Youth team development: Page 7 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Youth team development

evoh

otfgoon wrote:
You've never heard anyone go about Barcelona's youth system? 😆

Ramsey, Chamberlain, Walcott, Szczesny, Wilshere and Gibbs are all internationals playing at the highest level in the CL, that's a pretty decent return, certainly enough to continue to attract top quality youngsters.

Ramsey - Cardiff

Chamberlain - Southampton

Walcott - Southampton

Szczesny -Perhaps but hardly brought through

Wilshere - Arsenal

Gibbb- Wimbledon

Yeah fine record there. We are OK and produce a number of mediocre players who will have a career but we aren't on par with elite clubs at this level and the arsenal academy simply isn't producing players of a high enough standard on a regular basis. Add in that it take decades to reap the rewards and we can expect that all these chopping changes are unlikely to improve the ratio of youth player actually developed internally rather than youngsters brought in from outside

goon

Claudius wrote:
Timothy, the difference is that there was a clear focus on Wenger's part on youth post 2005. In the 8 years since, the only Arsenal product of note that broke through into the first team was Jack Wilshere, and even he has not yet had the opportunity to back up the hype. The other first team players are not amazing. There would be limited interest from our rivals in Gibbs, Sczeszny, for example.

The focus on youth wasn't just the academy, it was buying young too. Wenger's 'youth project' players include van Persie, Nasri, Flamini, Fabregas, Clichy etc, add that to the likes of Walcott, Chamberlain, Ramsey, Szczesny and you've got around £200m worth of talent for less than 50m. That was the whole point of the so callled youth project.

goon

evoh wrote:
Ramsey - Cardiff

Chamberlain - Southampton

Walcott - Southampton

Szczesny -Perhaps but hardly brought through

Wilshere - Arsenal

Gibbb- Wimbledon

Yeah fine record there. We are OK and produce a number of mediocre players who will have a career but we aren't on par with elite clubs at this level and the arsenal academy simply isn't producing players of a high enough standard on a regular basis. Add in that it take decades to reap the rewards and we can expect that all these chopping changes are unlikely to improve the ratio of youth player actually developed internally rather than youngsters brought in from outside

I was talking about being able to attract the best young talent, of course they're going to come from other clubs.

Tam

Not that it makes a difference to the number but Frimpong could arguably be added into those lists. He looked like he was easily on his way to being a dependable squad player if not for the injuries.

asajoseph

I don't know about Liverpool, and Chelsea are hardly a sensible comparison, but I don't think we compare particularly favourably to Utd.

evoh

otfgoon wrote:
evoh wrote:
Ramsey - Cardiff

Chamberlain - Southampton

Walcott - Southampton

Szczesny -Perhaps but hardly brought through

Wilshere - Arsenal

Gibbb- Wimbledon

Yeah fine record there. We are OK and produce a number of mediocre players who will have a career but we aren't on par with elite clubs at this level and the arsenal academy simply isn't producing players of a high enough standard on a regular basis. Add in that it take decades to reap the rewards and we can expect that all these chopping changes are unlikely to improve the ratio of youth player actually developed internally rather than youngsters brought in from outside

I was talking about being able to attract the best young talent, of course they're going to come from other clubs.

So what? These players have already been discovered by others. Chelsea are a better prospect these days as they will buy you out, pay you loads and let you go on loan somewhere serious until you are ready for them. But they have a system in place unlike us.

Why aren't we the ones finding true youth players with potential like Bale, Chamberlain, Walcott, etc? Our scouting has totally missed these players at a young age while teams like southampton regularly pick them up.

Meatwad

sez was here since he was 16. and gibbs came from wimbledon at 13 or 14 when their academy closed down. it's not like he was recruited at that age because he was some can't miss prospect. he's even at a different position. if arsenal can't take credit for that guy then you might as well say they stole wilshere from luton at 9. there has to be an age cutoff, but 14 isn't it, neither is 16.

even cesc was developed at arsenal regardless of what barca and the rest of the world wants to believe. if being at barca between 9 and 15 is what makes you ready made then i don't know.

goon

Pure academy products have far more to do with the catchment area and the 90 min rule (though I believe that has now been scrapped?) than the standard of the youth system. The likes of United and Liverpool should have a clear advantage since they basically have a football mad city to themselves, while the large number of London clubs have to share among themselves. But the rule means or meant that it was mostly down to luck whether you could find a naturally gifted talent.

evoh

Cesc was developed in arsenal's first team, the academy had a series of months with him that is all.

