Player Watch: Marcus Edwards

Also to round this argument off, none of us know how good or not each & every player is in the academy. Poch gets to see them train & will be getting info from his trusted team on the abilities for each player. If he doesn't think that they are good enough then we have to trust him.

We, as a club, are trying to win the league and we need top players in every position

Everlasting Seconds said:

If I understand the initial post correctly, it is about players who have come through an academy and started playing PL matches for their respective youth career clubs during the time since Pochettino's arrival at Spurs. Within that framework, I see little or no flaw in the stats. Carroll, Townsend, Rose, Kane etc etc didn't start playing PL matches for the club of their youth career after Pochettino arrived. Bellerin and Lingard did.

If one would have to include a whole range of Spurs players who came through from the Spurs academy at a point, then the same figures must be added up for other clubs, going further back in time. You have to start counting fomr some specific time in history, and it is reasonable to do that from Pochettino's start at Spurs, because this is supposed to be his forte.

More to the point, rather than haggling over who should count or not count, let's have the debate centre around the actual underlying question, are we happy or not happy with the amount of academy players who have started playing PL matches for Spurs after Pochettino arrived?

Click to expand...

Fair point, I personally am happy with the amount of academy players playing as I'm sure if we filled the team with young players too early we wouldn't have finished 3rd then 2nd, and our older players (who the young ones are learning from) would have left for Champions League football........

Just tried to catch up on this thread and had to stop. Everyone's now writing book reports on Youth in the Time of Pochettino. There are so many youth prospects that we are all super excited for but I think we all need to swallow a little pill of chill. There are fundamental issues with youth development that clearly need to be discussed but even if we fixed all those issues there's no guarantee that any one player we like is going to make it.

IGSpur said:

...

Let’s look at how many Premier League starts academy players have made at each club. I am using PL starts as I think everyone can agree that the PL is the main competition and if you are making starts there then it’s the only time you can really start to argue that they are seriously being rotated or considered for the first team. I am also only including players who made their competitive debuts in the 14/15 season or after, so since Poch joined. I haven’t included LC starts as the LC is used a chance to experiment and may make us look even worse. I haven’t included EL starts for the same reason, many managers used it as a 2nd eleven. Didn’t include the CL starts as PL more important but if you did again, Winks only made a couple of starts and it would make us look comparatively worse again, I’d imagine.

Bare in mind, Poch also has the advantage of being in charge for a longer period of time than any manager at any other comparable club bar Wenger, so has time to nurture and plan pathways for these academy players.

Spurs – 4 PL starts, Winks (3), KWP (1)
United – 78 PL starts, Rashford (41), Lingard (37)
Liverpool – 6 PL starts TAA (5), Woodburn (1)
Arsenal – 112 PL starts Iwobi (27), Bellerin (85)
Everton –30 PL starts Garbutt (3), Davies (21), Pennington (6),
City – 12 PL starts Iheanacho (12)
Now we all know how terrible Chelsea are but since 14/15 season, these players have gone from not playing one minutes of competitive football for any club to now playing
Christensen 1 start for Chelsea and 1000s of Bundesliga minutes
Palace – RLC (3)
Swansea – Abraham (5)

...

Click to expand...

A lot of the points you make are interesting, but those figures above do not strike me the same way as they do you.

In particular, what sticks out is that all of the teams you have listed have one, two or three players that have make up all of their academy starts. Tottenham have several players that are more or less equivalent to the above, it just happens that the criteria that you have chosen excludes the Spurs examples in a unrepresentative way. For example, I don't think that the status of Harry Kane is notably different to Jesse Lingard, but if you were to include him that would add another 110ish starts, making us the top side.

Therefore, it seems to me that the norm for top teams is to have about two or three players from the academy getting starts, with only one or at most two actually playing regularly. Spurs seems to be roughly similar or better than the other clubs.

Danny1 said:

Fair point, I personally am happy with the amount of academy players playing as I'm sure if we filled the team with young players too early we wouldn't have finished 3rd then 2nd, and our older players (who the young ones are learning from) would have left for Champions League football........

Click to expand...

