He's probably lost in Milton Keynes.
Spurs v Wimbledon Match Thread
- Thread starter Archibald&Crooks
- Start date
Gb160
Well done boys. Good process
- Jun 20, 2012
- 23,678
- 93,450
Anyone ever told you how much you look like Serge Aurier mate?
Houdini
No better cure for the blues than some good pussy.
- Jul 10, 2006
- 56,801
- 78,635
But when we win, I always love to see the pain on the faces of our opponents. Chelsea drew against Norwich, but since Lennie Riefenstahl died they've had no one to do their fan TV.
tiger666
Large Member
- Jan 4, 2005
- 27,978
- 82,216
IGSpur
Well-Known Member
- Jan 11, 2013
- 7,939
- 13,758
Well all the money we made was due to players being brought in before Poch arrived. My point is none are being brought through now that hold any value. If the point is just to produce players to sustain itself that's pointless as it doesn't help the first team.
Striking gold once or twice a decade seems pretty pointless as we wouldn't have needed to revamp and large amount of investment we made. Surely the point of investing in something is to do better than it was previously doing. We were due to produce a player of Kane's ability at some point, so again, I don't really see any significant improvements that warrant the investment and restructure we might as well have just kept things the same and like I say use the money for the team.
- Feb 1, 2005
- 55,602
- 205,188
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #649
How much does this investment cost? How much, say over the past five years, has it cost us and how much have we recouped through sales over the same period of time?
Gb160
Well done boys. Good process
- Jun 20, 2012
- 23,678
- 93,450
Sorry mate I disagree, if it was such a drain on resources then the plug would be pulled, so it must be operating with a profit. (Which indirectly does benefit the first team).
I don't think any club is 'due' a Harry Kane...they happen very rarely and to very few clubs.
When was the last time any other team in the top 6 produced a 'Harry Kane' ?
Last edited:
Gb160
Well done boys. Good process
- Jun 20, 2012
- 23,678
- 93,450
It's a daft argument, if it was operating at a loss we all know Levy would pull the plug on it.
He's just lashing out because he thinks that academy prospects are ready for first team action, whereas Poch knows they're not.
yes we are very fortunate to be honest
Even though we lost the game at home to Chelsea, the upside was that I watched it on the Pacific coast, so had gorgeous scenery to take away the bad thoughts.
Don't go out in the cold.
Ionman34
SC Supporter
- Jun 1, 2011
- 7,182
- 16,793
There are a multitude of factors that you are not taking into account when evaluating the worth of an academy.
The first has already been addressed, producing players that, whilst they may not make an impact on our own first team, are sold on for reasonable to excellent returns. Just off the top of my head we’ve had Caulker, Livermore, Bentaleb, Mason, Pritchard all go for a number of million apiece. Conservatively £50 million in total?
Secondly, the production of a World class star has a number of benefits, a) we don’t shell out multi millions to gain their skills, b) they bring in a following and revenue worth millions, c) they enable you to progress further, increasing the opportunities for higher league placing, European progression etc, all adding to the revenue pot and d) if you eventually sell you get top market value for an asset without having to offset against any initial outlay. This in itself would likely pay for the academy for decades.
Thirdly, the quality of the academy increases the likelihood of attracting the cream of young talent. The better the talent, the greater the chance of producing the “Worldies” at better than once a decade. As already stated, few do this in our country, which is why the Class of ‘92 stands out so much, it is the exception rather than the rule. A top class academy increases the chances of finding that type of talent more regularly, Ajax are proof of this and top talent know this. They’re like a finishing school with the talent knowing that they’ll get farmed out to a heavyweight. However, if the heavyweight has a comparable academy, there’s every reason for them to believe they’ll make it there without the farming out. At worst they’ll know they’ll get the kind of training needed to make it in a top league, if not at an elite club.
There are many other factors, but I’ll end by addressing your last point. The academy at its worst is a money spinner. Even if we don’t produce our own “Worldies,” if it produces say a half dozen journeymen every 1-5 years, each going at 10 to 15 million apiece, this generates £60 to £100 million in funds that can be invested in that “ “Worldie.” This alone makes the academy viable. Economically it is a wiser investment of the initial outlay than on a single player who likely will depreciate in value over a few years. Think about it, if the academy produces journeymen that realise say £15-20 million a year and the odd “Worldie,” this is money that can then be used to augment the squad with other “Worldies” and allow competitive wages. It’s another revenue stream that, if successfully managed, is worth far more than the outlay and upkeep.
was working today showing real estate ---- bloomin cold out!!!
Gb160
Well done boys. Good process
- Jun 20, 2012
- 23,678
- 93,450
BBC1 10:30.
Saw pictures of my cousin's house in New Jersey and it looked bad. Contrast that to Sydney where it was almost 47 degrees C.
IGSpur
Well-Known Member
- Jan 11, 2013
- 7,939
- 13,758
I think it has operated on a profit from the academy players brought through pre Poch, and we should be doing that more and I believe it can whereas you don't.
By due I mean World/Top class players come round every now and then. We had Hoddle, then we had Campbell then we had King, so clearly as things were before we were due to produce another, I don't think it require the complete restructuring of the academy. We could have just left things the way they were and it wouldn't have made a difference is my point. We've always produced the Carrs, the Barmbys, Marneys, who will make us money, like I said the point in an investment is to be an improvement on what we did before.
I think it should be better used you don't fair enough. I don't know why you think I'm lashing out and can't have a debate without trying to make someone look stupid. It only started because I dared to suggest that putting an academy player on the bench doesn't mean you're not taking a game seriously. It finished and a few hours later you tagged me in a joke, I made a joke back, you got sensitive/defensive and we're here now.
Honestly, I don't have the figures to hand and cba to research on a Sunday evening. Don't get me wrong I don't think it costs much where it will be detrimental at all. My point was, we seem to be producing players at the same rate as we've always produced players. We're not doing any better than we were pre the restructure, bar the period of time when Redknapp gave a load a chance through the Europa League. I know that the running costs under the EPPP cost more than they did before the restructure and there are certain rules in place. So if money is so tight, we could have used that money to contribute towards better wages or something. Gb160 says we should only produce a player once or twice a decade, we were already doing that, so don't fix what's not broken and use the money more wisely.
FWIW I believe that the academy is doing what it is meant to do which is produce more top quality players that can play in the first team and be sold on for profit but if Poch an the fans don't, I'm just saying we didn't need to go through the whole restructure