Claudius

share amongst themselves in a large metropolis.

goon

evoh wrote:
otfgoon wrote:
I was talking about being able to attract the best young talent, of course they're going to come from other clubs.

So what? These players have already been discovered by others. Chelsea are a better prospect these days as they will buy you out, pay you loads and let you go on loan somewhere serious until you are ready for them. But they have a system in place unlike us.

Yeah, Josh Mceachran, Bertrant and countless other youth players now thriving at Chelsea obviously made fantastic career choices. I actually can't think of a single one.

Why aren't we the ones finding true youth players with potential like Bale, Chamberlain, Walcott, etc? Our scouting has totally missed these players at a young age while teams like southampton regularly pick them up.

The 90 min rule, see above.

Rohit

Also, is there a stipulated time limit for which kids in England can train per day/ week?

Mirth

The 90 min rule is quite sensible actually. Otherwise the best talent of the country will inevitably be at the top 10 clubs, which would seriously damage the lower leagues.

evoh

General Mirth wrote:
The 90 min rule is quite sensible actually. Otherwise the best talent of the country will inevitably be at the top 10 clubs, which would seriously damage the lower leagues.

Retarded idea. How can a club in plymouth develop a talented player better than one in manchester with £1,000,000 s more spent on development and training of youth players. Barca are successful because they can cream off all the top spanish players they can find into numerous groups at each age level. We needed that chance years ago and its of no benefit to the national team or the youth players themselves to limit them to staying in some tin pot club because of where they live.

Beckham moved to manchester to train, would he have done so well at west ham, yes probably but he got the chance early at a far bigger club and that's what every club/player needs to be able to do.

evoh

otfgoon wrote:
evoh wrote:
So what? These players have already been discovered by others. Chelsea are a better prospect these days as they will buy you out, pay you loads and let you go on loan somewhere serious until you are ready for them. But they have a system in place unlike us.

Yeah, Josh Mceachran, Bertrant and countless other youth players now thriving at Chelsea obviously made fantastic career choices. I actually can't think of a single one.

Why aren't we the ones finding true youth players with potential like Bale, Chamberlain, Walcott, etc? Our scouting has totally missed these players at a young age while teams like southampton regularly pick them up.

The 90 min rule, see above.

Where is Walcott from is it < 90 mins for colney? yes he's from Berkshire!

How much further is southampton than london from cardiff? Same time in the car.

Chamberlain again could easily have fitted in the 90 mins but Southampton is the closest.

Point being we don't find players on the regular, southampton do.

Also when talking about Chelsea you know what I'm saying (De Bruyne, Lukaku, Courtois,) Loaned out, not their local lads they have brought through they stand just a little a chance as ours do, though they actually have out old coach and a far better team overall at youth level.

Mirth

evoh wrote:
General Mirth wrote:
The 90 min rule is quite sensible actually. Otherwise the best talent of the country will inevitably be at the top 10 clubs, which would seriously damage the lower leagues.

Retarded idea. How can a club in plymouth develop a talented player better than one in manchester with £1,000,000 s more spent on development and training of youth players. Barca are successful because they can cream off all the top spanish players they can find into numerous groups at each age level. We needed that chance years ago and its of no benefit to the national team or the youth players themselves to limit them to staying in some tin pot club because of where they live.

Beckham moved to manchester to train, would he have done so well at west ham, yes probably but he got the chance early at a far bigger club and that's what every club/player needs to be able to do.

Depends on whose perspective you see it from. If you want to implement that, then the tin pot clubs need better compensation or, indeed, a better incentive to at least bring in talented 12 year old through.

Southampton got themselves into the Premier League by leveraging their youth team talent. Of course they have more resources than Plymouth but Plymouth will never have that opportunity. It's a vicious cycle.

Mirth

evoh wrote:
otfgoon wrote:
Yeah, Josh Mceachran, Bertrant and countless other youth players now thriving at Chelsea obviously made fantastic career choices. I actually can't think of a single one.

The 90 min rule, see above.

Where is Walcott from is it < 90 mins for colney? yes he's from Berkshire!

How much further is southampton than london from cardiff? Same time in the car.

Chamberlain again could easily have fitted in the 90 mins but Southampton is the closest.

Point being we don't find players on the regular, southampton do.

Also when talking about Chelsea you know what I'm saying (De Bruyne, Lukaku, Courtois,) Loaned out, not their local lads they have brought through they stand just a little a chance as ours do, though they actually have out old coach and a far better team overall at youth level.