That's a perfectly fair stance you should be allowed to have as it's a matter of different perspectives and preferences. Naturally balancing the sporting concerns isn't straight forward and something's got to give for every chose made.

I'm on the other hand is gobsmacked that since 2014, we have seen that few PL matches with players who a) are Spurs academy graduates and b) became senior players for Spurs after Pochettino's arrival. Especially in light of some of the more peculiar choices that's been made over the years.

Tashan Oakley-Boothe became the eighth academy player to make his debut under Pochettino on Tuesday.

https://twitter.com/thfcacademy/status/910854572251533312

faze_coys said:

Tashan Oakley-Boothe became the eighth academy player to make his debut under Pochettino on Tuesday.

https://twitter.com/thfcacademy/status/910854572251533312

Click to expand...

updated to 9th...

Winks
Onomah
Carter-Vickers
Edwards
Walkes
Harrison
Lesniak
Walker-Peters
Oakley-Booth

nicdic said:

Why don't Kane, Mason, and Betnaleb starts count? Does it skew the numbers and undo the point? Regardless of the pointless argument of who is responsible for bringing whichever player through, they are academy graduates who have clocked up significant starts for the first team. Rose arguably counts too, having been signed into the academy. I guess it undermines the argument?

Click to expand...

This is exactly it. Only counting players who made their league debut under specific managers is a very blinkered and redactive way of looking at it. How does playing a player who has one league start show significantly less trust/belief from the manager than a player yet to make their debut? Van Gaal gave several young players debuts but most of them were due to injuries to first team players and most of them have since left Man Utd but somehow they're better at developing youth than we are because Kane made his debut before Pochettino was manager?

Also the suggestion that Sherwood is more responsible for Kane developing into one of the world's best strikers is laughable.

nicdic said:

So Rashford shouldn't have any of his apps count under Mourinho because it was LVG who gave him his first start? It's bollocks. Either count all starts for academy players or not. Kane, Mason, Bentaleb all count. None of them were first team regulars before Poch. You can't argue that they were while continuing to claim that Winks doesn't count for Poch either.

Players I want to play don't get picked, they must be great in training because I love them, so Poch must not care what happens in training. Even though we've seen players not treated by their price tag or status, who have proved themselves in training to get in the team?

Click to expand...

This isn't about whether appearances count or not, of course they all count, it's about giving credit where it's due for managers more prepared to trust their own coached academy players and assessing what managers are actually better at this than others and under which managers academy kids without first team experience are likely to get better chances.

Rashford's appearances under Mourinho count, but by the time Mourinho has picked him, he's already proven he can play and produce at the highest level, whereas when LVG gave him his first taste of proper football he had no such proof to work on, just confidence in his ability as a coach to coach him, get him prepared and introduce him in the right circumstances etc.

And this judgement is not black and white, it varies on a sliding scale obviously, giving a player who's had 5 games a chance and hasn't done much - because you believe in him and are prepared to work with him more - is braver than giving a young player who's made 30 starts a game. etc.(and even then it varies on other circumstances that I'm sure you can envisage).

The point IG and I are trying to make here is it's much easier for a coach to pick a player who's already got senior experience than it is to pick one that hasn't, and the coaches that do integrate fresh players are the ones that take the risk, but deserve more credit when that player turns out well than the manager that inherits that experience.

I don't really understand your last paragraph.

Van gaal only picked rashford because every other forward at the entire club was injured. If that hadn't happened he'd still be an unremarkable youth player.

thebenjamin said:

Van gaal only picked rashford because every other forward at the entire club was injured. If that hadn't happened he'd still be an unremarkable youth player.

Click to expand...

Fun fact: Rashford was close to being loaned out to Norwegian club Stabæk. It fell apart because of Uniteds injury problems.

thebenjamin said:

Van gaal only picked rashford because every other forward at the entire club was injured. If that hadn't happened he'd still be an unremarkable youth player.

Click to expand...

Yup, there was no plan for him in the first team, injuries forced Van Gaal's hand which goes to show that there must be a whole host of good young players that only need that break and a little bit of luck.

