The Spurs Youth Thread - 2017/2018

[Lilbaz]

The point is you are saying the talented ones, but a lot of the players in that list and in the lower leagues came through a different system where we would loan out player even if they weren't talented.

For example your list included
Livermore
Carroll
Pritchard
Townsend
Mason

Now all of these players weren't tipped for greatness and for the first team when they were at the age of edwards and onomah were except for Mason. Carroll and Townsend got tipped for the first team at later age around 19 and 21 after good loans at leyton and QPR.

These weren't top tier players like Onomah, Edwards and even Winks

The players like Livermore, Rose, Carroll, Townsend and even Pritchard were a level below the likes of Edwards, the current crop of those types of players(harrison, Amos, Oduwa and etc.) havent been developed as well in the current system. We are becoming like arsenal were before their demise focusing on only the really talented ones as a result and wanting the next big thing to come through.

The only players, out of the current lot that are being tipped for having good careers are our most highly rated players we have ever had.

So you saying it will be interesting to see how our talented youth will go on to have no career though, overlooks the point I'm making.

When attracting parents to their club, chelsea are pointing out whilst we may not be producing players for the first team, out of our yearly intake most of them are going on to have careers. Considering we intake around 14 each year(more now), how many of the 14 of the intake are going on to have careers under the current setup?

There isnt any doubt about the KWP, Edwards and etc but what about the other 12 players per year?

Pritchard was hyped. But mostly those players weren't hyped that much because we hardly saw any players from the youth team making it in the last 20 years.
Now we look at players with optimism. Yes we single out the 4 you mention as the most promising.

 

[IGSpur]

It's a BS comparison at this stage though. All the players you mention (that left) made their moves when they were around 23/24. Also, I don't think Mason would have gone to a PL team if he had been loaned out again rather than kept and played by Poch. How many loans did Bentaleb go on?

Surely Veljkovic is a bad example, since Poch sent him out on loan?

In a few years time it will be worth assessing, but right now is pointless for fans to try and predict what would happen.

What I was attempting to do was explain to the previous poster what I thought beats1 was trying to say. Which was that, Chelsea is also appealing as they appear to provide academy players with not only money but also a more likely possibility to end up as a Championship player. Their method is tried and tested and while it doesn't prvide top PL players atm it does guarantee a better chance of a career in football which may look appealing to parents.

My point about Redknapp is that. when people say we must look appealing to young players as look how many have come through, well they came through the loan system that we used that we don't use anymore. I didn't actually make a comparison, what i said is we will see how well Pch's method compares to Redknapp's method in a few years, and that as we don't know how well Poch's methods work sending academy players to us is no guarantee of success. I will be interested to see if Poch's methods in say 3 years times results in as many PL players, particularly around our top youngsters i.e. the ones he doesn't loan.

The ones who aren't rated highly have an opportunity to prove themselves on loan and its good that they get released, but its the top players we should pay attention too. I don't know what you mean about making their moves, but all the players I have mentioned were loaned out around 17/18/19/20 and also were thrown into EL football and have ended up PL players so it has worked.

All of the top players in the 89/90/91/92/93 are all playing either PL or Championship football which is great.

I didn't mention Bentaleb as we were talking about the loan system and how we used it like Chelsea and why players might want to go Chelsea as it has 'proven' results. I'm not saying its the only way of working.

Bentaleb if he was with Poch would have spent a year or 2 training with the first team and getting ad hoc minutes towards the end of the game, before he was considered for a first team spot. He was the first one that went straight from academy to PL football and proved he was good enough, and I'd welcome Poch doing that more but that only happened as an academy coach who knew his players inside out and maybe also had an agenda threw him in and showed that our academy players were good enough to go straight in.

I only mentioned Veljkovic as he had not gone on any loans prior to Poch arriving so in the interest of fairness I'd mention him as someone who has ended up playing top football 'brought through' under Poch' as I'd assume others would have pointed it out. But you're right, Veljkvoic is playing top European football as he was coached to such a good standard by the academy and had the confidence and belief to turn us down and back he'd make it elsewhere, which he appears to be doing at the moment.

