Marcus Edwards leaving rumour?

[IGSpur]

Evans got 1 min the the league cup, Roberts has 4 mins in the league (when they were 4-1 down with 4 to go against us) and 35 in the league cup and Iheanacho has 23 mins in the league. That is a combined total of 27 mins in the PL and 36 mins in the league cup between those 3 players. Alli alone has 411 mins of PL, 180 in the EL and 15 in the league cup, Winks has 14 mins of EL and Carroll (not young, but still and academy player not broken into the side) has 24 PL, 90 EL and 90 LC.

You have to remember that unlike most teams, we have talented 22-24 year olds that (Mason, Carroll & Pritchard) weren't given a chance under previous managers, so we have to see what they are capable of and once we know that, they will either take the place of a more senior squad member (if they fit better) or will be moved on and the likes of Winks, Onomah and Oduwa will be given a go.

Edwards should be looking at the amount of time given to other players by other managers, as a lot of the time, it's token mins here and there, where as Poch seems to play them more consistently, regardless of age or even academy, just look at Dier, Alli, Bentaleb, Mason & Kane.

Ye but Alli was bought for the first team and had 2 seasons of experience under his belt. Carroll even played quite a few EL games for us under AVB and Redknapp and had a PL season loan. I'm not trying to get into this specific debate, but I am just saying that I wouldn't dismiss City being an influence other than their money based off us playing young players who we've bought. They are going to want to see progress and chances given from within, I believe, to know that they stand a chance here.

I agree we need to give others a chance, and sadly even though I wanted to give Carroll a chance we probably need to sell him in Jan to get any money off him at which point we may as well give Winks a chance.

I see what you mean about Edwards but as in most cases, people prefer to give chances to those bought or brought in young rather than their own. I know you believe Poch is responsible for Bentaleb and Kane's chance but I don't think an academy player will see it that way. Once they get a chance they know they could get real game time but I think they will want to see people get that chance first.

Anyway, Edwards will most likely stay, I was just arguing that it wasn't a foregone conclusion as I think that now Man City are starting to use youngsters, them paying more and having great facilities, may give them greater pull than some people expect than young people just getting chances with us

 

[IGSpur]

It's not true anyway. Poch gave debuts to Sam Gallagher, Omar Rowe, Jake Sinclair, Sam McQueen & Harrison Reed (possibly more than just those too).

Chambers had only been given 6 mins in a LC game prior to Poch playing him.

Thanks. I'm now pretty sure it was you who said that to me last season, that made me think he gave a lot of debuts

 

[spurs9]

Ye but Alli was bought for the first team and had 2 seasons of experience under his belt. Carroll even played quite a few EL games for us under AVB and Redknapp and had a PL season loan. I'm not trying to get into this specific debate, but I am just saying that I wouldn't dismiss City being an influence other than their money based off us playing young players who we've bought. They are going to want to see progress and chances given from within, I believe, to know that they stand a chance here.

I agree we need to give others a chance, and sadly even though I wanted to give Carroll a chance we probably need to sell him in Jan to get any money off him at which point we may as well give Winks a chance.

I see what you mean about Edwards but as in most cases, people prefer to give chances to those bought or brought in young rather than their own. I know you believe Poch is responsible for Bentaleb and Kane's chance but I don't think an academy player will see it that way. Once they get a chance they know they could get real game time but I think they will want to see people get that chance first.

Anyway, Edwards will most likely stay, I was just arguing that it wasn't a foregone conclusion as I think that now Man City are starting to use youngsters, them paying more and having great facilities, may give them greater pull than some people expect than young people just getting chances with us

Whether Alli (or anyone else) was bought for the 1st team straight away or future is largely irrelevant, the important thing is that they are playing. If we brought in a player that we planned would go into the 1st team and they turned up but weren't up to scratch yet, they wouldn't play, just as, if we brought in a player for the future but when they arrived, they exceeded expectations and looked ready for the 1st team, they would play.

If money isn't a motivation and only 1st team opportunities are, then surely you look at the youngest team in the PL, with the most academy players playing which, when compared with Man City is us by a long way. In the league this season, Man City have played 5 players 24 and under (3 of those bought for between 42 and 54m each and the other 2 played a total of 27 mins combined!!!) in comparison, we have played 13.

