The Spurs Youth Thread - 2017/2018

IGSpur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
7,008
Thread starter #5,921
Player integration is a subject that merges and conflates with other debates and as such doesn't really need a thread of it's own. These players are already, effectively part of our squad, often part of the first team squad, and as such qualify to be discussed as "options" in normal conversations about who should get picked and why, or who we should buy and why.
Not sure about that mate, surely the point is that these guys are clearly not really considered as part of any squad and are just an afterthought at best
 

IGSpur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
7,008
Thread starter #5,922
I wonder if its a simple explanation - two that sort of make sense: 1) Sheffield play 3 at the back, and CCV was not suited to that style, and, 2) I think Sheffield bought a CB in January - so it could be that they had approached Spurs about CCV, but were not able to reach an agreement, and when they bought a permanent replacement, there was no room for CCV to play.
I think CCV just had a bad patch and struggled to recover, it seems getting out and moving club has worked well. Let him gather his thoughts and go again
 

IGSpur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
7,008
Thread starter #5,924
also said they're looking at bringing him in after the next international break but could possibly be sooner, he cited strength and endurance as things they're working on and that he's only been training fully for the last two weeks.
I don't really see him getting a look in towards of the season. There's 10 games or so left, they're still got a chance for the playoffs but every point counts at this point. Not many managers are going to use a completely untested player in league football, especially when it's a loanee and serves no benefit to them, when they have more experienced players to do a job. If our manager won't risk him, why would Norwich?

Hope I'm wrong, but we have seen this played out, seems like this injury came at the wrong time for Edwards if it is still affecting him
 

IGSpur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
7,008
Thread starter #5,925
I can’t see us keeping him in the squad, but another loan at best.
If he has an excellent end to the season, he could get another loan next season, or even a PL loan.

One good year next year, in either league, would result in a newly promoted PL team trying to sign him and get us some good money
 

Hengy1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
2,744
I don't really see him getting a look in towards of the season. There's 10 games or so left, they're still got a chance for the playoffs but every point counts at this point. Not many managers are going to use a completely untested player in league football, especially when it's a loanee and serves no benefit to them, when they have more experienced players to do a job. If our manager won't risk him, why would Norwich?

Hope I'm wrong, but we have seen this played out, seems like this injury came at the wrong time for Edwards if it is still affecting him
I wonder if there’s a deal saying they can have him next season on loan too.

They seem to be pushing him in the right direction with very little in return atm
 

blackburn

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
308
This is the Norwich manager talking yesterday about Edwards

“He has every possibility,” said Farke. “Our squad is not too big and at the moment without Tom Trbyull we have 21 outfield players available. So he is an option. In general, he has improved a lot, in terms of his attitude, but he can still grow up a bit more and also we have to work on strengthening his body to help his endurance and power.”

“The last two weeks he was able to do proper training with us. He is not far away, not an option for this next game (against Nottingham Forest), because it is a bit too early and he has to improve a bit in some topics. At the latest, after the next international break but he might be involved before then,” he added.
 

Spurs_Bear

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
14,175
Isn't that what everyone does in every thread on this forum i.e. criticise Poch's decision making based on what they believe, despite Poch being a lot more knowledgeable and knowing the players a lot better. I'm sure you like most posters don't rate Sissoko, but Poch seems clearly rate him but it's wouldn't stop you voicing your opinion or suddenly thinking he is top quality.
There's a difference though in criticising based on opinion and just typing bullshit like "Poch has a terrible record with our academy", "His fabled youth policy and improvement is a load of rubbish" etc etc.

None of the above are relevant to your good self.
 

Blake Griffin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2011
Messages
12,015
I don't really see him getting a look in towards of the season. There's 10 games or so left, they're still got a chance for the playoffs but every point counts at this point. Not many managers are going to use a completely untested player in league football, especially when it's a loanee and serves no benefit to them, when they have more experienced players to do a job. If our manager won't risk him, why would Norwich?

Hope I'm wrong, but we have seen this played out, seems like this injury came at the wrong time for Edwards if it is still affecting him
would usually agree but given farke actually gave a time frame for when they're looking to bring him in i'm a bit more hopeful, he does have a lot of players he needs to get past first though and not a lot of time in which to do so but hopefully he can at least get a few games between now and the end of the season. i think if that happens and he does well then he'll be back there next season but in a more prominent role.
 
Last edited:

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
Was it not slightly odd that Norwich/Farke even wanted Edwards given that he's saying they have too many players?

