a fan on facebook mentioned to me that he would have brooks as the backup and not sign a third goalkeeper. i think it would generate an interesting conversation as it is an area where we could save a bit of money whilst giving game time to a player that would only get better. would you have tiernan brooks as the backup keeper?

Quote

I wouldn’t bother with a backup keeper, as I’d make the young Brooks as actual backup.

the only concern i have is those fans who are impatient and angry, a keeper needs to be confident and they are always open to heavy criticism which might be to much for him.

Its risky either, whatever Ian Burchnall decides I will be happy but it would be nice to start blooding in the youths.

Good question. I'd certainly like to see him in action, FA Trophy games and the qualifying rounds of the FA Cup would be a good starting point. But if Slocombe got a injury early in the season that meant he'd be out for a while I think it would be too early for him... But then I'm saying this having never seen him play, so who knows maybe he'd come in a do well! 

If you want to develop a player you either have to play him or loan him out so he can get game time. I think IB said he wanted 3 keepers so maybe there would be scope to send Brooks on loan to a team in the divisions below.

Edited July 1, 20214 yr by menzinho

I personally would guarantee him game time against certain teams, I am not sure I feel as "backup" would be wise - as Sam Slocombe most likely will miss some games due to injury. However, it sounds like Jake Kean might be the fallback option which I would be perfectly happy with.

Provided he agrees to wear the shirt when required.

Chasing promotion? I wouldn't leave him as backup.

If Jake Kean plays as the backup and Tiernan Brooks as the optional keeper than I am happy with that, as @Chris pointed out. I think it would be easier to answer if we had seen him play in goal for the first-team, that might be enough to sway my opinion in favour but because getting out of this league is of great importance. Playing a rookie keeper could cost us those points that might make all the difference come the season.

I don't know as I don't have an idea on how good Brooks is apart from 'having potential'. He was on loan at Worksop which is level 7 (?) only a couple of divisions below us.

Having a backup keeper that we have no intention of ever using (a.k.a Pilling) is pointless. 

Most clubs have a fill in type keeper who only starts if the main keeper is injured, at this level it would be a luxury to have 2 good keepers.

I mean its not like switching keepers give you a tactical advantage over the opposition, but it is important game time is given to young players. I have no issue with him as backup, I would be more concerned if Sam Slocombe had gone and the suggestion was to make him the first choice option.

I would pass, but I would give him at least a few starts and several appearances from off the bench when it can be afforded.

Its the only way he will learn.

I think its time Notts started to blood in the youth players, there is talk about loans but I think slowly settling in players who are capable of improving game by game is a must. If he can make 5 or more appearances it's a start.

Then send him out on loan to a club that will guarantee him a start more regularly.

Allow him to start in the FA Trophy games, that would be a starting point.

Happy to keep him as back up and play him in FA trophy games can always loan someone later if there is any injury to Slocombe it also keeps the wage bill down 

Game time, yes but as the only backup? No. Simply because we can't afford to risk games in such a crucial area of the pitch.

Last season shown that we missed Sam Slocombe when he was out injured.

Start the lad against York in the PSF, if he does well give him some game time in the league and FA Trophy.

If he don't abandon the idea of risking losing points in the league.