 

[spurs9]

Thanks. I'm now pretty sure it was you who said that to me last season, that made me think he gave a lot of debuts

Probably was me.

 

[beats1]

Evans got 1 min the the league cup, Roberts has 4 mins in the league (when they were 4-1 down with 4 to go against us) and 35 in the league cup and Iheanacho has 23 mins in the league. That is a combined total of 27 mins in the PL and 36 mins in the league cup between those 3 players. Alli alone has 411 mins of PL, 180 in the EL and 15 in the league cup, Winks has 14 mins of EL and Carroll (not young, but still and academy player not broken into the side) has 24 PL, 90 EL and 90 LC.

You have to remember that unlike most teams, we have talented 22-24 year olds that (Mason, Carroll & Pritchard) weren't given a chance under previous managers, so we have to see what they are capable of and once we know that, they will either take the place of a more senior squad member (if they fit better) or will be moved on and the likes of Winks, Onomah and Oduwa will be given a go.

Edwards should be looking at the amount of time given to other players by other managers, as a lot of the time, it's token mins here and there, where as Poch seems to play them more consistently, regardless of age or even academy, just look at Dier, Alli, Bentaleb, Mason & Kane.

No offence you can't include Carroll, he is an academy graduate but he is also 23. He isn't a youth player he has over 70 first team league games.

TBH those players were only not given a chance by AVB who people defended strongly saying the youth players weren't good enough

A youth player wont care about getting an opportunity in 5 years time, if they are one that they feel that isn't a typical academy talent and thats what we are talking about here.

Also look at Onomah he is not getting minutes at the moment when we have huge injury problems. Compare him to other players his age and he is the only one who isn't playing first team football at any level(above or below) and he is all of a sudden lucky to be playing for the U19's. Its alright saying he will get minutes but players who are considered exceptional should be getting chances.

Whether Alli (or anyone else) was bought for the 1st team straight away or future is largely irrelevant, the important thing is that they are playing. If we brought in a player that we planned would go into the 1st team and they turned up but weren't up to scratch yet, they wouldn't play, just as, if we brought in a player for the future but when they arrived, they exceeded expectations and looked ready for the 1st team, they would play.

If money isn't a motivation and only 1st team opportunities are, then surely you look at the youngest team in the PL, with the most academy players playing which, when compared with Man City is us by a long way. In the league this season, Man City have played 5 players 24 and under (3 of those bought for between 42 and 54m each and the other 2 played a total of 27 mins combined!!!) in comparison, we have played 13.

I think people are too fixated on academy players rather than giving players opportunities. Yes we have a lot of young players in our team but they also are very experienced. Now will an academy player surely think well where am I going to get my experience from?

Also those clubs are spending more on their academies than us and in some cases are overtaking us and have got managers who are also giving opportunities to their players.

Another point is that previously we apparently did have two people from the academy on the transfer committee and all of a sudden have none to some itk. The reason I'm mentioning this is while our squad is very young is also fucking huge. Players will look forward and think well I have 6 people ahead of me as well as the those who are about to get an opportunity.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I don't agree with a lot of this -

the onus is on the young players to prove themselves. At the moment the first team are doing reasonably well and have earned the opportunity. The team we have currently is well documented as being the youngest in the premier league so chances are arising but its not an immediate thing and nor should it be. Young players like Winks and Josh have both graduated to the first team squad and earned it by being the best performers last year but it doesn't guarantee them opportunities they need to continue their development and grasp them when they occur.

I am not sure that the selling point at Tottenham is connected to opportunities its more to do with the academy being particularly well run having excellent facilities and the football education being pretty strong. Of course all young boys want to graduate as
quickly as possible but very few are ready that early and its even more difficult in modern football. Personally I think there is a general togetherness across the club and that's driven by the squads being young but ambition remains a very personal thing and there isn't a lot of room for sentiment.

I think the boys do see Josh and Harry as benchmarks but there very positive benchmarks in that they have earned the right to be where they are. Currently in the youth and U21 sides the performances overall have been lacking and that has to be considered as players have no right to move forward especially not on reputation which sends a very contrary message to what is trying to be achieved

No, the onus is on the head coach to have the courage to play a development player in the natural position we have spent several years teaching him to play rather than play an established or more experienced player out of position. The onus is on the head coach to play a development player who has done everything asked of him and shown talent and application instead of an under performing established or experienced player. The onus is on the head coach to teach these development players the next stage of their development process.

How an earth do young players "prove themselves" if they don't get first team chances to do just that.

 

[beats1]

No, the onus is on the head coach to have the courage to play a development player in the natural position we have spent several years teaching him to play rather than play an established or more experienced player out of position. The onus is on the head coach to play a development player who has done everything asked of him and shown talent and application instead of an under performing established or experienced player. The onus is on the head coach to teach these development players the next stage of their development process.

How an earth do young players "prove themselves" if they don't get first team chances to do just that.

I agree but I would add :

That i don't think that in turn means giving 4 or 5 youth players a chance each season, that is unsustainable but giving the opportunity to one or two players would be sustainable while loaning out less developed or worse players to let them find their feet and if they prove themselves then they can come back and try to make an impact

Also another thing I would add is that our facilities are good but they aren't the best, City and Chelsea are spending a lot on their academies with FFP now in place and clubs like Liverpool and Utd are continuously trying to scout the best young players. Whilst the fact there is more of a premium on homegrown players clubs are offering more in terms of real first team prospects than they ever have before

 

[spurs9]

No offence you can't include Carroll, he is an academy graduate but he is also 23. He isn't a youth player he has over 70 first team league games.

TBH those players were only not given a chance by AVB who people defended strongly saying the youth players weren't good enough

A youth player wont care about getting an opportunity in 5 years time, if they are one that they feel that isn't a typical academy talent and thats what we are talking about here.

Also look at Onomah he is not getting minutes at the moment when we have huge injury problems. Compare him to other players his age and he is the only one who isn't playing first team football at any level(above or below) and he is all of a sudden lucky to be playing for the U19's. Its alright saying he will get minutes but players who are considered exceptional should be getting chances.

I think people are too fixated on academy players rather than giving players opportunities. Yes we have a lot of young players in our team but they also are very experienced. Now will an academy player surely think well where am I going to get my experience from?

Also those clubs are spending more on their academies than us and in some cases are overtaking us and have got managers who are also giving opportunities to their players.

Another point is that previously we apparently did have two people from the academy on the transfer committee and all of a sudden have none to some itk. The reason I'm mentioning this is while our squad is very young is also fucking huge. Players will look forward and think well I have 6 people ahead of me as well as the those who are about to get an opportunity.

Why can't I include Carroll? He literally fits the exact criteria that I was talking about in between 22 & 24 and from our academy. In regards to the amount of games he has played, Mason & Pritchard both have more first team mins than him.

I'm not sure your point about 5 years time, if it is regards to my comment on 22-24 year olds, that is just about the situation this season, due to us having talented players in that age group that are finally being looked at for the first team, that were previously overlooked under previous regimes. I wasn't saying we will/should wait until players are that age before assessing them.

In regards to Onomah, I disagree that he should have played due to injury problems, as Carroll is the one to be tried tout there and given his age, it's now or never for him. We are only 11 games into the season in all comps and in the 3 non PL games, we have had to face Arsenal & Monaco, so there hasn't been much chance to play him. What games do you think he should have played in?

If an academy player wants experience but can't break into the side, they can go on loan, just like other academy players did before them (Kane, Mason, Townsend, Rose, etc) and like other clubs youth players do.


When you say "those clubs" "have got managers who are also giving opportunities to their players", which clubs are you referring to?

Our squad isn't huge, it's relatively small with 24 and 7 of those are from out academy (Rose, Mason, Bentaleb, Carroll, Pritchard, Townsend & Kane) and 14 of those are 24 or under. Compare that with Man City (the team rumored to be after Edwards) 25 players, 0 from the academy and 6 are 24 or under.

In the same post you mention that our squad might be young, but are experienced for their age and also worry where our youngsters will get experience from, but we must be doing a good enough job of finding/giving them experience, considering only 50% of the players 24 or under were transfered in and 3 of those only had about par (or under) for their age (Dier, Wimmer & Njie).

 

[Trix]

I agree with a lot of this, and I too would have said before this season why would you choose City if not for the money, and while one swallkow does not a summer make, I woulnd't be so sure after this season. Sheikh Mansour is very serious about his academy and wants to see a return on it. This summer everyone reported how old City's squad was and not only that how they were lacking so many homegrown players. People expected to buy themselves out of it, but only really bought Sterling I believe. Instead they have made up the rest of it using homegrown/academy players. While like i said it's too early to see if they carry on they fact that he now seems to be giving chances as many or more to 'new' players than Poch isn't to be scoffed at.

which is fair enough, but IMO only really relevant if those players are given game time. Some managers will still only use a core of 15-18 players regardless of having nearly 30 available. I'd also wager in January if City are not top of the tree we will see at least two more come in higher up the pecking list, because they can.

 

[spurs9]

I woulnd't be so sure after this season. Sheikh Mansour is very serious about his academy and wants to see a return on it. This summer everyone reported how old City's squad was and not only that how they were lacking so many homegrown players. People expected to buy themselves out of it, but only really bought Sterling I believe. Instead they have made up the rest of it using homegrown/academy players. While like i said it's too early to see if they carry on they fact that he now seems to be giving chances as many or more to 'new' players than Poch isn't to be scoffed at.

Sheikh Mansour's investmentis far greater in the 1st team than the academy and for all we know the academy investment could just be just to sell players to balance the books abit, just like Chelsea.

They also bought Delph & Roberts.

In regards to the bold, they bought 8 players, spent 142m (95m net), not 1 player in their 25 man squad is from their academy and no player 24 or under in their 25 man squad, has been their longer than 15 months.

 

[beats1]

Why can't I include Carroll? He literally fits the exact criteria that I was talking about in between 22 & 24 and from our academy. In regards to the amount of games he has played, Mason & Pritchard both have more first team mins than him.

I'm not sure your point about 5 years time, if it is regards to my comment on 22-24 year olds, that is just about the situation this season, due to us having talented players in that age group that are finally being looked at for the first team, that were previously overlooked under previous regimes. I wasn't saying we will/should wait until players are that age before assessing them.

The fact he is from the academy doesn't change the fact he is an older professional and older than our first team players like Dier and Alli. He isn't a youth player. Poch got a free signing essentially to assess but I agree that is down to previous management mishandling him. Much like Bamford will be like for Chelsea.

Yet comparing them to the man city players is wrong despite Carroll not breaking in to the team, which he may never due to the fact he much more experienced than them. Even comparing Roberts to Alli is unfair as Roberts had only started 3 matches in his whole career. Comparing them to winks and Onomah would be right as they are in similar stages of their career

Other clubs will offer the players that a opportunity to get fast tracked and been given an opportunity and at the moment our recent graduates are struggling to get that opportunity or experience that the current first team graduates got despite being more experienced at a younger age in youth football and imo better.

In regards to Onomah, I disagree that he should have played due to injury problems, as Carroll is the one to be tried tout there and given his age, it's now or never for him. We are only 11 games into the season in all comps and in the 3 non PL games, we have had to face Arsenal & Monaco, so there hasn't been much chance to play him. What games do you think he should have played in?

I think he or winks should have at least started against Qarabag and perhaps Monaco. As we have seen before having a young player can have a positive effect and the fact they are trying harder does put more pressure on the other players. In fact imo Alli has had a huge effect on the team because of this. One youth player in a team isn't going to make us throw the game all of a sudden and of our some key players desperately need a rest and etc.

Playing your strongest team doesn't mean its your best team, the players clearly weren't up for it against monaco and put in a tired display some fresh legs would have done wonders especially in a high pressing system. Last season we found the lack of rotation hurt us in march. Lets hope the same doesn't happen again

Also I wasn't suggesting we should play Onomah, just that if he can't get near the pitch during a terrible injury crisis how is going to get on it when the players are fit? After all when those players come back wont they need minutes as they havent played all season?

That said those two games imo was a total clusterfuck and I don't what happened with the selections even if you weren't playing a youth player it was a waste to play too strong of a team against Qarabag.

If an academy player wants experience but can't break into the side, they can go on loan, just like other academy players did before them (Kane, Mason, Townsend, Rose, etc) and like other clubs youth players do.

So it begs the question why aren't they on loan. Having an academy player not playing football begs the question why have them whilst risking them regressing?