Shadydan said:

Yup, there was no plan for him in the first team, injuries forced Van Gaal's hand which goes to show that there must be a whole host of good young players that only need that break and a little bit of luck.

Click to expand...

People vastly overrate the standard of players in the premier league tbh. A lot of youth could easily make the jump up

faze_coys said:

People vastly overrate the standard of players in the premier league tbh. A lot of youth could easily make the jump up

Click to expand...

Tim?

Just kidding, I suspect you're right.

faze_coys said:

People vastly overrate the standard of players in the premier league tbh. A lot of youth could easily make the jump up

Click to expand...

If they all made the jump up, does the standard of player in the premier league then increase? Meaning the next group of youth after them have a harder time of it? Or do they all become a bit worse when they make it?

tiger666 said:

If they all made the jump up, does the standard of player in the premier league then increase? Meaning the next group of youth after them have a harder time of it? Or do they all become a bit worse when they make it?

Click to expand...

Eh? He's saying that youngsters might be capable of playing in the Prem more often than they get the chance to do, I.e. that their level is comparable. The overall standard wouldn't change.

faze_coys said:

People vastly overrate the standard of players in the premier league tbh. A lot of youth could easily make the jump up

Click to expand...

I agree and disagree. People do overrate the standard of player in the premier league. But, most youth players cannot make the jump.

The youth players are technically proficient enough to play - but the biggest difference between the PL and other leagues is the physicality of the play. And, the physical aspect of the game is why most youth cannot not make the jump, until they have more physically developed. That simply takes time, hard training off the pitch, and sometimes just genetics.

A player like Edwards could probably step into a lower level team in one of the other big leagues - like La Liga or Serie A - and compete favorably - because players typically get more time and space on the ball than they do in the PL.

I think Sancho made a good decision to go to Dortmund, and it will be interesting to see if that impacts other young English talent - in terms of going abroad to get into first teams faster.

I guess at times it's just the difference between experience or the exuberance of youth, when the latter may be better more often than some might think!

Just interested to hear what are people's current percentage prediction that Edwards will make it here as a first team player?

I've seen him play 90 mins for us and England in age group matches about 7 or 8 times, and I really think he has tremendous quality, but I'd still only give it about 15-20% chance of him establishing himself here.

LexingtonSpurs said:

The youth players are technically proficient enough to play - but the biggest difference between the PL and other leagues is the physicality of the play. And, the physical aspect of the game is why most youth cannot not make the jump, until they have more physically developed. That simply takes time, hard training off the pitch, and sometimes just genetics.

Click to expand...

Again this I feel is somewhat of a myth and legend attributed to PL football. Players in the PL are so much more protected than they ever used to be. Gerrard was a skinny runt with his shirt hanging off him when he was introduced at a time players were still hacking each other. You've now got fitter and stronger academy players than ever before with all the advances in technology and science and more protection but now they're now it's too much for them. Really?. People like to make out that the PL is this incredibly hard league to break into but it's not. The PL is comparatively weaker than it has ever been despite the massive increase in money. The PL is a perfect example of the idiom 'a fool and his money are easily parted', just because there is more money somewhere it doesn't mean something is better, when the money is mispent. People are so caught up in out spending each other, and appeasing fans that they can't see the wood through the trees. If James Cameron behaved like the PL, he'd turn the Titanic into a wreck (no pun intended) including all kinds of unnecessary add-on. Oh look we've got another billion to spend put some elephants on the ship that'll look good.

An average player 10 years ago cost 5mil and now the same player costs 30m. That doesn't make the league better it just makes it more expensive. Introducing an academy player 10 years ago, would appear less daunting as there was less money so it looked easier. Now as everyone is spunking money to thought of throwing in someone who costs nothing to run around with players worth 30m sounds preposterous even though the young player are better and the PL players are worse.

nicdic said:

Why don't Kane, Mason, and Betnaleb starts count? Does it skew the numbers and undo the point? Regardless of the pointless argument of who is responsible for bringing whichever player through, they are academy graduates who have clocked up significant starts for the first team. Rose arguably counts too, having been signed into the academy. I guess it undermines the argument?

Click to expand...

