And de Bruyne, who has been exceptional this season on the whole. To be fair though, they are all top quality players and any team missing a spine which is as strong as that would suffer immensely, regardless of how much they spend.
I agree with you 100% but I think you're missing the point. Arsenal without Sanchez and Ozil and Cech would also be a shadow of the team that they are with them. But those are your 'big money' signings who have joined in recent years. But when you spend upwards of £30m on a player, you kind of expect them to become absolutely key to the team's fortunes. We learned this the hard way having blown a fortune on Soldado and Paulinho and a very patient wait for Lamela to begin resembling a £30m player. De Bruyne is therefore the exception that proves the rule: Since the sheikhs took over, City have been exceptionally poor at bringing in big money signings who actually make a difference to the team. Their recent transfer history reads like a comedy: Jo - £18m Robinho - £32m De Jong - £18m Adebayor - £25m Santa Cruz - £18m Balotelli - £24m Dzeko - £27m Nasri - £24m Fernandinho - £30m Jovetic - £22m Negredo - £20m Bony - £28m Mangala - £32m Sterling - £44m Otamendi - £29m That's £391m worth of 'talent' that really should've gone on to become essential to the club. But look at the list - all signed within the past 7 years - how many of them are still there? And of those who are still there, how many actually justify their price tag? It boils down to one fact: whoever is in charge of recruitment at City needs serious help because a glance at that list and you'd assume that their director of football is a 12 year old kid whose parents give him unlimited spending power on Fifa Ultimate team. I wrote a long piece on the original 606 about 6 years ago now about how City's success was unsustainable unless they established a top quality academy and started bringing through local lads who would actaully care about the shirt they wear, and that they needed a complete rethink and overhaul of their transfer strategy and recruitment policy. As was expected, I got utterly mauled by the City fans on there, and the words 'jealous', 'sour grapes' and 'you know nothing' were used intermittently with other words usually no more than 4 letters in length. But after numerous embarassments in Europe and abject failure to retain a title, I stand by everything I said.
Nasri has been the biggest surprise, for me. At Arsenal, he looked great; whenever we played them, he was always a big threat. But, as soon as he joined £ity, he became complete pants! It's as though being given so much extra cash actually saps the will to play.
"But, as soon as he joined £ity, he became complete pants! It's as though being given so much extra cash actually saps the will to play." For all but a few players, when you have the security of money and (perhaps) silverware given to you on a plate, you do not have the resolve to improve your game unless your manager is imposing their own iron will on you. That is why Citeh are more or less bi-annual(/polar) PL winners etc.
I totally understand what you're saying and you are correct that due to the unique position City are in where they have unlimited funds and therefore other clubs can command a higher fee for their player that City want to buy, but I can't agree with the last paragraph. You're right in that their recruitment policy needs to be changed, but to say that they need to bring local lads who actually care about the shirt they wear in order to ensure success isn't the case because it has no bearing on anything. How many players in the Premier League are successful academy products? Especially at the top clubs? And compare that with how many have either been bought from other clubs or are foreign players. In fairness, City do have a few promising youngsters, but whether they will ever get sufficient game time remain to be seen. Either way, I don't think the fans or the owners care because they know that the money they are willing to offer is enough in itself to entice players to join them, whether they're flavour of the month or whether they are the next best thing. Due to the revised FFP regulations, I'm not sure whether City's success will be 'unsustainable' because I can't envisage anyone that would be willing to punish them properly if they fail to comply with the rules again. They may be underperforming in Europe, but in the last 5 years, they've won 2 league titles, a League Cup and an FA Cup. Regardless of whether the benchmark for them should be higher or not, particularly when it comes to signing players, Mansour is still seeing his investment winning silverware and that is because, ultimately, the riches a club has will always be the decisive factor in the long-term. Nurturing youth, for the wealthiest teams, will never be a serious priority.
My dream is that, one day, the entire Spurs squad will consist of only our academy players. We've made a good start.
United's two most successful periods came from their own nurtured youth, that fact alone shows a serious flaw in your argument.
In the last 5-6 years? I seriously doubt it. The landscape of football has evolved from 20 years ago.
"United's two most successful periods came from their own nurtured youth, that fact alone shows a serious flaw in your argument." And managers who would not let their players rest on the laurels of previous season successes.
"My dream is that, one day, the entire Spurs squad will consist of only our academy players. We've made a good start." We're currently well beyond the last comparable period (which is the early 80s) .
If you confine your argument to a time frame that does not allow any development Spurs are also about to prove you wrong.
"Also, let's not forget that United were still spending £30m on players 15 years ago as well." Every Empire does that to periodically maintain squad quality at the highest level. Tis when you do it every season, and are not even winning the PL or CL, that questions must be asked.
But teams like City, Chelsea and even recently United care about instantaneous success over homegrown talent and development. LvG may well be giving a few more youth players a chance, but that's after spending £300m and realising that some of the players he's signed aren't playing the way that he wants. Do these successful teams give a damn about local lads with fighting spirit? If you finish ahead of City, United and Chelsea, it would be a fantastic achievement. But in the long-haul, due to their wealthy benefactors/lucrative sponsorship deals, they will always have the competitive advantage when it comes to signing the better players and will end up getting more success than you. That's not a slant on you, that's just the reality. As I said, money may not determine success, but it is a huge, huge factor. It's certainly more influential than homegrown talent.
There is no argument that money makes all the difference of course it does but to dismiss youth development when teams like Barca, United, Ajax and Bayern have all based their biggest successes on that combination. The point is well made by CK. If City want to make a real mark on football history, then youth development will be required otherwise we are just looking at another PSG.
United, under Ferguson, proved that a championship-wiinning squad can be built from ones own academy. Spur now have one of the best footballing academies in the world. We are about to build our own new state-of-the-art stadium. Regardless of how much money £ity, Chelsea, or any other club may have, there is absolutely no reason why Spurs cannot or should not build a side capable of winning anything.
"United, under Ferguson, proved that a championship-wiinning squad can be built from ones own academy." Not just Fergie. George Grahams' Goon teams at the beginning benefited from having several players who had come thru the ranks together. A sense of collective being, strong understanding of each others' game etc. Very difficult to buy these things regardless of how much money you have.
Also, which players have you actually developed from your youth academy that have been successes, apart from Kane and perhaps Bentaleb? Kyle Walker came from Sheffield United. Rose was from Leeds. Alli came from MK Dons. Dier was at Sporting Lisbon. Trippier was at Burnley. Davies was from Swansea.
"Also, which players have you actually developed from your youth academy that have been successes, apart from Kane and perhaps Bentaleb?" Mason (established) . Carroll (establishing) . Pritchard (imminent) .