And why would we want to send Edwards somewhere, where we seemingly brief them about Edwards perceived deficiencies, knowing they also have all these other options and he's unlikely to get much game time?

This doesn't seem to me to be a routine "lets get him some much needed game time" type loan. Norwich clearly weren't saying "send him to us we desperately need a player like him" and Spurs weren't saying "we'll send you this player as long as you can assure us he'll get some game time".

Which suggests the object of this exercise was not necessarily about getting Edwards first team experience. That's fine, maybe they wanted him to get some other type of experience; being around a first team squad daily, being coached by someone with a good reputation, and hearing the same mantra about what he needs to improve from someone else??
 

Blake Griffin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2011
Messages
12,015
Was it not slightly odd that Norwich/Farke even wanted Edwards given that he's saying they have too many players?

And why would we want to send Edwards somewhere, where we seemingly brief them about Edwards perceived deficiencies, knowing they also have all these other options and he's unlikely to get much game time?

This doesn't seem to me to be a routine "lets get him some much needed game time" type loan. Norwich clearly weren't saying "send him to us we desperately need a player like him" and Spurs weren't saying "we'll send you this player as long as you can assure us he'll get some game time".

Which suggests the object of this exercise was not necessarily about getting Edwards first team experience. That's fine, maybe they wanted him to get some other type of experience; being around a first team squad daily, being coached by someone with a good reputation, and hearing the same mantra about what he needs to improve from someone else??
he actually said they don't have too many players("only 21 outfielders" were his words), though i can't really agree with that.

it was true when they originally took him as the only attacking players they had then were murphy, maddison, watkins and oliveira. but then a week later they signed three more from germany(leitner, hernandez, srbeny) all of which were obviously pushed for by farke and they also have hoolahan and matt jarvis returning from injury. i don't think game time was the reason for sending him there though and as i said above, i suspect this is actually preparation for taking him on properly next season.
 

Disconosebleed

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
2,553
Which suggests the object of this exercise was not necessarily about getting Edwards first team experience. That's fine, maybe they wanted him to get some other type of experience; being around a first team squad daily, being coached by someone with a good reputation, and hearing the same mantra about what he needs to improve from someone else??
With the exception of the last bit (and with respect to Farke, if Edwards isn't heeding what Pochettino says, why would he listen to a manager of a smaller club in the league below?), all of those things could have been achieved by keeping him at Tottenham, around the first team.

It seems incredibly unlikely to me that we would send Edwards out for any reason other than to get him some competitive games. Who knows whether it's injury, atittude or just Edwards not reaching the required standard that is keeping him from playing, but claiming the point of the loan was for something other than game time seems like moving the goalposts in order to make the move seem like less of a failure.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
With the exception of the last bit (and with respect to Farke, if Edwards isn't heeding what Pochettino says, why would he listen to a manager of a smaller club in the league below?), all of those things could have been achieved by keeping him at Tottenham, around the first team.

It seems incredibly unlikely to me that we would send Edwards out for any reason other than to get him some competitive games. Who knows whether it's injury, atittude or just Edwards not reaching the required standard that is keeping him from playing, but claiming the point of the loan was for something other than game time seems like moving the goalposts in order to make the move seem like less of a failure.

Like I said, depends what the ultimate aim of the loan was from our perspective. I might be completely wrong, and the fact that I misunderstood and Farke was actually saying "we don't have enough players" when I thought he was saying "we have too many players" suggests I might be.
 

Disconosebleed

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
2,553
Like I said, depends what the ultimate aim of the loan was from our perspective. I might be completely wrong, and the fact that I misunderstood and Farke was actually saying "we don't have enough players" when I thought he was saying "we have too many players" suggests I might be.
Yeah true, it is a weird thing to say. I just struggle to see what he could gain from being at a lower level club outside of competitive football, particularly as Norwich aren't at a low enough level for it to be a logical place to send him to experience 'the real world'.

On a somewhat related note, I'm reading Henry Winter's excellent Fifty Years of Hurt (aka Why England are Shite) at the moment and there is an illuminating interview with Gary Neville which touches on young players gaining experience. He said that when he was coming through under Ferguson, the emphasis was on players getting a rounded education across the breadth of football - even after Neville had broken into the first team he was still training with the youngsters as often as the first team, and it was common for him to play in a big European game midweek for the first team followed by a youth team friendly at a non-league ground on the weekend.

Neville said the point, as he understood it, was to never let the young players think they'd made it - he specifically said that he never got the feeling, even after the treble win, that players like Beckham, Butt or Scholes thought they'd made it - they were constantly looking to push on further.
 

C0YS

Just another member
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Messages
8,555
Was it not slightly odd that Norwich/Farke even wanted Edwards given that he's saying they have too many players?

And why would we want to send Edwards somewhere, where we seemingly brief them about Edwards perceived deficiencies, knowing they also have all these other options and he's unlikely to get much game time?

This doesn't seem to me to be a routine "lets get him some much needed game time" type loan. Norwich clearly weren't saying "send him to us we desperately need a player like him" and Spurs weren't saying "we'll send you this player as long as you can assure us he'll get some game time".

Which suggests the object of this exercise was not necessarily about getting Edwards first team experience. That's fine, maybe they wanted him to get some other type of experience; being around a first team squad daily, being coached by someone with a good reputation, and hearing the same mantra about what he needs to improve from someone else??
He is saying exactly the opposite.

I agree with the general gist of the post though.

For what its worth I like what Farke is saying, and for one I think its extremely reductive to see loans as only being beneficial if players are playing.
 

spurs9

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
8,499
Was it not slightly odd that Norwich/Farke even wanted Edwards given that he's saying they have too many players?

And why would we want to send Edwards somewhere, where we seemingly brief them about Edwards perceived deficiencies, knowing they also have all these other options and he's unlikely to get much game time?

This doesn't seem to me to be a routine "lets get him some much needed game time" type loan. Norwich clearly weren't saying "send him to us we desperately need a player like him" and Spurs weren't saying "we'll send you this player as long as you can assure us he'll get some game time".

Which suggests the object of this exercise was not necessarily about getting Edwards first team experience. That's fine, maybe they wanted him to get some other type of experience; being around a first team squad daily, being coached by someone with a good reputation, and hearing the same mantra about what he needs to improve from someone else??
I think improving his attitude was one of the key reasons. Sometimes people need to hear things from a voice outside their normal world for it to sink in. Looks like it could be working though.

Daniel Farke - "he has improved a lot, in terms of his attitude, but he can still grow up a bit more"
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
Yeah true, it is a weird thing to say. I just struggle to see what he could gain from being at a lower level club outside of competitive football, particularly as Norwich aren't at a low enough level for it to be a logical place to send him to experience 'the real world'.

On a somewhat related note, I'm reading Henry Winter's excellent Fifty Years of Hurt (aka Why England are Shite) at the moment and there is an illuminating interview with Gary Neville which touches on young players gaining experience. He said that when he was coming through under Ferguson, the emphasis was on players getting a rounded education across the breadth of football - even after Neville had broken into the first team he was still training with the youngsters as often as the first team, and it was common for him to play in a big European game midweek for the first team followed by a youth team friendly at a non-league ground on the weekend.

Neville said the point, as he understood it, was to never let the young players think they'd made it - he specifically said that he never got the feeling, even after the treble win, that players like Beckham, Butt or Scholes thought they'd made it - they were constantly looking to push on further.

I think there's a couple of ours that would happily settle for that now. Ferguson was possibly the best example of how this notion that kids need to be world class to be of good use to a top team's squad is a misnomer.

Of course he had Giggis, Beckham, Scholes, Gary Neville but over the years he won titles using players like Butt, Phil Neville, OShea, Brown, Evans, Fletcher etc

I just think that you can mitigate a lack of experience sometimes with the fact that you can teach these kids every day for years how you want them to play, and know that they will usually walk through a wall to do it - they are so hungry to succeed and not let you down. Certainly in the first 2/3 years anyway. Ferguson had massive resources, ManU were the richest club in England then, but resisted the temptation to fill every place in his team/squad with purchased galaticos.

The shame is, I think Poch did kind of dig this ethos when he arrived, but somewhere along the way it's got a little bit lost, maybe he's become a victim of his own success and the added pressure this has brought has found him less willing to take what he perceives as the braver option.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
He is saying exactly the opposite.

I agree with the general gist of the post though.

For what its worth I like what Farke is saying, and for one I think its extremely reductive to see loans as only being beneficial if players are playing.
Yeah, BG pointed out that I'd misconstrued what he said (or misconstrued what someone else thought he'd said) about having too many players.
 

Streetspur77

Happy Clapper
Joined
Jul 20, 2017
Messages
2,742
Does it even matter if he plays that much in this loan?

No ones ever had doubts about his ability and its not like a few games in the championship would really "toughen him up anyway". To me it's just encouraging that he's made progress with his attitude, and this change of scenery and being told what he needs to improve on by different faces may have helped that.

Kane and Masons many unsuccessful loans show that they can sometimes benefit even more off the pitch
 
Top