What's new

The Spurs Youth Thread - 2017/2018

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
I wonder if the event organisers know that we're going to these tournaments with the intention of getting a right royal roasting. I get prioritising individual development over team accolades, I've defended the idea many times myself but there is a limit. On the international stage they're representing this club and getting humiliated is not a great look. I also wonder what it does to the confidence of the players. Getting no further than the first round and losing to teams we absolutely should be beating and shipping 7 goals in two games can't do wonders for their self-esteem or their confidence. It was clear that the lads were very disappointed and frustrated as their humiliating elimination was confirmed.

Harsh we easily should have won the 1st game scoring 5 or 6 at least. And then we had rough end of the draw playing twice in 48 hrs. If we won 1st game we’d have gone through to next round.
 

N174EVA

New Member
Jan 24, 2018
6
2
Amazing how many U18 games we seem to score 3 or 4 and not win. And always seem to be ahead and get pegged back.
There seems to be a pattern. To me it's obvious the coaches don't seem to develop the defenders and only individual skilful attacking players
 

IGSpur

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2013
7,939
13,758
I don't think we spend very much time at all teaching our kids how to defend. 100% effort put into their offensive and technical training. I absolutely understand why we do what we do but it makes for brutal match performances. Our defensive line in this game was Tainio (holding midfielder), Bowden (box to box midfielder), Binks (ball playing defender), Cirkin (full back) and White (creative midfielder). We were never going to compete off the ball in this tournament. I feel bad for the likes of Binks who, it is blindingly obvious, is quality because he is constantly exposed by the sieve like nature of our defensive shape and personnel.

I think it is clear to see, and I've said this quite a lot it's obvious that up until say u18s, we focus on producing players with individual quality, and we only really start to focus on shape and structure etc once they hit the u18s, but even then there is a lot of experimenting on trying to develop ability. I think it is successful for us, as it is what helps us produce quality players good enough for the first team. England also notice it, despite some of our performances where some results are contrived England coaches still notice that our players are some of the best in England, and watching them it is clear to see the individual talent. This can end up us looking poor and exposed but I don't think it's a big issue. I would trust the regime that has worked so far. I get that the players may be embarrassed but it may be good for them, I'm sure the coaches know. They may be trying to test them under different levels of stress, we know the coaches leave them exposed, and they may want to see how they bounce back from such a defeat. See what characters around to gee their mates back up, find out whose head drops etc

This may be a large part of the 'developing the whole person' we hear about and not just the footballing sides. A lot of our players will destroy other teams and it definitely brings them to earth. I think the fans have more of a problem with it than the coaches. We may be embarrassed but ultimately it is about the development. It's cliché but true. That's not to say our method is the only method and the best but it is clearly successful. Look at the players we have developed so far. Chelsea combine both sides of development well. And on the other end, I've seen teams, said up very rigidly and not allowing for much talent development. You will find teams at u18s level that are hard to break down and very organised but you won't spot a player in there that you think will be quality int he future. I always think that aspect of the game can always be taught and ingrained later, whereas it is harder to teach new things to an older player and start finding their individual talent once they are 21/22 when they've grown up learning how to just play as part of a unit.

Also with regards to the game against PSG, as coys200 said we hadn't rested and they were older than us. They also probably the best academy setup in France. It doesn't look good but it's not like they destroyed our best 11 with every player in their favourite position.

I like Binks and he has impressed me, but I was always impressed more with his on the ball ability than his defending, though of course his defending was good. But I thought he was a good defender, who had the ability to spring a counter attack with a raking pass, or pass through the lines or being able to pick up a goal. But I've come away impressed with his ability to handle a very good attacking team in a mish mash of a back line, being the senior defender.
 

IGSpur

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2013
7,939
13,758
Just caught up, beaten by a bigger, stronger, faster team with some technical gems. We really missed Bowden's presence in midfield and struggled to get the ball to our dangerous wide players as a result.

I quite liked the cameo by Marqes Muir at RB.

Where does Harvey White generally play?

I was quite disappointed with Oluwayemi.

Muir is highly rated and I believe is usually a CB. He is an u15 like John. I'' watch back but John is very silky, he probably did not get to show his talent playing against a team a lot bigger and stronger than him

To add to what Spurzinho siad about White, I've always known him as a more mobile Bowden could play no.10 or drop deep but more understanding is he has also become a bit more of a harrier, and gets around the pitch more doing the defensive side.

White is a midfielder very similar to a lot of our midfielders. Decent passer, likes to carry the ball, low centre of gravity, twists and turns well.

Oluwayemi isn't great, never really was. The coaches must have seen something in him though because he's not just making up the numbers like Freeman who, in my opinion, is slightly better.

Oluwayemi didn't look great, but I always say him as a good ball handler. Safe hands and a good shot stopper. Conversely I always saw Freeman as a bit of an acrobatic and showman. I've seen JO more than I've seen Freeman and he hasn't done himself justice here, letting in a couple of weak goals, and I wouldn't be able to pass judgement on who's better but I'm genuinely shocked at the little opportunity Freeman has had.
 

WindyCOYS

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2016
479
1,588
Have we had a proper discussion about why we think TOB has been promoted to the first team squad? It seems so odd to me, almost as if he was hand-picked at U16 level, because his performances at U18 level certainly didn't merit that promotion. Certainly there are others more deserving based on performances (Skipp being the most obvious candidate).

They obviously see something they like in him, which is great, but I must say that I have reservations about his stye of play; he seems a bit of a Ross Barkley to me: not defensively sound enough to play 8, not explosive or creative enough to play 10.

Naturally I'd absolutely love to be proven wrong!
 

beats1

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2010
30,006
29,551
Have we had a proper discussion about why we think TOB has been promoted to the first team squad? It seems so odd to me, almost as if he was hand-picked at U16 level, because his performances at U18 level certainly didn't merit that promotion. Certainly there are others more deserving based on performances (Skipp being the most obvious candidate).

They obviously see something they like in him, which is great, but I must say that I have reservations about his stye of play; he seems a bit of a Ross Barkley to me: not defensively sound enough to play 8, not explosive or creative enough to play 10.

Naturally I'd absolutely love to be proven wrong!
We probably offered him a fast track route in order to get him to sign after we lost Kirby
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
39,837
50,713
I wonder if the event organisers know that we're going to these tournaments with the intention of getting a right royal roasting. I get prioritising individual development over team accolades, I've defended the idea many times myself but there is a limit. On the international stage they're representing this club and getting humiliated is not a great look. I also wonder what it does to the confidence of the players. Getting no further than the first round and losing to teams we absolutely should be beating and shipping 7 goals in two games can't do wonders for their self-esteem or their confidence. It was clear that the lads were very disappointed and frustrated as their humiliating elimination was confirmed.

I've kind of gone full circle on this issue, and am pretty much on board with our philosophy on this. I started coming round to the idea during Ehiogu's time, realising that the teams he was putting out couldn't be just his choices, but a program designed by McDermott etc, and since then the more I think about it the more it makes sense.

I'm not saying I don't want our teams to be coached well tactically, as well as individually, I do, and I think we should be coaching that hard press, collective work ethic through all age groups as standard, regardless of the individual development, but I think our prioritising the development of these kids as footballers (and people - character etc) should always take precedence over results. Always. (And I believe this at International level as well)

If the kids aren't performing and aren't learning whilst getting humiliated at these tournaments, that's a problem, but we seem to be continually producing good footballers, so there appears some merit in it.

Something else occurs to me too, one of the bullshit things always expressed as a negative reason for not playing young players is "if they have bad game it could ruin them" - well if they are going to tournaments and playing league games - where they are being set up (deliberately or not) to suffer bad results and humiliation, then that's going to mentally prepare them for the knocks that are coming their way.

Who's mentally tougher, the kid who's had to take some humiliation, or the kid whose spent 5 years cruising through his development, never stepping out of his comfort zone ?

As long as these kids are getting the right support through the tough times and the coaching staff are giving them the right message through the tough tests etc.

You could argue that constantly winning fosters a winning mentality, but some of the best players are those that suffered rejection and set backs as kids. Kane was rejected by Arsenal and us once as a kid, he's not even the 3rd or 4th best "footballer" technically in out team, but he's got the strongest mentality of any player I know.
 