The 90 minute rule is for u16s. If your under 12, the time spent in travel should not exceed 60 mins. By this age most talented youngsters, including Walcott, Ramsey and Chamberlain, had already been snapped up.

In reality it's unlikely that players would leave the city that their based in at that age anyway.

goon

I can't even get to work from East to South West London in 60 mins.

Plus it's all a bit to easy to say why didn't we sign 'x' in hindsight. If it were that easy and it was down to our ineptness that we failed to spot them, then why is it these kids ended up at Southampton and not one of the other top clubs?

evoh wrote:
Also when talking about Chelsea you know what I'm saying (De Bruyne, Lukaku, Courtois,) Loaned out, not their local lads they have brought through they stand just a little a chance as ours do, though they actually have out old coach and a far better team overall at youth level.

But not a single one of those guys has made it into the Chelsea side on a regular basis, even the 18yr old they bought for £20m. Lukaku has a great season last year but with Chelsea looking to bring in another striker with Torres and Ba already on the books there's a decent chance he won't get the chance to establish himself.

Any young player will realise Arsenal and perhaps United are the two clubs to go to if you want the best possible chance of making it at a top club. City and Chelsea are a good choice if you want to potentially kill your career.

evoh

General Mirth wrote:
evoh wrote:
Retarded idea. How can a club in plymouth develop a talented player better than one in manchester with £1,000,000 s more spent on development and training of youth players. Barca are successful because they can cream off all the top spanish players they can find into numerous groups at each age level. We needed that chance years ago and its of no benefit to the national team or the youth players themselves to limit them to staying in some tin pot club because of where they live.

Beckham moved to manchester to train, would he have done so well at west ham, yes probably but he got the chance early at a far bigger club and that's what every club/player needs to be able to do.

Depends on whose perspective you see it from. If you want to implement that, then the tin pot clubs need better compensation or, indeed, a better incentive to at least bring in talented 12 year old through.

Southampton got themselves into the Premier League by leveraging their youth team talent. Of course they have more resources than Plymouth but Plymouth will never have that opportunity. It's a vicious cycle.

But thats what the new FA pan is. Clubs with academies will get higher fees paid whatever the level of talent they bring through and they will get more for better facilities, those better facilities will bring through better players all-round which is good or all levels of the game. In exchange the better players will end up centralised in better academies (of which southampton is a premium one) and the club will be entitled to less based on the individual transfer fees. What it should do is help all players at all levels and provide up front fees to youth development that as you say could otherwise go into to leveraging the first team. Which in no way is helping bring future players through for that club or the national team.

Scraping the 90 min rule is just what clubs need to build an effective academy system to bring through the best talent in the country.

evoh

otfgoon wrote:
I can't even get to work from East to South West London in 60 mins.

Plus it's all a bit to easy to say why didn't we sign 'x' in hindsight. If it were that easy and it was down to our ineptness that we failed to spot them, then why is it these kids ended up at Southampton and not one of the other top clubs?

evoh wrote:
Also when talking about Chelsea you know what I'm saying (De Bruyne, Lukaku, Courtois,) Loaned out, not their local lads they have brought through they stand just a little a chance as ours do, though they actually have out old coach and a far better team overall at youth level.

But not a single one of those guys has made it into the Chelsea side on a regular basis, even the 18yr old they bought for £20m. Lukaku has a great season last year but with Chelsea looking to bring in another striker with Torres and Ba already on the books there's a decent chance he won't get the chance to establish himself.

Any young player will realise Arsenal and perhaps United are the two clubs to go to if you want the best possible chance of making it at a top club. City and Chelsea are a good choice if you want to potentially kill your career.

Its easy to say in hindsight because all three were spotted by the same club, kind of defines the ineptitude of all the clubs but hardly allows us to stand up and say anything other than "we are just as poor at it as spurs, chelsea, fulham, etc". We certainly missed seeing these kids before they were picked up and that my gripe at the clubs youth set up is that it misses most then we go pick up players from 16-18 years old and pretend that the academy is someone producing a truck load of talent that is being imported in late.

Chelsea's lads are/have been on loan at clubs playing real football, and they were picked up at relatively late but have been allowed to go and do their work elsewhere as the club recognises that for them they aren't going to give options in the first XI as they want a full complement of able bodies. Chelsea are willing to go in on these player pay them loads more than they would get at their current club and then they loan them back so they can develop properly. For me that's a pretty solid plan to get players coming through and into the first team ready to actually contribute, we just throw them in and hope they can learn it on the job while we drop points as they learn from their mistakes.

« Previous Page Next Page »