Mason is a fair point, but his whole youth was injury plagued and while he went on numerous loans it did take Poch to spot his ability for him to get his chance, but he had plenty of league experience under his belt at that point.

As I said in the post above, it will be interesting to see what happens to the 96/97/98/99/00s who as many are aware have a lot more top quality players than the previous age groups. If Poch's methods work and we find at 25/26/27 as many of those or more are PL players than the other age groups, then we will know Poch's methods have succeeded but Poch will probably be long gone by then and so at that point it won't matter how it appears to other young players. and the argument is moot. But for young players now looking in, Chelsea still look attractive for money and a good chance of league football, there is no guarantee of those benefits right now with us.

I'm curious to see what method is more successful anyway. Feel like I rambled but there is a point in there somewhere

 

[spurs9]

What I was attempting to do was explain to the previous poster what I thought beats1 was trying to say. Which was that, Chelsea is also appealing as they appear to provide academy players with not only money but also a more likely possibility to end up as a Championship player. Their method is tried and tested and while it doesn't prvide top PL players atm it does guarantee a better chance of a career in football which may look appealing to parents.

My point about Redknapp is that. when people say we must look appealing to young players as look how many have come through, well they came through the loan system that we used that we don't use anymore. I didn't actually make a comparison, what i said is we will see how well Pch's method compares to Redknapp's method in a few years, and that as we don't know how well Poch's methods work sending academy players to us is no guarantee of success. I will be interested to see if Poch's methods in say 3 years times results in as many PL players, particularly around our top youngsters i.e. the ones he doesn't loan.

The ones who aren't rated highly have an opportunity to prove themselves on loan and its good that they get released, but its the top players we should pay attention too. I don't know what you mean about making their moves, but all the players I have mentioned were loaned out around 17/18/19/20 and also were thrown into EL football and have ended up PL players so it has worked.

All of the top players in the 89/90/91/92/93 are all playing either PL or Championship football which is great.

I didn't mention Bentaleb as we were talking about the loan system and how we used it like Chelsea and why players might want to go Chelsea as it has 'proven' results. I'm not saying its the only way of working.

Bentaleb if he was with Poch would have spent a year or 2 training with the first team and getting ad hoc minutes towards the end of the game, before he was considered for a first team spot. He was the first one that went straight from academy to PL football and proved he was good enough, and I'd welcome Poch doing that more but that only happened as an academy coach who knew his players inside out and maybe also had an agenda threw him in and showed that our academy players were good enough to go straight in.

I only mentioned Veljkovic as he had not gone on any loans prior to Poch arriving so in the interest of fairness I'd mention him as someone who has ended up playing top football 'brought through' under Poch' as I'd assume others would have pointed it out. But you're right, Veljkvoic is playing top European football as he was coached to such a good standard by the academy and had the confidence and belief to turn us down and back he'd make it elsewhere, which he appears to be doing at the moment.

Mason is a fair point, but his whole youth was injury plagued and while he went on numerous loans it did take Poch to spot his ability for him to get his chance, but he had plenty of league experience under his belt at that point.

As I said in the post above, it will be interesting to see what happens to the 96/97/98/99/00s who as many are aware have a lot more top quality players than the previous age groups. If Poch's methods work and we find at 25/26/27 as many of those or more are PL players than the other age groups, then we will know Poch's methods have succeeded but Poch will probably be long gone by then and so at that point it won't matter how it appears to other young players. and the argument is moot. But for young players now looking in, Chelsea still look attractive for money and a good chance of league football, there is no guarantee of those benefits right now with us.

I'm curious to see what method is more successful anyway. Feel like I rambled but there is a point in there somewhere

Mate, wasn't having a go at you. What I'm trying to get across, is that saying we aren't creating as many pro players League 1 or higher due to the policy of "no loans for top prospects" is pointless, due to the time it has undertaken.

