- Aug 13, 2005
- 46,700
- 104,989
He was always going to be for the chop after doing something like that
sterling not even on the bench for sunderland today, i know it's still early days but it's shaping up to be another poor loan. i don't know why we don't use stevenage more, surely they're ideal and amos' loan there is one of few recent ones that actually worked out well for everyone.
We do need a trusted loan network. Stevenage and MK Dons we clearly have a working relationship with. Would like us to work with Luton Town too - not too far away and have a great record of bringing players through. Should be in the Championship next year too.
Otherwise we seem to have a good relationship with Swansea, Sunderland, Portsmouth, Southend and Peterborough. Shame Mark Warburton isn't knocking about any more. Good that Bielsa's with Leeds...
Am sure he could do a few scouting or spying missions for us ?How old is Bielsa? Is he near retirement? When he retires, would like him to join us and work with Poch in some capacity.
Opposition scout?How old is Bielsa? Is he near retirement? When he retires, would like him to join us and work with Poch in some capacity.
On the depth thing, and what makes this even more annoying is that Man City have 3 other wingers from this age group in Matondo, Poveda and Richards who stand no chance of coming through there but would likely be starting in other age groups. Along with Hudson-Odoi it's just talent being wasted. Also in the players you mentioned above Ampadu was also in this age group but not deemed good enough at u16s. Really is crazy depth
Our subsequent reserve crop have quite a lot to live up to, with only Winks to date really having done enough to put himself high on that list, though KWP and perhaps CCV might also creep in.
Loathed to dive in here given your knowledge but Carroll was given the chances that most others would want. He doesn’t fit your narrative.Which is ironic considering the crop of players after them were more talent. Clearly the use of the loan system and the first team opportunities handed to them via the EL helped a lot of those players establish themselves as well as a year of Sherwood forcing the issue.
The current more talented crop of had none of that. The only year we have EL football was in 14/15 when Poch was learning about his squad so apparently could not give chanes, and 15/16 when Onomah got a couple of chances including the game against Monaco his only start in CM for us where we won 4-1. Since then, we've had CL football and only found an opportunity for one player in Winks, which IIRC he also got his initial chances via an injury crisis somewhat. I'm sure someone will correct me. Addiitonally under the current regime loans were forwned upon, which meant talented players were stagnating in u23 football and not developing, even on bad loans.
Every single player, I think, in the list above bar Bentaleb, Veljkoivc and Falque were out on loan at around 18/19, in some way or another to at least develop expereince.
In comparison by the time Onomah had turned 20 he had 793 first team minutes under his belt over 3 seasons and 31 appearances an average of 25 per game, I don't know wha tit would be if you took the sporadic 90 mins out.
Whereas Carroll has played played 2026 minutes of consistent first team football including 450 minutes for our first team in the Europa League, in his preferred position which was over 200 minutes more than Onomah had played at the same age.
I compare these 2 as they were both the most talented midfielders (CMs) in their age group, also because fans claim claim that Onomah wasn't physically ready for first team football despite him being a lot bigger and stronger than Carroll. In this time Carroll wasn't even playing for a decent England age group, whereas Onomah was a regular in what was at the time, England's strongest age group that had produced and had already won 2 international tournaments. Now while Carroll was talented I'm sure the consensus is Onomah was a better player, and some fans are starting to come round to the idea that even Carroll's development was handled poorly so what do we make of Onomah's?
And when you compared to the rest of Onomah's age group Onomah had more opportunities. As in those times he was trying to scrape together some first team appearances none of the others were even allowed to go out on loan. It's no wonder that Carroll's age group, with all the opportunities they have had, are doing or appear to be doing considerably better than any of the players born below 1995 as they have all been handled shoddily.
If we compare two similar types of players Pritchard had 2 great loans on the other hand Sahshoua by all accounts had to arrange his own loan to go out. As Vieira said he knows from managing the CIty u23s and seeing seeing the players out there and having managed in Ligue 1 that there are players stuck in the u23s who would be starting in Ligue 1. He also acknowledged that staying in the u23s actually causes regression. These are teh things happening to our players.
So there's two groups.
The apparently successful lot born before 1995. The had first team opportunities and lot of loans and experience, but not many England representatives and those England age groups had one successful age group.
Then those born after. We've had plenty in the England age groups. Those age groups have won tournaments, various coaches have admitted that England are producing the best in players in the world and with our players contributing and our players being hunted but for some reason, they have been less successful.
So despite a lot of evidence suggesting the 2nd group have more talent, why have the first lot been so successful. Well the first group got lots of loans and first team opportunities. I can only conclude that the development of the 2nd lot of players were handled really poorly.
It will be incredibly hard for those born after the year of 1995 to match up to those born pre 1995, when they haven't had the same amount of opportunities, but I await for the fingers to be pointed at the players, as a reason for their lack of development
Loans are so difficult - speaking to someone who worked for another club at a lower level his opinion was that taking boys from Spurs was a particular risk as Spurs worked on developing a certain type of player. Technically very able but sometimes lacking in the so called dark arts, the grafting and the battling aspects of football (which is kind of ironic as the current first team are proving masters of the latter two_.