For those upset that I chose an unfair timeline. My point is:

• that the PL need to improve and aren't bringing through enough academy players.
• that Pochettino is just as guilty of this as any other team/manager/club

So, rather than picking any timeline in football, I am choosing the period he joined the club. If people are not happy with my criteria of 'which academy players at other clubs have made PL starts since him joining', I will open it up to include all academy players to have played for their clubs first team since he joined, to include the ones you have mentioned

Spurs - Mason, Carroll, Townsend, Kane, Rose, Bentaleb, KWP, Winks
Liverpool - Sterling, Ibe, Gerrard, TAA , Woodburn,
Chelsea - Terry, Christensen
United - Cleverly, McNair, Blackett, Welbeck, Pogba, Lingard, Rashford
Arsenal - Wilshere, Gnabry, Jenkinson, Coquelin, Gibbs, Szczeny, Iwobi, Bellerin,
Everton - Browning, Garbutt, Hibbert, Barkley, Osman, Davies, Pennington
City - Iheanacho

So it doesn't really skew the stats and my original point still stands, we are no better at giving our own players games than any other comparable clubs bar City and Chelsea. So, if everyone can acknowledges that the PL struggle at bringing through academy players, which I think everyone agrees with, how are we any different? Why are we being told to just trust the manager as they will get a chance if they're good enough, if we don't believe that at other clubs?

I feel we are living off Poch's first season where we had upto 5 PL ready players left ready for him to us. Since then he as got rid of them and kept 2

What do people believe is harder, giving someone their first PL start under pressure, with the huge risks involved. Or continuing to play a player that has already had that risk removed?

Why when Dier and Alli were bought, and Mason, Kane, Bentaleb, Townsend, Rose were played were they not brought on with 5mins to go or in stoppage time when he started. Why are Winks and Onomah not subject to that gung ho approach he had at the start of his tenure. What hapepned to that manager who, threw caution to wind, and just gave inexperienced players games? I want to see more of that. Anyone who will have followed youth football will no the players he currently has generally were better than those ones he gave chances to above, so why does he not play them. Are the coaches wrong. Has McDermott lost his way? Maybe we should look at McDermott and ask why the level of players being developed has fallen off so sharply?

nightgoat said:

Also the suggestion that Sherwood is more responsible for Kane developing into one of the world's best strikers is laughable.

Click to expand...

McDermott (and Sherwood) were responsible for Kane's development up until the very end of the 13/14 season. In that season I had already said I believe Kane to be our striking version of Ledley King. Kane also made his first start in the PL for us and scored 3 in 6 starts towards the end of the season. Kane then started the 14/15 season scoring goals and went into the PL scoring. So you beleive it was down to Poch's summer coaching that lead to Kane being good enough to score those EL goals.
Poch is not responsible for Kane being that good. He has continued to develop him but Kane started scoring EL and PL goals without Poch's input. Poch has no dount contributed to him becoming the World Class player he is now, and I don't think there is a better coach for young players in teh world than Poch, but Kane's 14/15 season wasn't down to Poch. It was despite Poch ignoring Kane and only playing him due to the perfect storm. Heck Poch admitted if Kane hadn't scored that freekick at Villa he may not still be here.

thebenjamin said:

Van gaal only picked rashford because every other forward at the entire club was injured. If that hadn't happened he'd still be an unremarkable youth player.

Click to expand...

Don't doubt that. Rashford was not as good as 4 other strikers in his age group. But that is my point, Rashford who was clearly talented enough only got a chance due to circumstances, shouldn't the coaches or managers have noticed his talent and played him rather than neglecting him just as he is a youth player. If it is taking poor form and injuries for Kane and Rashford to get chances, the coaches clearly can't be that good a judge of a player that they only came through down to luck.

For the record I'm not holding United up as an ideal, my point is all of the PL suck at bringing through the best academy players and it's ridiculous that the only chance they get is down to fortune. How many more players are missed out on because not enough injuries occurred? Why is ti so random. My point in this debate is United are bad and so are we, just as the whole league is. I don't believe that players who are good enough are getting chances.

Like the debate guys, and only wish the best for our club.