- Oct 19, 2004
- 39,837
- 50,713
I get your gripe about KWP, but what other top 4 clubs would has developed 3 english youth players (ok two of them we paid for and both under 5m, but still it needs to be recognised that we took punts on these players when others didn't and we gave them first team opportunities):
Kane - A youth prospect being loaned to the likes of Millwall and due to Spurs one of the top 3 strikers in world football
Dele - We took a big leap of faith on this kid and in no way been detrimental to his development, from a youth prospect in league one to one of the most exciting young players in world football due to Spurs
Dier - Rejected by Everton, we took a punt on him and now one an England regular and a vital part to our starting 11 who has developed into one of the most versatile players in the league due to Spurs.
Who have Liverpool, Chelsea, City or United developed like this? We can't compare ourselves to other smaller clubs because you can't penalise quality just to give a youth player a chance.
Giving 3 young English players a chance to thrive is ridiculous in the current financial climate of Premier League football. This doesn't include the likes of Winks, Foyth and KWP to a smaller degree.
Currently i find it difficult to understand any negative comments around our youth development, is it perfect, of course not, but it's a solid 8/10.
I said in the Harry Winks post, if the likes of Winks or Onomah want to be a starting CM for Tottenham Hotspur football club, a club now cementing itself as one of the top 4 clubs in the country, mixing it with the best European teams. Then THEY have to prove that they are better than Dembele / Dier / Wanyama etc. They need to get to training earlier and leave later, they need to be better in training and when they get time on the pitch or time away on loan, they need to prove themselves.
That's all it comes down to now, we aren't a top 10 club anymore, we aren't a charity club for youth players to get at least 10 starts a season in their preferred position. We are a big club, if a player comes on in a position that isn't his, show the manager you want it, show you want to make. It's all about application.
The only part i agree with in a lot of the posts i have read in this topic, is the development of KWP. I would have enjoyed to see him more. But who are we to judge what his attitude is like and how hard he trains compared to Serge / Tripps, a lot of unknowns.
But we piss all over the over top 4 clubs so lets celebrate that a little please.
I have and do give Pochettino credit for improving players.
Lets ignore the word academy for a minute. Because for me, as odd as this sounds, this isn't about the academy, it's about what I perceive as just poor choices in terms of our squad.
I believe KWP has the potential to be a better RB than Aurier and I think it wouldn't take much longer than the time it will take Aurier to settle into our team and stop looking like a very erratic and unpredictable RB (if that's going to happen at all).
Poch's ability to improve players is one of his many strengths, so what I question is why, as a club, we decided it's better to tie up so much money on a player like Aurier (when we already have Trippier) and try to iron out his game, than do it with KWP for free.
We know this kid. We have coached him for ten years. We know he's of impeccable character. Won't be a pain in the arse if he's not picked every week. Know he has huge potential. Look at what he's shown in three appearances this season. A MOTM (OK Generous but still good debut away at a big ground) and a goal from LB in ten minutes pitch time.
And then we have Sissoko. Never mind Onomah or Winks, I would rather have kept Lesniak round and played him as a CM than watch Sissoko treat the fucking football like hot potato every time it goes near him.
I just cannot fathom why Poch, this great lover of youth, could not give Onomah a single minute in a pre season friendly as a CM ? Please explain that one to me. We had nothing to lose but everything to gain from him, maybe, looking decent there, the kid had just won a WC, played exceptionally well, his confidence was sky high, but Poch really pissed on it, and to add insult to it, actually played TOB there. Almost like he was trying to teach Onomah, who'd apparently been badgering him to play in CM (according to Poch himself), a lesson.
And before that it was Pritchard, who didn't get a single meaningful minute when our bench was not exactly chocked with options, and Veljkovic.
I don't mind Poch not picking or wasting time developing academy players, for any players that aren't great - IMO (and that's just how we all feel about our opinions) but I do mind him not trying to give a chance to at least develop, ones that clearly have huge potential. I'm only talking about a handful of players in his whole time here, and some of them I know wouldn't have been ultimately very top drawer (but not all our bought players turn out that way either).
So yes, lets praise everything good that Poch does, but lets also criticise the things he does badly. And it's not about academy v purchase per se, it's about managing and maximising resources, vital to a club like us, which I don't think Poch has/is always doing wonderfully.