Compare Winks and Onomah to players in their age group and especially onomah, he is the only one to not completed a league game despite having been one of the most highly rated players in his age group and now is getting overtaken by his peers in possibly the most talented, definitely the most talented CM.

When you say "those clubs" "have got managers who are also giving opportunities to their players", which clubs are you referring to?

Man City are still in their infancy in relation to their youth program but they are giving players opportunities despite being a limited numbers. Even Chelsea are making progress to integrate one youth player a season with RLC being integrated this season. Now these clubs have traditionally been fighting for the title have struggled to integrate players. Next season we will see DaSilva come in to the squad.

TBH other clubs are making the changes to promote younger players whether by nicking them or straight from the academy. We have seen some get a chance like Galloway, Targett, RLC(limited minutes) and etc.

Our squad isn't huge, it's relatively small with 24 and 7 of those are from out academy (Rose, Mason, Bentaleb, Carroll, Pritchard, Townsend & Kane) and 14 of those are 24 or under. Compare that with Man City (the team rumored to be after Edwards) 25 players, 0 from the academy and 6 are 24 or under.

24 isn't relatively small, especially considering 25 is the limit bar the u21 players. However for striker, defence and Goalkeepers we have about 12 players(average 2 per position). For midfield we have 12 players(including Dier). So we have 2 midfield players per position plus an excess of two players who can play other positions but its unlikely they will. Having a young player in a large squad this size and you'll already notice someone like Winks or onomah are 5th choice to be the first reserve behind fringe players like Bentaleb, Alli, Carroll and Dembele. Then at AM, these players would be used before Onomah or winks would for a starting place; Eriksen(first choice), Lamela, Pritchard, Alli, Dembele and Mason. Of course some of these players may play in other positions but what tends to happen is that someone is more likely to go RW/CM/LW to replace say Mason then have winks start.

Also I don't think city are the ones to fear at the moment in regards to edwards but he is our player to lose since they do want to stay at the club.

Also another issue I have with this thread is that there is too much hype around Edwards, he isn't performing as expected. A year ago he was on par with Onomah with his performances(at the same age) and this season he needs to step it up a bit.

In the same post you mention that our squad might be young, but are experienced for their age and also worry where our youngsters will get experience from, but we must be doing a good enough job of finding/giving them experience, considering only 50% of the players 24 or under were transfered in and 3 of those only had about par (or under) for their age (Dier, Wimmer & Njie).

Firstly I was referring to our latest academy graduates who are neither being loaned or used, bar an odd game every month or two at U21 club level and are much more inexperienced than their peers despite being just as highly rated if not higher. So where will their experience come from?

Compare winks to the inexperienced Carroll and Mason at the same age and same point in the season
Winks: 17mins in the Europa League
Carroll: 3 EL and 1 League cup full appearances as well as 800mins in League 1.
Mason: 1min in Uefa cup and over 2000mins in League 1 and 5 appearances in the championship despite having injuries

Now carroll was a very late bloomer as well and wasn't even one of the top CM prospects until he was 20 unlike Winks, he wasn't fast tracked and was behind the likes of Mason, Bostock, Parrett and etc.

 

[nightgoat]

What I was specifically discussing was the seemingly foregone conclusion that atm Edwards (or any other young player) would only go to Cty for the money but he would stay for footballing reasons. The young team doesn't mean anything to an academy player.
Like you said Winks and Josh were the best performers, so how can they grab opportunities if they don't occur? (again I am not saying they should get them right now, just discussing the comparison with City) If Edwards or whoever sees our best and brightest prospects barely getting chances why would he stick around?

If first team opportunities are his primary motivation why would he consider going to Man City when their best and brightest prospects are getting fewer chances than young players are at Spurs, and the pathway to the first team is more likely to be blocked by another £50m signing?

 

[nightgoat]

TBH those players were only not given a chance by AVB who people defended strongly saying the youth players weren't good enough

Carroll has played more games for Spurs under AVB than any other manager. Besides Pochettino the only other Spurs managers to give Mason any first team game time were Redknapp (albeit only a couple of minutes in a UEFA Cup game) and AVB.

 

[spurs9]

The fact he is from the academy doesn't change the fact he is an older professional and older than our first team players like Dier and Alli. He isn't a youth player. Poch got a free signing essentially to assess but I agree that is down to previous management mishandling him. Much like Bamford will be like for Chelsea.

Yet comparing them to the man city players is wrong despite Carroll not breaking in to the team, which he may never due to the fact he much more experienced than them. Even comparing Roberts to Alli is unfair as Roberts had only started 3 matches in his whole career. Comparing them to winks and Onomah would be right as they are in similar stages of their career

Other clubs will offer the players that a opportunity to get fast tracked and been given an opportunity and at the moment our recent graduates are struggling to get that opportunity or experience that the current first team graduates got despite being more experienced at a younger age in youth football and imo better.

Come on Beats, you know I can't quote posts properly, just ask @IGSpur and you come up this!! Talk about setting me up to fail, lol.

My point about Carroll is that he needs to be assessed before moving onto the next player, who will probably be Winks or Onomah. Bamford is different, as he was bought by Chelsea when he was 18 and Mourinho has had him for 2 years.

Comparing Roberts to Winks or Onomah wouldn't be fair, as Roberts had played PL football before (thought only 44 mins) and played in the Championship. Besides, Roberts has played just 4 min in the PL and came on when the game was lost and came on in the LC when they were 4-0 up, lets see who has played more at the end of the season.

What current graduates are struggling for opportunities, just Winks and Onomah? We are only 11 games in and Winks has already come on.

I think he or winks should have at least started against Qarabag and perhaps Monaco. As we have seen before having a young player can have a positive effect and the fact they are trying harder does put more pressure on the other players. In fact imo Alli has had a huge effect on the team because of this. One youth player in a team isn't going to make us throw the game all of a sudden and of our some key players desperately need a rest and etc.

Playing your strongest team doesn't mean its your best team, the players clearly weren't up for it against monaco and put in a tired display some fresh legs would have done wonders especially in a high pressing system. Last season we found the lack of rotation hurt us in march. Lets hope the same doesn't happen again

Also I wasn't suggesting we should play Onomah, just that if he can't get near the pitch during a terrible injury crisis how is going to get on it when the players are fit? After all when those players come back wont they need minutes as they havent played all season?

That said those two games imo was a total clusterfuck and I don't what happened with the selections even if you weren't playing a youth player it was a waste to play too strong of a team against Qarabag.

We haven't had a terrible injury crisis in CM or AM though.

We didn't play a strong team v Qarabag. Alli played, but hadn't broke into the starting line up yet, Son played but was getting experience with our system (I think it was also his debut), Lamela played but was needing match fitness as he hadn't started a game yet, Dier was the only questionable starter and the other 2 from the front 6 were Townsend and Carroll.

So it begs the question why aren't they on loan. Having an academy player not playing football begs the question why have them whilst risking them regressing?

Compare Winks and Onomah to players in their age group and especially onomah, he is the only one to not completed a league game despite having been one of the most highly rated players in his age group and now is getting overtaken by his peers in possibly the most talented, definitely the most talented CM.

Maybe we couldn't find suitable loans, or maybe we have plans for them (we are only 11 games into the season in all comps).

Man City are still in their infancy in relation to their youth program but they are giving players opportunities despite being a limited numbers. Even Chelsea are making progress to integrate one youth player a season with RLC being integrated this season. Now these clubs have traditionally been fighting for the title have struggled to integrate players. Next season we will see DaSilva come in to the squad.

TBH other clubs are making the changes to promote younger players whether by nicking them or straight from the academy. We have seen some get a chance like Galloway, Targett, RLC(limited minutes) and etc.

Who have Man City given opportunities to? Who was the player Chelsea intergrated last season?

I don't see why other clubs doing it devalues us doing it, when we have the youngest team and most academy players.

24 isn't relatively small, especially considering 25 is the limit bar the u21 players. However for striker, defence and Goalkeepers we have about 12 players(average 2 per position). For midfield we have 12 players(including Dier). So we have 2 midfield players per position plus an excess of two players who can play other positions but its unlikely they will. Having a young player in a large squad this size and you'll already notice someone like Winks or onomah are 5th choice to be the first reserve behind fringe players like Bentaleb, Alli, Carroll and Dembele. Then at AM, these players would be used before Onomah or winks would for a starting place; Eriksen(first choice), Lamela, Pritchard, Alli, Dembele and Mason. Of course some of these players may play in other positions but what tends to happen is that someone is more likely to go RW/CM/LW to replace say Mason then have winks start.

