, I'm not even sure we'd have even been allowed to loan a 17 year old Gomes to a foreign club.
He was basically just about ready for a loan when he decided to leave. The reason he had limited senior appearances before that is because he simply wasn't ready for more.
The only thing I'd concede is he maybe could have gone out on loan in his final season with us, but I'm not sure that'd have changed a great deal considering his trajectory in the club would have meant farming him out for another two or three seasons anyway. He certainly wasn't displacing Bruno in the side any time soon.
I'd love to see where all these sub-5' 8" 17 year olds are playing though.
Did you reply to the wrong poster re bolded?
James was great for us for a short window, then I think opposition team's worked out quite quickly how to deal with him but he did have that initial spell. Pereira to be honest never really had a run of games, he was playing a fair bit in 19/20 from memory but he was always ok, some good games some bad, much like most of our team from the period from SAF where we would make most players look worse than they looked in other teams.
Obviously it's debateable, that's why we're talking about it but there's no real data with Gomes from the PL whereas at least with Pereira there is. There's not really any point in my mind comparing him to James, they are different players and play different roles.
I like the way he has gone about his career.
Not content to sit on his arse at a big club. Making incremental progress in terms of stature of club.
He was disadvantaged by how tiny he was, no doubt about it. Many teams will look at that and not fancy it. It would have been hard to get loans at a level of club and style that suited. Look at Pellistri for example, he went on these completely redundant loans where the clubs aren't that compelled to develop the player. That's the danger.
Not convinced he's really going to be good enough for a top club but ultimately not everyone can be. Playing top level football for good sides is its own achievement.
Not content to sit on his arse at a big club. Making incremental progress in terms of stature of club.
He was disadvantaged by how tiny he was, no doubt about it. Many teams will look at that and not fancy it. It would have been hard to get loans at a level of club and style that suited. Look at Pellistri for example, he went on these completely redundant loans where the clubs aren't that compelled to develop the player. That's the danger.
Not convinced he's really going to be good enough for a top club but ultimately not everyone can be. Playing top level football for good sides is its own achievement.
Always though he has potential as a creative deep lying CM. The question marks are and were always physical. Hope he comes back to the Prem soon. Out of that u17 squad he's the only one who's not made it big, and he was the captain.
I meant among the high profile ones like Foden, Sancho, Gallagher, Hudson Odoi etc.
Fonseca knows how to develop young players, he's in the right team and with the right staff.
If I remember correctly, Brewster, Panzo and McEachran were more high profile than Gallagher and Hudson-Odoi at the time of the tournament. Starting week in, week out in Ligue 1 and playing in the UEFA competitions ain't that bad really anyway. PL is not the only league where you can "make it big".
Outside of Sancho and Foden, he's at a higher level than Hudson, definitely. Being a mainstay for a 5th place Lille team > pitiful minutes in Germany on loan.
I'd argue Gallagher is at a similar level. 1600 minutes at Chelsea at the age of 23 isn't that remarkable.
A lot of small players make it to the top,Messi,Zola David Silva all little but technically gifted. None of these would probably get in a Dyche or Allardyce team
Anyone who doubts the talent of Gomes should watch the England match from last night. Totally controlled the tempo of the game from deep with quick 1 touch football which has always been his hall mark.
To me this was the quality with which some people may have said he was ahead of his peers in both under 18 and under 23 football and also above some older players too. When you play the game quick enough you can minimise the effect of physical play and as someone pointed out earlier Angel stick gets stuck in regardless of size.
For me the only thing he failed to have was a consistent chance in a settled team with a coach that trusted him. Not saying there’s any guarantees but to me he was only second to Morrison for pure talent that I’ve watched in our youth teams. And as was also suggests earlier, the level of talent doesn’t equal success.
So while other former first teamers may have had more impact in the first team, I wouldn’t say they were better.
To me this was the quality with which some people may have said he was ahead of his peers in both under 18 and under 23 football and also above some older players too. When you play the game quick enough you can minimise the effect of physical play and as someone pointed out earlier Angel stick gets stuck in regardless of size.
For me the only thing he failed to have was a consistent chance in a settled team with a coach that trusted him. Not saying there’s any guarantees but to me he was only second to Morrison for pure talent that I’ve watched in our youth teams. And as was also suggests earlier, the level of talent doesn’t equal success.
So while other former first teamers may have had more impact in the first team, I wouldn’t say they were better.
He was always a good and talented kid with great footwork. Pleased to see him doing well because he was a player that I originally thought would make it. Having watched him since he left, I don’t see anything to suggest he can make the step up to regular PL football, let alone at a top club. But to be fair to him he still has time to develop.
He looks like he has found his niche, and perhaps his level. Let’s see what he does over the next couple of seasons. He career trajectory is sort of similar to Marcus Edwards. Super hyped and very technical young player, who didn’t quite have that edge - or maybe physicality - to make it at PL level. But now finding a good career in a second tier league.
I love seeing academy players do well, regardless of whether it’s with us or after they’ve moved on. It’s an academy to be proud of.
He looks like he has found his niche, and perhaps his level. Let’s see what he does over the next couple of seasons. He career trajectory is sort of similar to Marcus Edwards. Super hyped and very technical young player, who didn’t quite have that edge - or maybe physicality - to make it at PL level. But now finding a good career in a second tier league.
I love seeing academy players do well, regardless of whether it’s with us or after they’ve moved on. It’s an academy to be proud of.
It's a real shame but his stature will always be a problem at the top level. He doesn't have the pace or strength to mitigate it.