You say that Chelsea's system "does guarantee a better chance of a career in football", but I don't see how you can say that yet. Also, when the only difference in policy applies to the top prospects (we do loan out the other youngsters), it should only be the top prospects that are evaluated and for all teams, it is too early to access, plus, Chelsea and City had the better prospects in the last few years, so they should be showing a higher success rate.

When I said making their moves, I mean moving to other clubs permanently, as it is making a career at a decent level that is being discussed and many youngsters have gone on loan after loan but then fallen down to league 2 or even non league. Dean Parrett for example, was very highly rated and went out on loan after loan and has only just managed to get to a league one club last season.

I think in essence we actually agree that it is too early to tell and are both interested to see how it turns out.

 

[Cornpattbuck]

I think beats1 is saying that under Poch's regime there is no guarantee of anything as we don't know how things pan out.

The only player that has come through since Poch joined is Winks. The only other player who appears to be doing well and was Winks' age group s Veljkovic who is playing regularly in one of Europe's top 5 leagues. And he was also placed in a similar position to Edwards. Poch came in first season, sent him on loan, as he wanted to buy players in his first season. He got injured (not unlike Edwards) and returned 2nd half of season. Won WC. Was offered a new contract (like Edwards), rejected it as I understood he wanted game time. Was essentially blackballed for a season (could happen to Edwards) left and is now playing in Bundesliga.

It will be interesting to see after Poch leaves how many of our current best academy players are playing football.

By comparison I think beats was comparing it to Redknapp's send them on loan and chuck them into the EL policy. From that method, we have Smith, Carroll, Kane, Rose, Townsend, Caulker, Mason, Livermore who are all PL players and Luongo and Fredericks who are regulars in the Championship. I think their could have been more subtly and not every method is fool proof, but the results have been pretty good, when he had a talented group of players in our academy.

As you say it will be interesting to see where an equally or more talented group of players are in a few years time under Poch's tutelage, to compare methods

That makes more sense, thanks.

Just seemed needlessly negative but I can appreciate there's a concern.

Still, as Chelsea are the ones we're being compared to, we don't have bottomless pockets to pay ridiculous youth wages or subsidise those wages when they're then out on loan.

Maybe we could do better at setting up feeder clubs etc but even then I imagine those bottomless pockets probably help with that too.

We, to a certain extent, have to hope that our project, facilities and gentlemen (rather than untouchable ****s) first teamers are more appealing than a vast majority of teams.

Who knows...

Football is being thrown in the air by what City and Chelsea are doing, but Man Utd are still pouring more youngsters into the PL at the moment (despite, to my understanding, losing a fair few to City).

Making it to the top is about character not tricks or fame, and we certainly appear to be trying to produce well balanced, hungry individuals who know the game.

Can only cross fingers really but there's no point bemoaning what Chelsea are doing...

P.s. And, as far as I'm aware, the non-uber talented lads are still available for loan...

 

[Bus-Conductor]

When you chose Sky Andrews player agency to represent you (he is nominally the secretary but the clearly most experienced/powerful figure there) it presumably can only be heard by our club as a statement that you wont be a club-loyal player. And sad though it is if when your best talents are not on board with your clubs vision, if Marcus wants to throw the next year or two of development in the bin before going to Man U reserves the we move onto the next one.

If it was just about the Edwards camp having a concern of receiving game time/opportunities and a salary track commensurate to his talent then I suspect we would have agreed a ramping up contract that works for both sides by now unfortunately... A pay rise to circa 5k this year with a short term deal until 2019 and an auto triggered salary doubling+bonuses after he makes 5 first team appearances...another doubling and year extension after 10 more... and another year and doubling after 15 more etc. He'd be pushing 40K+ bonuses within a year imo on talent on a still relatively short term deal, and then he could decide if he wants to commit to a long term future and a top tier deal (probably as much as 150k/week by then) at Spurs.