Last edited:

Spurzinho

Well-Known Member
Jan 24, 2016
2,513
8,342
I think it is clear to see, and I've said this quite a lot it's obvious that up until say u18s, we focus on producing players with individual quality, and we only really start to focus on shape and structure etc once they hit the u18s, but even then there is a lot of experimenting on trying to develop ability. I think it is successful for us, as it is what helps us produce quality players good enough for the first team. England also notice it, despite some of our performances where some results are contrived England coaches still notice that our players are some of the best in England, and watching them it is clear to see the individual talent. This can end up us looking poor and exposed but I don't think it's a big issue. I would trust the regime that has worked so far. I get that the players may be embarrassed but it may be good for them, I'm sure the coaches know. They may be trying to test them under different levels of stress, we know the coaches leave them exposed, and they may want to see how they bounce back from such a defeat. See what characters around to gee their mates back up, find out whose head drops etc

This may be a large part of the 'developing the whole person' we hear about and not just the footballing sides. A lot of our players will destroy other teams and it definitely brings them to earth. I think the fans have more of a problem with it than the coaches. We may be embarrassed but ultimately it is about the development. It's cliché but true. That's not to say our method is the only method and the best but it is clearly successful. Look at the players we have developed so far. Chelsea combine both sides of development well. And on the other end, I've seen teams, said up very rigidly and not allowing for much talent development. You will find teams at u18s level that are hard to break down and very organised but you won't spot a player in there that you think will be quality int he future. I always think that aspect of the game can always be taught and ingrained later, whereas it is harder to teach new things to an older player and start finding their individual talent once they are 21/22 when they've grown up learning how to just play as part of a unit.

Also with regards to the game against PSG, as coys200 said we hadn't rested and they were older than us. They also probably the best academy setup in France. It doesn't look good but it's not like they destroyed our best 11 with every player in their favourite position.

I like Binks and he has impressed me, but I was always impressed more with his on the ball ability than his defending, though of course his defending was good. But I thought he was a good defender, who had the ability to spring a counter attack with a raking pass, or pass through the lines or being able to pick up a goal. But I've come away impressed with his ability to handle a very good attacking team in a mish mash of a back line, being the senior defender.

I don't disagree with what you or @Bus-Conductor have to say. As I've said I'm not interested in tin pot youth accolades but its more the manner of our performances in prestigious tournaments is damaging to our reputation. The only conclusion many can have come to having watched us in those two games is that we didn't belong there. We need to take care on two fronts that we don't alienate people. On the one hand there's a certain professional courtesy in not turning up to prestigious tournaments and playing like the keystone cops and on the second hand there's the effect it has on the perception of young players and parents. I don't mind my son playing for a club that says youth trophies are not important his development is...that's great but I think I would have some reservations about him losing every week and suffering regular hammerings. The game should be enjoyable as well. It didn't look like many of our players were having fun out there and enjoying their football.
 

mpickard2087

Patient Zero
Jun 13, 2008
21,886
32,513
As the topic is currently on defence and development, I'll ask a question(s) that I posed a few weeks back but didn't really get an answer... Do people think we could be a bit more radical, and possibly expect a bit more from what we're doing?

I only currently see bits and pieces so maybe my assessments are harsh/totally wrong and feel free to say, previous years I saw a lot more, but basing it on our beliefs of playing out from the back etc and teaching/developing the football elements, I do have some observations..... Firstly, the individuals. I caveat that they can still improve and develop but the ones I have seen - the likes of CCV, Tanganga, Eyoma - as defenders look promising, don't get me wrong, with the ball they are competent... but still a bit clunky. I get the feeling they've got there more on their physicality rather than what they can do with the ball. None of them look as smooth in comparison to Foyth, and we should be thinking that this is the type of player, and level of comfort on the ball, we should be developing rather than buying in.

Maybe in English football you will always have to compromise between physicality and technique in defenders, but I'd say there is an argument that a really bold, radical outlook would be to go all out on technique and developing Vertonghen-types rather than Sanchez's. I haven't seen anything of BLF or Binks, two who by the sounds of it have all-round potential and especially with the ball at their feet, so maybe it's a case of still refining coaching techniques and these type of players are still to come through, but I'd be interested to hear what others think.

Next is the tactical aspect to playing out from the back. I see a lot of posters/watchers lamenting that we often struggle to do it and not just down to individual errors, which will happen in age-group football... Again, only going on bits and pieces that I see but what I have seen is that we could probably aim to have better structures in place. I think if you're going to play this way, then from an early age you need to do shape work and pattern play as a unit so that under pressure you know where your passing options will be and so as you reach the final age groups it's a well drilled machine. The bits I see, appreciating it's young kids who are learning, some of the positional play and shape to make options could be better. Again it's about being radical, and striving to be a leader in the development stakes. I don't think development has to all be about the individual. If you can comprehensively drill systems and a framework of playing then that makes it easier for players to move up and compete, maybe even allows weaker players to go further.

I don't write all that to trash the great work that is done in the academy.... Just pondering if we can strive to go from 8 or 9 out of 10, to 10/10 in what we do.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
39,837
50,713
As the topic is currently on defence and development, I'll ask a question(s) that I posed a few weeks back but didn't really get an answer... Do people think we could be a bit more radical, and possibly expect a bit more from what we're doing?

I only currently see bits and pieces so maybe my assessments are harsh/totally wrong and feel free to say, previous years I saw a lot more, but basing it on our beliefs of playing out from the back etc and teaching/developing the football elements, I do have some observations..... Firstly, the individuals. I caveat that they can still improve and develop but the ones I have seen - the likes of CCV, Tanganga, Eyoma - as defenders look promising, don't get me wrong, with the ball they are competent... but still a bit clunky. I get the feeling they've got there more on their physicality rather than what they can do with the ball. None of them look as smooth in comparison to Foyth, and we should be thinking that this is the type of player, and level of comfort on the ball, we should be developing rather than buying in.

Maybe in English football you will always have to compromise between physicality and technique in defenders, but I'd say there is an argument that a really bold, radical outlook would be to go all out on technique and developing Vertonghen-types rather than Sanchez's. I haven't seen anything of BLF or Binks, two who by the sounds of it have all-round potential and especially with the ball at their feet, so maybe it's a case of still refining coaching techniques and these type of players are still to come through, but I'd be interested to hear what others think.

Next is the tactical aspect to playing out from the back. I see a lot of posters/watchers lamenting that we often struggle to do it and not just down to individual errors, which will happen in age-group football... Again, only going on bits and pieces that I see but what I have seen is that we could probably aim to have better structures in place. I think if you're going to play this way, then from an early age you need to do shape work and pattern play as a unit so that under pressure you know where your passing options will be and so as you reach the final age groups it's a well drilled machine. The bits I see, appreciating it's young kids who are learning, some of the positional play and shape to make options could be better. Again it's about being radical, and striving to be a leader in the development stakes. I don't think development has to all be about the individual. If you can comprehensively drill systems and a framework of playing then that makes it easier for players to move up and compete, maybe even allows weaker players to go further.

I don't write all that to trash the great work that is done in the academy.... Just pondering if we can strive to go from 8 or 9 out of 10, to 10/10 in what we do.

Fucking hell, steady on MP, English academies only started teaching kids to pass to each other about 5 years ago.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
Have we had a proper discussion about why we think TOB has been promoted to the first team squad? It seems so odd to me, almost as if he was hand-picked at U16 level, because his performances at U18 level certainly didn't merit that promotion. Certainly there are others more deserving based on performances (Skipp being the most obvious candidate).

They obviously see something they like in him, which is great, but I must say that I have reservations about his stye of play; he seems a bit of a Ross Barkley to me: not defensively sound enough to play 8, not explosive or creative enough to play 10.

Naturally I'd absolutely love to be proven wrong!

It is slightly odd as really he’s in competition with winks and Onomah. Essentially Poch has stated he’d rather have TOB around rather than Onomah. So they must see something they think they can shape. He’s very calm on the ball looks good technically. In the World Cup he was steady if not spectacular in that metronome role. Very similar to winks really. But he does look to have a good burst of pace and physically looks decent think he’s about 6ft if not more. Skipp certainly seems to have more bite to his game. TOB has certainly been fast tracked be interesting to see how it turns out.
 

Krafty

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2004
4,768
2,099
It is slightly odd as really he’s in competition with winks and Onomah. Essentially Poch has stated he’d rather have TOB around rather than Onomah. So they must see something they think they can shape. He’s very calm on the ball looks good technically. In the World Cup he was steady if not spectacular in that metronome role. Very similar to winks really. But he does look to have a good burst of pace and physically looks decent think he’s about 6ft if not more. Skipp certainly seems to have more bite to his game. TOB has certainly been fast tracked be interesting to see how it turns out.

I would imagine there is a reall feeling/fear amongst the senior coaching staff that we don't have real cover for Dembele. We have a Dier and Wanyama as the DMs, Winks is a little passer/all rounder, Eriksen your terchnical playmaker when we are really, really on top, but there is no ball carrier like Dembele, and they are looking at any players who can play as the central midfielder who is physcially strong and athletic to offer solidity but can break forward on occassion with the ball.
 