Also I don't think city are the ones to fear at the moment in regards to edwards but he is our player to lose since they do want to stay at the club.

Also another issue I have with this thread is that there is too much hype around Edwards, he isn't performing as expected. A year ago hewo was on par with Onomah with his performances(at the same age) and this season he needs to step it up a bit.

Those of those excess players can also play Striker (one already has) and we only have 1 striker. I fully believe that Dembele will be gone next season, along with Carroll (unless he improves) and Townsend, which will give space to Onomah, Winks and Oduwa (I can also see Chadli going if he doesn't get his work rate up).

I agree with you in regards to the Edwards hype, he has some improving to do at his current level.

Firstly I was referring to our latest academy graduates who are neither being loaned or used, bar an odd game every month or two at U21 club level and are much more inexperienced than their peers despite being just as highly rated if not higher. So where will their experience come from?

Compare winks to the inexperienced Carroll and Mason at the same age and same point in the season
Winks: 17mins in the Europa League
Carroll: 3 EL and 1 League cup full appearances as well as 800mins in League 1.
Mason: 1min in Uefa cup and over 2000mins in League 1 and 5 appearances in the championship despite having injuries

Now carroll was a very late bloomer as well and wasn't even one of the top CM prospects until he was 20 unlike Winks, he wasn't fast tracked and was behind the likes of Mason, Bostock, Parrett and etc.

Our manager is only 11 games into his second season, we got rid of 4 CMs and only brought in 1, which is a lot of change, so I think you need to be patient. Remember Bentaleb had 0 mins at the same age as Onomah, so he is already more experienced at the same age and at the start of the season, was ahead of the more experienced Mason.

 

[spurs9]

Come on Beats, you know I can't quote posts properly, just ask @IGSpur and you come up this!! Talk about setting me up to fail, lol.

My point about Carroll is that he needs to be assessed before moving onto the next player, who will probably be Winks or Onomah. Bamford is different, as he was bought by Chelsea when he was 18 and Mourinho has had him for 2 years.

Comparing Roberts to Winks or Onomah wouldn't be fair, as Roberts had played PL football before (thought only 44 mins) and played in the Championship. Besides, Roberts has played just 4 min in the PL and came on when the game was lost and came on in the LC when they were 4-0 up, lets see who has played more at the end of the season.

What current graduates are struggling for opportunities, just Winks and Onomah? We are only 11 games in and Winks has already come on.

We haven't had a terrible injury crisis in CM or AM though.

We didn't play a strong team v Qarabag. Alli played, but hadn't broke into the starting line up yet, Son played but was getting experience with our system (I think it was also his debut), Lamela played but was needing match fitness as he hadn't started a game yet, Dier was the only questionable starter and the other 2 from the front 6 were Townsend and Carroll.


Maybe we couldn't find suitable loans, or maybe we have plans for them (we are only 11 games into the season in all comps).



Who have Man City given opportunities to? Who was the player Chelsea intergrated last season?

I don't see why other clubs doing it devalues us doing it, when we have the youngest team and most academy players.

Those of those excess players can also play Striker (one already has) and we only have 1 striker. I fully believe that Dembele will be gone next season, along with Carroll (unless he improves) and Townsend, which will give space to Onomah, Winks and Oduwa (I can also see Chadli going if he doesn't get his work rate up).

I agree with you in regards to the Edwards hype, he has some improving to do at his current level.


Our manager is only 11 games into his second season, we got rid of 4 CMs and only brought in 1, which is a lot of change, so I think you need to be patient. Remember Bentaleb had 0 mins at the same age as Onomah, so he is already more experienced at the same age and at the start of the season, was ahead of the more experienced Mason.

And I didn't even fuck up the quotes.

 

[ralphs bald spot]

No, the onus is on the head coach to have the courage to play a development player in the natural position we have spent several years teaching him to play rather than play an established or more experienced player out of position. The onus is on the head coach to play a development player who has done everything asked of him and shown talent and application instead of an under performing established or experienced player. The onus is on the head coach to teach these development players the next stage of their development process.

How an earth do young players "prove themselves" if they don't get first team chances to do just that.

Sorry but I can't have this at all -

the young players have to prove themselves good enough - sure they have too have development paths, but Spurs have that - Josh and Harry performed throughout last season and find themselves in the first team squad to me that's not a mystery that's down to hard work. Both have begun to feature on the bench and they have earned that.

I don't see where the manager has played a player out of position currently you could argue Dier but his performances have arguably been the best of any player this season so you have to back his judgement. At the moment the first team are not under performing imo and consequently opportunities will be difficult, though as the season progresses I think there will be opportunities for a few of the boys and its up to them to grasp those opportunities.

Saying that the onus on the young players is to provide regular strong performances in the games that they are playing in. At the moment in the u21's and the u18's there hasn't been a consistency and yes there are reasons for that, but neither have the individual performances matched the levels that were achieved last season by the two who were promoted. I would say currently that Lesniak has been the best U21 player this season in the games I have seen.

For the young players they don't have a right of progression and though you can argue there should be designated places for home grown players I am not convinced that's the way to go. You could say that on Saturday we have no Dier so perhaps the logical step would be to play Veijkovic but its not that simple. One you could still have a decent argument about whether that's his best position - Two is it a good idea to give a young unproven player a game in what is likely to be high tempo game and arguably that might not suit him.

I think we have some really good boys and it would be great to have them all coming through but its so difficult to bring them in at the right time and from the clubs point of view not to effect overall performances or damage the young player

 

[IGSpur]

And I didn't even fuck up the quotes.

I'm so proud of you

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I agree but I would add :

That i don't think that in turn means giving 4 or 5 youth players a chance each season, that is unsustainable but giving the opportunity to one or two players would be sustainable while loaning out less developed or worse players to let them find their feet and if they prove themselves then they can come back and try to make an impact

Also another thing I would add is that our facilities are good but they aren't the best, City and Chelsea are spending a lot on their academies with FFP now in place and clubs like Liverpool and Utd are continuously trying to scout the best young players. Whilst the fact there is more of a premium on homegrown players clubs are offering more in terms of real first team prospects than they ever have before

I don't think there is any need to put a figure on how many development players get chances or how many chances that has to be. I don't think 4 or 5 players getting "a chance" of some description is outlandish, be that 1 or 2 starts in cups, or 10 various competition sub appearances or 20 starts in the EPL. But it is dependent on the quality of development player and the coach having the bollocks to use them in the right circumstances instead of making less logical choices based, wrongly IMO, purely on flawed criteria.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Sorry but I can't have this at all -

the young players have to prove themselves good enough - sure they have too have development paths, but Spurs have that - Josh and Harry performed throughout last season and find themselves in the first team squad to me that's not a mystery that's down to hard work. Both have begun to feature on the bench and they have earned that.

I don't see where the manager has played a player out of position currently you could argue Dier but his performances have arguably been the best of any player this season so you have to back his judgement. At the moment the first team are not under performing imo and consequently opportunities will be difficult, though as the season progresses I think there will be opportunities for a few of the boys and its up to them to grasp those opportunities.

Saying that the onus on the young players is to provide regular strong performances in the games that they are playing in. At the moment in the u21's and the u18's there hasn't been a consistency and yes there are reasons for that, but neither have the individual performances matched the levels that were achieved last season by the two who were promoted. I would say currently that Lesniak has been the best U21 player this season in the games I have seen.

For the young players they don't have a right of progression and though you can argue there should be designated places for home grown players I am not convinced that's the way to go. You could say that on Saturday we have no Dier so perhaps the logical step would be to play Veijkovic but its not that simple. One you could still have a decent argument about whether that's his best position - Two is it a good idea to give a young unproven player a game in what is likely to be high tempo game and arguably that might not suit him.

I think we have some really good boys and it would be great to have them all coming through but its so difficult to bring them in at the right time and from the clubs point of view not to effect overall performances or damage the young player

This argument gets trotted out in some form or another continually. Like playing established players that are under performing or out of position or need rest/rotation is always a more viable or less risk averse solution than playing a development product who has been trained for years for the chance to play in a specialised position or role is more of a risk to the team dynamic or performance.

I don't want imposed quotas. I don't want a development product played for the sake of it or instead of a well performing existing first team player. But I do want, and there has to be, some logical progression to the years of development time and effort put in. Otherwise why do it.