He'd go straight into the 18 for early season games with no Barkley, Son, Lamella, Sissoko (+Ali in the champions league) available....but if he misses this window of coming days to commit then my prediction is that he goes abroad on a free in 12 months before bouncing around clubs like the even more outstandingly talented players like Ravel Morrison modeled at Man U. As he pushes 20 without game time no top club will be as invested as we are in developing a non-home grown frail luxury player responsibly as we have cause to be. It would be a tragic waste of talent but thats where this train wreck of a situation appears to be heading imo...Napoleon syndrome

I have no info, but I don't see that the club could have allowed their most talented youth prospect to get to this stage if there was a genuine desire to compromise that would have emerged by now.

That kind of a contract structure would incentivise both parties to work to develop him with game time and should remove the trust gap by contacting it and preventing a Sol Campbell situation emerging...giving appropriate short term compensation and us the minimum years buffer policy we require before exposing playing assets to doped clubs predation and humiliation of the last decades of our clubs development strategy.

Not that I don't understand their approach as we are a genuine threat to Man U's hegemony over the next decade, but it seems nothing less than a policy of industrial sabotage...it's not sporting and it's the Bayern/Madrid thing exported to the Perm that we have to stand up against.

This approach Man U are undertaking towards our clubs young english core as Mourinho complains in public that they have the economic power but 'other clubs still say no'... these cheek of us (aggressively targeting McDermott, Mckenna, Dier and others). For this reason we shouldn't sell Dier even at world record levels, nor even train Edwards for others to benefit if he doesn't sign imminently imo.

I struggle to see what credibility the Edwards has in any of our older fans eyes to make demands on a club that has developed him to the point of potential greatness when the final leap requires physical development and injury free status he alone can deliver on. I have no sympathy/patience for the argument that Edwards deserves further special treatment and patience after employing Sol Campbell's agent - an act that can only be interpreted as poisoning good will in any negotiations. Once burnt fool you...twice burnt fool me...

What has Sky Andrew got to do with Marcus Edwards ? Has he changed agent ? I'm pretty sure he's with a guy called Costas Toffis (Emimel Sports Management).

From Edwards "group" perspective this is not necessarily all about money but "opportunity". They will be well aware that getting the right opportunity at the "right" time (i.e. sooner rather than later) can be crucial to a career. It might not be but it's their life and livelihood they are gambling with so it's piss easy for us to criticise from afar. If it was my kid I'm really not sure I'd choose us over others (and that includes someone like Chelsea where I know he'll make a packet even if he fails to make it, will almost certainly get first team experience and exposure on loan somewhere and a move if he fails).

Don't forgot, if you are loaned out at Spurs it effectively means your done, so if you are not getting loans and not getting first team time it must feel fucking frustrating and there is scant evidence that these "non loan" kids will get a chance here depending on how much you read into a couple of league starts for a 21yo Winks and about 38 league minutes for Onomah.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Pritchard was hyped. But mostly those players weren't hyped that much because we hardly saw any players from the youth team making it in the last 20 years.
Now we look at players with optimism. Yes we single out the 4 you mention as the most promising.

Pritchard wasn't over hyped. He was a damn good little player who I'd swap for 30m Sissoko yesterday if I could. He excelled at every level tested. League 1 loan, Championship helped the club with the smallest budget in the VChampiobship into the play offs and made the Championship team of the year (I'm pretty sure he also had something like the most assists or key passes in the league) and even last year when he finally got games he did some great stuff. Pritchard was just typical of the policy of the club and PL clubs in general who seem more comfortable buying a raw French kid with 15 games for 10m, or a shit older one for 30m than just give him some game time.

 

[Lilbaz]

Pritchard wasn't over hyped. He was a damn good little player who I'd swap for 30m Sissoko yesterday if I could. He excelled at every level tested. League 1 loan, Championship helped the club with the smallest budget in the VChampiobship into the play offs and made the Championship team of the year (I'm pretty sure he also had something like the most assists or key passes in the league) and even last year when he finally got games he did some great stuff. Pritchard was just typical of the policy of the club and PL clubs in general who seem more comfortable buying a raw French kid with 15 games for 10m, or a shit older one for 30m than just give him some game time.

