What's new

What is the Point of Youth?

alamo

Don't worry be happy
Jun 10, 2004
5,046
7,226
im so pissed off with the sale of chris gunter. i believe he is better than both kyle from sheff utd!!!! he can also play across the back four with no difficulty!!!! would anyone like to have a £10 bet with me by next summer chris gunter will have signed for another prem team and will be in the 1st eleven!!!! i really do think its shoking to sell gunter and for less than 2mil aswell

i'll take that bet.

And besides, all that matters from a club point of view is that we made a profit on him (wages aside - don't quote me!).

As someone so aptly put it the other day - if we truly regret selling him I will eat my hair
 

alamo

Don't worry be happy
Jun 10, 2004
5,046
7,226
never forget that tottenham hotspur plc is a business. if we buy and sell in a financially beneficial manner then i really don't see the problem.

example in point - negredo. biought back to Real just to be sold on.
 

mancman

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2006
361
678
Interesting points raised. I disagree though with some of the points made. Academies (good ones that is!) cost about 3 to 4 million pounds a year. Just on this point alone some academies have been very succesful. Chelsea have produced JOHN TERRY(worth £30m?), SAM DALLA BONA(£6m sale), ROBERT HUTH (£6m sale), CARLTON COLE (£2m sale). Man United have produced JOHN O'SHEA, DARREN FLETCHER, KIERON RICHARDSON(£5.5m), GIuseppe ROSSI(£6.7m), FRAIZER CAMPBELL(£4m), JONNY EVANS and many more besides. In both CHELSEA and MAN UTD cases I have just mentioned the players produced in the past 10 years. Also I have not mentioned the fantasdtically succesful MAN CITY, MIDDLESBORO and ASTON VILLA academies. So just on economic grounds youth academies are a must. With regards to SPURS in the past 10 years the following players have come through our supposedly crap academy (excluding last years side) -- LEDLEY KING , PETER CROUCH, STEPHEN KELLY, DEAN MARNEY, DEAN YEATES and JAMIE O'HARA (I believe worth about £40m (if KING was fit!)).
I also believe we have a responsibility to develop local youngsters and to encourage football in the community and a Youth Academy does that. To say why bother with an academy is like saying why bother having apprenticeships in plumbing and electrical skills, lets import the finished product from POLAND!
Just some thoughts....
 

bryanabutler

SC Supporter
Jul 15, 2007
1,342
583
i'll take that bet.

And besides, all that matters from a club point of view is that we made a profit on him (wages aside - don't quote me!).

As someone so aptly put it the other day - if we truly regret selling him I will eat my hair


We lost money on Gunter
 

spurs_viola

Rui Costa,dreamspurs no10
Mar 10, 2005
2,454
0
You really do speak continual rubbish don't you. Sorry, I shouldn't be so damning but its just I couldn't disagree more. The simple reason youth hasn't been developed to the degree you so desire is because WE HAVE FULL INTERNATIONALS in each and every position that are more deserving of the first eleven place and as such need to be on the pitch more often than not.

Name me a club that has been successful with a predominantly youth team side (christ, i sound like Alan Hansen :grin:)

Thank you for trawling through my rubbish consistently...I can't say I pay as much attention to your undoubtedly enlightened input, sorry - I don't have as much patience as you when it comes to getting through garbage, I guess.

So the club that has full internationals in each position should never even bother with developing talented young players, is that so? Very bright...

No one is calling for a predominantly "youth team side" (sic). Gradually introducing some of the talented youngsters into the first team (a la Barca or even Arsenal, as I clearly mentioned in my post) is not turning the team into the "youth side". It is developing the young players with good potential up to the highest level and bringing progress to the club.
Sticking with your "Full Internationals" (many of whom are actually little more than mediocre - and I'm not talking only about Spurs) will not bring progress to the club - at best, it stagnates the progress; at worst, it leads to regress.
 

Krafty

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2004
4,768
2,098
Chelsea have produced JOHN TERRY(worth £30m?), SAM DALLA BONA(£6m sale), ROBERT HUTH (£6m sale), CARLTON COLE (£2m sale). Man United have produced JOHN O'SHEA, DARREN FLETCHER, KIERON RICHARDSON(£5.5m), GIuseppe ROSSI(£6.7m), FRAIZER CAMPBELL(£4m), JONNY EVANS and many more besides. With regards to SPURS in the past 10 years the following players have come through our supposedly crap academy (excluding last years side) -- LEDLEY KING , PETER CROUCH, STEPHEN KELLY, DEAN MARNEY, DEAN YEATES and JAMIE O'HARA (I believe worth about £40m (if KING was fit!)).


I do think an academy is important, and we should have one, but we dont use our properly.

FYI, Terry was nicked from West Ham's academy, Dalla Bona, Huth, Richardson (west ham again) and Rossi were all nicked from other clubs academies. Apart from King, those players you mentionned were not given a chance at Spurs and O'Hara came from the scum academy.

We are not the only team in the world to waste talent, but we are one of the worst at it. We will get in a third choice back up who is 30 years old rather than risk having to play a kid in amongst the ten full internationals for 30 minutes in one game.

Its like when people talk about getting another centre back - we have King and Woody as first choice. Ok they are injury prone, but then we have Dawson as a very able backup, and Corluka can easily slot in at centre back. Huddlestone could play there, and then you have Dervitte. He needs at least three players unavailable before he plays, and if he cant cover for one game, alongside those experienced quality pros, then is he ever going to make it? If not, why bother keeping him? If so, we dont need to buy anyone.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
33,903
81,485
I actually quite like our youth system at the moment. I remember under Graham any player with youth on his sides regardless of talent had an opportunity in the first team. It made for awful viewing.

Nowadays we have a lot of very talented young players, naturally some will make it and some won't. The point is you need to earn you're chance and prove you deserve, the manager isn't going to simply give it to you.

We bought Routledge and Lennon was bought supposedly as one for the future and backup. Routledge didn't really inspire but as soon as Lennon got a game he took this chance and made himself a first teamer. He didn't rely on time, excuses or lack of experience to get himself in the team he did what footballers should do, he played well and has continued to work on his game.

Huddlestone for all his ability hasn't done this at the same level but as he has played well but not yet spectacularly he has found himself in the first team squad. The rest haven't proved much.

Last season Harry sent out a lot of players on loan to the Championship and below to give them a chance to prove themselves, some did well and some didn't. We recognise many of these players have ability and may come good in the future which is why when one wants to leave we often look to loan them out rather than sell them.

Loaning these players out creates the right mentality at our club. We want young, talented players but pulling on the white shirt at White Hart Lane is the holy grail and you are going to have to work very hard to get that honour.
 

mancman

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2006
361
678
KRAFTY
Thanks for your thoughtful article. I do though take exception to your comments on players (like J TERRY) being stolen from other academies (in this case WHU). In actual fact TERRY was in the same amateur schoolboy team as KING and that WEST HAM did not offer him a scholarship he was released. Indeed Chelsea considered TERRY as an outside bet for success at 16 years of age. Terry did not gain schoolboy or Youth honours (King was a U17 International) and was essentiallky a late developer. Anyway lads taken on at 8 years of age and being given a scholarship at 16, all with one club is a rarity. So my measure really is from taking on lads at 16 and being 'coached' to a first team standard. Jamie O'hara is a case in point. He succeeded at Spurs because of greater opportunity which the (then) higher standards and competition at Arsenal would have been less likely. If i am being pedantic KRAFTY i apologise but your article certainly makes you think so please write more. I am all for stimulating debate.
 
Top