- Sep 9, 2014
- 4,264
- 11,177
Yesterday marked the 12-year anniversary of Cristiano Ronaldo's completed transfer to Manchester United. I was reminded of this from the Breel Embolo Transfer Rumors thread, where @225 brought up how C Ronaldo successfully moved to a new country and league at 18 and made a huge impact even on his debut with United in the PL, seen below.
This got me thinking a little about a debate that has ebbed and flowed on here for quite some time.
When do you 'protect' and 'develop' your young talent? Conversely, when do you 'unleash' your young talent on the league and go for the biggest development and potential possible? Is one better than the other, or do both avenues eventually lead to the same result?
I think these are really important questions for our team to consider as we embark on this new 'era' of Spurs. The club has invested heavily in talented youth and developing them. We invested heavily in the training center and opened it in 2012 to rave reviews from a host of footballs biggest names and players. Our academy is now respected as one of the best in England and in Europe. We have incorporated many academy players into the first team squad now, including starters Harry Kane, Nabil Bentaleb, Ryan Mason, Danny Rose (signed from Leeds at 17, fits the purpose of this thread) and have found a lot of success with them.
I have seen many SC posters bemoan the transfer policy of our club and how we frequently, and inexplicably, sign a seemingly average level player who eventually just becomes another body in the squad. This blocks potential minutes for our younger academy players hoping to break through. Now, this thread is not about discussing our transfer policy, but it is not to be dismissed lightly for the purposes of this debate. I believe that many of the players we sign are not as talented as the ones we already have in house. Granted, none of our exceptional talents in and around the first team are C Ronaldo, who was and is a once in a generation talent. He arrived at United with an enormous transfer fee and even bigger expectations on his shoulders, especially after being handed Beckham's no.7.
However, are we developing our talent correctly and using it to our fullest advantage? Are we seeing the benefits of never sending Nabil Bentaleb on loan? What have we learned from Kane's rise? It is an impossible question to answer but was he ready to make his impact before he was finally allowed to play in the Premier League, first at the end of 2013-2014 and eventually bursting onto the scene in the fall of 2014?
We have used the loan system a lot over the years to develop our young players to varying degrees of success and failure. The journeys of Harry Kane, Ryan Mason, Danny Rose, Kyle Walker, Tom Carroll and others have been well documented as they have bounced from club to club in the Championship and the Premier League, sometimes succeeding and developing like Danny Rose, Kyle Walker, and Andros Townsend. Nevertheless, our young players' loans were risky and rocky along the way. Harry Kane was called by not too few Leicester City fans as the 'worst player to ever play for the Foxes.' Ryan Mason never played for Lorient in Ligue 1 making the bench just once. Milos Veljkovic, Dominic Ball, and Nathan Oduwa strangely struggled to make appearances for their loaned teams, for various reasons.
I don't want it to seem like I am dismissing the benefits of the loan system. I do, however, want to really examine when loans should and should not occur. Cristiano Ronaldo was never loaned back to Sporting Lisbon after signing for United, nor did he go to develop in the Championship or at another PL team to 'acclimate to English football.' Nabil Bentaleb never went on loan for us and has shown an incredible amount of promise, nailing down a starting spot initially at 19 years old.
It appears as if some of our most talented and highly-rated players to come through in a long time are coming into the first team with little to no loan experience. Dele Alli, after signing last January, only played half a season back at his former club, MK Dons. Joshua Onomah and Harry Winks, two of our brightest prospects in years, seem to be coming into the first team now without any loans.
Should this be the way forward for Tottenham? Should we 'unleash' Onomah into the Premier League, especially with so little depth in the attacking midfield right now? What about Alex Pritchard, who has been called special time and time again with each loan? And with Tom Carroll's transfer seemingly on the horizon, did we make a mistake by not giving him a run in the first team earlier? Did we bury him behind average footballers, or is that something easy to say with the benefit of hindsight?
It is a complicated subject and I am sorry to write such a long post about it. But with the transfer window careening toward its close in September, many of us are nervously watching our Twitter feeds, hoping to see an announcement of a new signing.