I never said he was overhyped. But when he destroyed barca and inter everyone was excited about him. A lot of us thought he could make it with us, even when he was sold to norwich.

 

[Cornpattbuck]

Pritchard wasn't over hyped. He was a damn good little player who I'd swap for 30m Sissoko yesterday if I could. He excelled at every level tested. League 1 loan, Championship helped the club with the smallest budget in the VChampiobship into the play offs and made the Championship team of the year (I'm pretty sure he also had something like the most assists or key passes in the league) and even last year when he finally got games he did some great stuff. Pritchard was just typical of the policy of the club and PL clubs in general who seem more comfortable buying a raw French kid with 15 games for 10m, or a shit older one for 30m than just give him some game time.

I agree with the general sentiment, as I'd happily see CCV, KWP, Onomah and Edwards step into the first team squad as is without any additions next season (presuming Lamela and Rose are likely to return sooner rather than later).

I firmly believe they can too as long as long as they subscribe to what we're doing, keep listening and graft their asses off.

I just hope assessments are remembering that the level of the guys they're training against are far higher than most players in the PL.

 

[Blake Griffin]

What has Sky Andrew got to do with Marcus Edwards ? Has he changed agent ? I'm pretty sure he's with a guy called Costas Toffis (Emimel Sports Management).

after some brief digging i think costas worked for sky andrew before setting up on his own, it's unclear whether sky andrew has anything to do with emimel - who only have a handful of players on their books, including edwards and tsaroulla.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I never said he was overhyped. But when he destroyed barca and inter everyone was excited about him. A lot of us thought he could make it with us, even when he was sold to norwich.

I still think he could easily have made it with us. I do not believe even Son is any more talented or a better "fit" for us than Pritchard. He's just had game time in the Bundesliga and a season to acclimatise in the PL.

 

[IGSpur]

Just seemed needlessly negative but I can appreciate there's a concern.

I'm probably more on the extreme end of pushing for our academy players than most, (though I of course believe I make sense) so will get frustrated when they do not get used as I believe the club is missing out. Both on talented potentially world class players and also saving money to be used elsewhere, so where others see positives I look at it at a different angle and want improvement and it looks negative. I'm really positive about our club, and contrary to what it appears I don't think Poch is any worse or better than any other manager, so its not dig at Poch it's just this is my club and I know our academy players better than others clubs players, so this club will be my focus.

I'm a believer of give a man a fish eat for a day teach a man to fish eat for a life time. And our believe our academy is us teaching us to fish and constantly buying is the give a man a fish. In most worlds most people would follow that rule, but in the crazy world of football if you aren't splashing money it is seen as a failure. And if you even consider trusting an academy player as a back up you must be loopy

 

[Bus-Conductor]

after some brief digging i think costas worked for sky andrew before setting up on his own, it's unclear whether sky andrew has anything to do with emimel - who only have a handful of players on their books, including edwards and tsaroulla.

He's (Costas Toffis) 100% shareholder of Emimel.

 

[Lilbaz]

I'm probably more on the extreme end of pushing for our academy players than most, (though I of course believe I make sense) so will get frustrated when they do not get used as I believe the club is missing out. Both on talented potentially world class players and also saving money to be used elsewhere, so where others see positives I look at it at a different angle and want improvement and it looks negative. I'm really positive about our club, and contrary to what it appears I don't think Poch is any worse or better than any other manager, so its not dig at Poch it's just this is my club and I know our players better than others.

I'm a believer of give a man a fish eat for a day teach a man to fish eat for a life time. And our believe our academy is us teaching us to fish and constantly buying is the give a man a fish. In most worlds most people would follow that rule, but in the crazy world of football if you aren't splashing money it is seen as a failure. And if you even consider trusting an academy player as a back up you must be loopy

Do you fish for your dinner or buy it in a supermarket?

