And that's all I was respectfully trying to ask/say. What is it that £2.5 mil is going to be spent on to vastly improve the academy from what it is now?
Not being a Cat 1 hasn't stopped us earning 10s of millions in transfer fees recently for academy products. It's not stopped the likes of Flemming, Jacob and Jarvis getting a chance.
If we take the pathway argument and I back down a bit and say you do have some point there, the difference Acun can make is to insist that any manager coming in utilises the youth players more. Im sure Steve Bruce made a comment once along the lines of 'playing academy kids won't keep me in a job'. What Acun could do, which I wouldn't be against, is stipulating that any manager has at least 2 academy products on the bench and takes a hands on approach with the academy system.
It's a decent and functioning set up, it doesn't urgently require money.
However, as someone has pointed out, most of these kids just aren't good enough, as upsetting for them as it is. I've seen lads in tears when releasing them from Fev Rovers, never mind a potential money spinning career, so I can only imagine how heartbreaking it must be to realise you're not going to hit the big time with a club like City. The fact is we have a pretty decent strike rate of producing players that can play at a good level recently and players like Jacob and Smith will have good lower league careers but they were just that little bit short for the first team.
Andy Smith being sold actually represents pretty good business. We didn't pay for him and I think people assume that because it isn't at KLP or Bowen levels of money, that it's disappointing somehow. He cost us nothing and we made six figures by selling him.
If we can produce one a season that is sold on for that much or more, it represents a very good production rate.