But with Alex Pritchard, Dele Alli, Josh Onomah, and Harry Winks waiting to get their chance, and Carroll strangely never getting his, is the exciting football we are all hoping for already training on Hotspur Way every day?
This got me thinking a little about a debate that has ebbed and flowed on here for quite some time.
When do you 'protect' and 'develop' your young talent? Conversely, when do you 'unleash' your young talent on the league and go for the biggest development and potential possible? Is one better than the other, or do both avenues eventually lead to the same result?
I think these are really important questions for our team to consider as we embark on this new 'era' of Spurs. The club has invested heavily in talented youth and developing them. We invested heavily in the training center and opened it in 2012 to rave reviews from a host of footballs biggest names and players. Our academy is now respected as one of the best in England and in Europe. We have incorporated many academy players into the first team squad now, including starters Harry Kane, Nabil Bentaleb, Ryan Mason, Danny Rose (signed from Leeds at 17, fits the purpose of this thread) and have found a lot of success with them.
I have seen many SC posters bemoan the transfer policy of our club and how we frequently, and inexplicably, sign a seemingly average level player who eventually just becomes another body in the squad. This blocks potential minutes for our younger academy players hoping to break through. Now, this thread is not about discussing our transfer policy, but it is not to be dismissed lightly for the purposes of this debate. I believe that many of the players we sign are not as talented as the ones we already have in house. Granted, none of our exceptional talents in and around the first team are C Ronaldo, who was and is a once in a generation talent. He arrived at United with an enormous transfer fee and even bigger expectations on his shoulders, especially after being handed Beckham's no.7.
However, are we developing our talent correctly and using it to our fullest advantage? Are we seeing the benefits of never sending Nabil Bentaleb on loan? What have we learned from Kane's rise? It is an impossible question to answer but was he ready to make his impact before he was finally allowed to play in the Premier League, first at the end of 2013-2014 and eventually bursting onto the scene in the fall of 2014?
We have used the loan system a lot over the years to develop our young players to varying degrees of success and failure. The journeys of Harry Kane, Ryan Mason, Danny Rose, Kyle Walker, Tom Carroll and others have been well documented as they have bounced from club to club in the Championship and the Premier League, sometimes succeeding and developing like Danny Rose, Kyle Walker, and Andros Townsend. Nevertheless, our young players' loans were risky and rocky along the way. Harry Kane was called by not too few Leicester City fans as the 'worst player to ever play for the Foxes.' Ryan Mason never played for Lorient in Ligue 1 making the bench just once. Milos Veljkovic, Dominic Ball, and Nathan Oduwa strangely struggled to make appearances for their loaned teams, for various reasons.
I don't want it to seem like I am dismissing the benefits of the loan system. I do, however, want to really examine when loans should and should not occur. Cristiano Ronaldo was never loaned back to Sporting Lisbon after signing for United, nor did he go to develop in the Championship or at another PL team to 'acclimate to English football.' Nabil Bentaleb never went on loan for us and has shown an incredible amount of promise, nailing down a starting spot initially at 19 years old.
It appears as if some of our most talented and highly-rated players to come through in a long time are coming into the first team with little to no loan experience. Dele Alli, after signing last January, only played half a season back at his former club, MK Dons. Joshua Onomah and Harry Winks, two of our brightest prospects in years, seem to be coming into the first team now without any loans.
Should this be the way forward for Tottenham? Should we 'unleash' Onomah into the Premier League, especially with so little depth in the attacking midfield right now? What about Alex Pritchard, who has been called special time and time again with each loan? And with Tom Carroll's transfer seemingly on the horizon, did we make a mistake by not giving him a run in the first team earlier? Did we bury him behind average footballers, or is that something easy to say with the benefit of hindsight?
It is a complicated subject and I am sorry to write such a long post about it. But with the transfer window careening toward its close in September, many of us are nervously watching our Twitter feeds, hoping to see an announcement of a new signing.
But with Alex Pritchard, Dele Alli, Josh Onomah, and Harry Winks waiting to get their chance, and Carroll strangely never getting his, is the exciting football we are all hoping for already training on Hotspur Way every day?
Last edited: