Four of the six U20's were already in the 16-18 academy under McCarthy, he left around the end of November 2014, the other two from the year below were involved around the junior set up at under 16.sam16111986 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2018 4:31 pmThere were lots of talented players entering the academy before. The problem was the coaches at the time had an agenda and a very specific view of what a Tigers player should be and we therefore let many go and opted to develop players that have no made it to the first team. Glynn seems to have improved our development pathways, it's not about an overhaul in finding talent it's developing what we've got.BFG wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2018 3:08 pmThis comment just makes very little sense because the six current players selected for England U20 were in the academy before the overhaul!sam16111986 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:44 pm We can see the academy has improved dramatically since his overhaul and we are generating players and more England representation after a slight barren spell.
I know a lad who was a county player at age grade and on his first day with the academy the only question he got asked by a certain coach was "which school are you at?". His answer wasn't approved of because he wasn't asked anymore questions and got dropped quickly (that coach is now gone). A rugby league side offered him a contract soon after. Charlie Walker was another who was told he wasn't going to make it.
Glynn became head of operations in 2014 about the same time as he changed the academy setup. Prime development age for the current batch of England under 20 players who are all 18/19.
You are suggesting that the likes of McCarthy could've been responsible for denying players opportunities, and at the same time giving credit to Glynn for players who were taken in under McCarthy!
The problem wasn't the people who went in my opinion, the problem was the Dad's involved keeping the competition away to keep their sons prospects safe!