Teams are rich, they don't have to go through the effort of producing players. They just buy an international.

I think it's wrong. Think they should cut the amount of players you have in a squad to 22 at least with the others being made up from the academy.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Do you fish for your dinner or buy it in a supermarket?

Teams are rich, they don't have to go through the effort of producing players. They just buy an international.

I think it's wrong. Think they should cut the amount of players you have in a squad to 22 at least with the others being made up from the academy.

Does the supermarket fish you buy always taste better than the one you catch ?

 

[Lilbaz]

Does the supermarket fish you buy always taste better than the one you catch ?

So you go out fishing often bc?

It's the world we live in, everybody want instant gratification.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

So you go out fishing often bc?

It's the world we live in, everybody want instant gratification.

But players signed from elsewhere rarely give you instant gratification either. Look at Son's first season compared to this. Sissoko, Soldado ?? And the many, many players we've signed that haven't even provided delayed gratification.

 

[Lilbaz]

But players signed from elsewhere rarely give you instant gratification either. Look at Son's first season compared to this. Sissoko, Soldado ?? And the many, many players we've signed that haven't even provided delayed gratification.

I know but that is how managers quite often think. They are under a lot of pressure to get instant results so will buy a player with international experience rather than try a youngster.

I am not saying it is right, i am saying that is how it is. Neither you nor i can change that no matter how much we talk about fish.

 

[IGSpur]

I am not saying it is right, i am saying that is how it is. Neither you nor i can change that no matter how much we talk about fish.

I agree, but hopefully one day the higher ups will change it for ours and Englands benefit. I don't know what can possibly change it.

Everyone can see what has happened wit Kane and it changes nothing. Worse still Rashford accidentally got a chance, wasn't expected to really make it, banged goals, and is rewarded by the, spending 70m on another striker. What more can be done.

All I care about is Spurs being succesful and I believe that is tapping into the academy

 

[Lilbaz]

I agree, but hopefully one day the higher ups will change it for ours and Englands benefit. I don't know what can possibly change it.

Everyone can see what has happened wit Kane and it changes nothing. Worse still Rashford accidentally got a chance, wasn't expected to really make it, banged goals, and is rewarded by the, spending 70m on another striker. What more can be done.

All I care about is Spurs being succesful and I believe that is tapping into the academy

As i said cutting down the squad size to 22 will force the clubs to rely on their academy more.
I'd cut down the amount of players you can loan out (stop big clubs hoarding the best talent) and no loans for players over 21. They become part of your squad or you sell. Clubs will have pressure on them to blood them earlier or sell them to a club that will have them as part of their squad and give them a chance. They might have to drop down a level but they will get more game time.

 

[LexingtonSpurs]

I love that Spurs are trying to build from within. But, practically speaking, everything is set against them being successful long-term - in today's market.

First, and foremost, is the pressure, and financial reward just for being in the Premier League - all decisions are based on maintaining that status.

Second, and also tied to #1, the pressure on managers to win - the league is set up to chew up managers and spit them out - very few teams take a long-term approach with managers - it is "win or get the sack" at every level in the table. Its easy to stand on the outside, as I am sure someone will, and point to the fact that academy players are just as likely to perform as purchased players. But, for the manager, who is fighting for his job every week - the "safe" gamble is to go with the more mature/experienced player in most cases. This is not conducive to long-term planning by the clubs by developing players. This would take a shift in how teams measure success.

Honestly, most Spurs supporters would not be happy with a squad that finished 6-10, but also brought through 1-2 new players from the academy every season. Manager would be sacked every 18 months or so. So, Managers are disincentivized from playing too many youngsters, absent an injury crisis.

Now, if Levy backed his manager, and promised not to sack him as long as Spurs were mid-table, but keeping wages down by bringing through players from the Academy in lieu of buying in the transfer market - then maybe you get a lot of good experience for the youth. But, expecting to fill a 61,000 seat stadium, with youth prospects in a mid-table squad is not very enticing...