N174EVA

New Member
Jan 24, 2018
6
2
As the topic is currently on defence and development, I'll ask a question(s) that I posed a few weeks back but didn't really get an answer... Do people think we could be a bit more radical, and possibly expect a bit more from what we're doing?

I only currently see bits and pieces so maybe my assessments are harsh/totally wrong and feel free to say, previous years I saw a lot more, but basing it on our beliefs of playing out from the back etc and teaching/developing the football elements, I do have some observations..... Firstly, the individuals. I caveat that they can still improve and develop but the ones I have seen - the likes of CCV, Tanganga, Eyoma - as defenders look promising, don't get me wrong, with the ball they are competent... but still a bit clunky. I get the feeling they've got there more on their physicality rather than what they can do with the ball. None of them look as smooth in comparison to Foyth, and we should be thinking that this is the type of player, and level of comfort on the ball, we should be developing rather than buying in.

Maybe in English football you will always have to compromise between physicality and technique in defenders, but I'd say there is an argument that a really bold, radical outlook would be to go all out on technique and developing Vertonghen-types rather than Sanchez's. I haven't seen anything of BLF or Binks, two who by the sounds of it have all-round potential and especially with the ball at their feet, so maybe it's a case of still refining coaching techniques and these type of players are still to come through, but I'd be interested to hear what others think.

Next is the tactical aspect to playing out from the back. I see a lot of posters/watchers lamenting that we often struggle to do it and not just down to individual errors, which will happen in age-group football... Again, only going on bits and pieces that I see but what I have seen is that we could probably aim to have better structures in place. I think if you're going to play this way, then from an early age you need to do shape work and pattern play as a unit so that under pressure you know where your passing options will be and so as you reach the final age groups it's a well drilled machine. The bits I see, appreciating it's young kids who are learning, some of the positional play and shape to make options could be better. Again it's about being radical, and striving to be a leader in the development stakes. I don't think development has to all be about the individual. If you can comprehensively drill systems and a framework of playing then that makes it easier for players to move up and compete, maybe even allows weaker players to go further.

I don't write all that to trash the great work that is done in the academy.... Just pondering if we can strive to go from 8 or 9 out of 10, to 10/10 in what we do.
Ever since John McDermott came in, nothing has changed training wise. Up to this day he still practices what Chris Ramsay put in place when he was in charge which I think is outdated compared to what academies are doing today. It's boring to watch trust me. I've been watching these boys for the past 7 years and it seems like every season is more or less the same repetitive drills. Defence doesn't really get worked on (tackling, positioning, offside traps), working on the boys fitness is another thing that is not really worked on and that's where you find some parents taking their kids to lea valley to gain extra fitness on our off days. Every Saturday/Sunday it's the same thing. We play the more attractive football than the opponents but yet unless it's a Cat 3 team, we always seem to ship in easy goals and same mistakes which does frustrate parents and kids. When on tour at u9s, we spoke to an Ajax coach and he said development and a winning mentality is a MUST. They don't tend to release kids at 9,10,11,12,13,14 and 15 as when they recruit them at a young age, they want to give the chosen kids proper development (Academies over here should try it). Another thing about the academy is the recruitment of players. What you will find is most players here already and the one being recruited are all very similar. Most of the boys are all natural midfielders or wingers, but are made to be played in different roles. It's frustrating. To me it's very clear why our highly rated youngsters don't get a 10 minute run around in a pointless Prem or CL game. To make this academy more successful, it has got to scrap Ramsays ethos and maybe let Poch draw up a new plan.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
I would imagine there is a reall feeling/fear amongst the senior coaching staff that we don't have real cover for Dembele. We have a Dier and Wanyama as the DMs, Winks is a little passer/all rounder, Eriksen your terchnical playmaker when we are really, really on top, but there is no ball carrier like Dembele, and they are looking at any players who can play as the central midfielder who is physcially strong and athletic to offer solidity but can break forward on occassion with the ball.

Out of all our CM youth prospects. I know Skipp is the most highly rated. And I think he will go on to be a solid player for us in years to come. Much in the same way as Dier solid but not sure if he has that xfactor. For me the most potentially exciting is Paris Maghoma. Although he can be a bit sloppy and look a tad lazy I still feel he has the most potential. There’s something very yaya toure for me about him. And has a great touch on free kicks and shots.
 
Top