Clubs are often not looking for a technician who is going to come in and create some special moments but then fade out of games or who are not able to cope physically. They are often looking for lads who can come in and cope with the physical aspects of football. You have to remember that clubs bringing in loans are often doing so because they are struggling or have injuries and that many sides down the league ladder are not going to play from the back.
I suspect much of Pochettino’s mistrust of the loan system is to do with the general abysmal standard of coaching in the lower leagues, and the general reliance on physicality and “manning up”. What’s the point in sending them their if they’re learning so much rubbish?There didn’t seem to be a problem arranging loans for those sort of lads back when Harry and Tim were working their address books…
Under Pochettino the aspiration for youngsters at the club seems to be for them hang out with the first team squad in the hopes that an injury crisis will hand them a sink or swim opportunity. For a few, such as Harry Winks this might work out, but even for the likes of KWP or Foyth a good performance is not immediately followed up by further outings, or if it is the next outing is strewn with errors while they learn on the job under relentless scrutiny. For most though it just means years of stagnation while they wait for the call that never comes.
I am not sure why Pochettino is so averse to the loan system, given that much of his success in bringing through youngsters has been with the likes of Kane and Mason who had been through the loan grind before his arrival, or with those such as Dier and Dele who had begun their football education elsewhere.
The Pochettino method of keeping youngsters close might ultimately be as effective as the more traditional approach in bringing through first team talent for Spurs, but the gulf in experience between the first team and the reserves weakens us in terms of strength in depth, and more importantly we are failing those youngsters who are being held back by lack of meaningful football. This won’t go unnoticed by agents and parents, and our ability to attract and retain talent could suffer.
I suspect much of Pochettino’s mistrust of the loan system is to do with the general abysmal standard of coaching in the lower leagues, and the general reliance on physicality and “manning up”. What’s the point in sending them their if they’re learning so much rubbish?
Actually the thing about our academy is we take the players who aren't as physically dominant in their age groups. We focus on those born later in the school year, who tend to be smaller.Are they though? I think it's healthy especially for players that have been reliant on their own physical superiority to realise that this may not be the case against seniors.
Actually the thing about our academy is we take the players who aren't as physically dominant in their age groups. We focus on those born later in the school year, who tend to be smaller.
There's obviously lots of good things about loans, learning to play infront of pressurised crowds, learning about pro dressing rooms, the physical nature of the game. However on the downside most lower league teams don't focus on pressing routines, or patterns of play in the style we play in, so our players won't be learning the way Poch wants them to play.Still, how do you want them to learn the senior game if you don't want them loaned up risking that they learn "rubbish"?
Is it not John McDermott’s job to oversee potential loans. A year or two back when Man Utd were rumoured to be after him, his job was upgraded to cover under 23 down. Bit like a technical director but only focusing on youth, while Steve Hitchen does recruitment for the first team.I'm actually becoming hopeful/slightly optimistic about our approach to the loan system.
I agree the use of loans has been pretty shambolic under Poche, and it has cost a lot of our prospects a lot of development time. It's all well and good being coached how we want them to play, but players need to be playing matches (u23 games don't count). We've heard countless times from Kane, Townsend, Mason etc. how these experiences playing with men taught them so much, and it's so obvious that those who get first team exposure early benefit from it (exhibit 1 - Dele Alli). Not only that, the players that don't play matches often move backwards (TOB, KWP, Winks almost did, Onomah). We even have an example of what could have been when comparing KWP with Wan-Bissaka.
THAT SAID, I also completely understand Poche's reasoning of why he doesn't ship them all out on loan to lower league sides a la Harry R, as he wants his players to play matches, but play and train in the right way. The perfect example of why he wants this done is to see how a poor loan has effected Onomah. Went to a team to get first experience, but played in a team/under a manager that plays a completely different style to us and is not suited to his strengths.
The reason that I am becoming slightly more optimistic (probably deluding myself) is that we appear to be looking further afield, looking for better fits. If our youth recruitment/development strategy is to focus on the technically able, and not physically developed, then it makes sense to send them on loan to leagues/clubs that play technical games. The loans of Shashoua and Georgiou to Spain make me hopeful that we will see more of this going forward. While we all would love our players to go on loan to the Bundesliga as we see with other top 6 youth, if that's not happening there is no reason we should be turning our noses up at lower quality, but still technically focused leagues, like Ligue 1, Segunda B, Serie B, etc.
In an ideal world I'd love to see the club bring someone in who's sole job is to find suitable loans for the players that need to take the step up from youth football, but aren't ready for first team football with Spurs yet, and then monitor those players while on loan. How much better would it be for us if we'd managed to get someone like Roles at an Eredivisie club or even somewhere like the Belgian pro league. Yes it's not glamorous, yes its not a top tier league, but exposure to men's football, regular large crowds and the pressure that comes with playing for a first team would develop these players like no amount of training/youth games could. Plus, good performances in a first team no matter what league are much harder to ignore than smashing youth games week in week out. Look at Amos, a middle of the pack steady eddie, yet a very good 6 month loan at league 2 Stevenage shot him to the top of the pile.
Just my Monday thoughts anyway...sorry if rambling a touch.