In a new series, I intend to find out which factors affect a player reaching his potential, including examples to follow and examples to avoid. Part 1: Versatility - a poisoned chalice? http://hitrowz.com/2013/07/16/fulfilling-potential-part-1/
It is part of the acadamy set up that young Saints play in lots of different positions within reason. You are not going to get a CB playing in goal, but he may be given a few games in midfield. The same applies to full backs being played as wide midfielders, it gives them a better understanding of the game
I think that when Bale left Southampton, he went to a place where he had a better opportunity, as opposed to Arsenal with their 10,000 starlets perpetually fighting for places. I also think that when Bale left Saints he was a better player and more ready to make the transition than Walcott or AOC. The latter two were obviously way too good for the level they were at, but it was unclear whether they were ready for top EPL. Bale played for us in Championship, and rather than force his way out at the first opportunity, stayed with Saints for at least an extra half season. That half season may not have helped his development personally, but it did make everyone aware of exactly how good he was, so he wasn't just another starlet. But the reality is that Bale is just flat out a better player than Walcott or AOC. I think all of us who watched him felt that way. Career paths and luck can make a difference. I am not sure that Lallana is all that much better than Surman fundamentally, but Lallana got a dream situation where he got first team football all the time and the team advanced in sync with him. Whereas Surman was actually sort of forced out, and got unlucky with injuries as well. Versatility can help or hurt, I don't think the player has much control over it. They really just have to run up against a coach who makes the right decision as to whether to slot them in a place or use them everywhere. I don't know if there's a name for them over there, but here in the US we call people like that 'tweeners and they're always the most hotly debated, high-risk/high-reward draft choices. The margin between say, being too fast for big guys and too big for fast guys vs too small for big guys and too slow for fast guys is tiny. And I would say most players with the physical potential for the former don't instinctively know what position they want to play or how to take advantage of mismatches and need guidance from a coach. Because of how hard it is for a young player to break into the Southampton side, fewer academy players will reach their potential (or definitely at least not here). But the truly exceptional still will. And if we cast aside a few youngsters too soon because we've bought proven players and we need them because we are challenging for Europe or the title and also Cups instead of having the luxury of competing in League One... well, that's just the price you pay.
Interesting article. I would suggest though, that if you are considered versatile, it is because you are not outstanding in one area. An out and out star in one position need not fear being replaced as much as a utility player. However, you can make a good career from being a reliable versatile player. Look how successive managers have appreciated Guly. A player is not a failure just because he isn't a Ronaldo or a Bale...those are exceptions.
Very good article. I think it is more a question of the opportunity combining with individual talent that is key, as the excellent Surman/Lallana example above. Deprak (sp?) Chopra talks about synchro-destiny in Eastern philosophy. Took me years to get my head round it, but basically good stuff happens if all the circumstances line up. The basic principle behind this article - that talent alone is not enough - is valid. Cole is a great example. I went to a Cup match at Old Trafford with some Manc mates when Cole, Lampard and Carrick were kids playing for West Ham and we all agreed we'd just seen in Cole a player teams were going to kill for. However, somewhere along the way the runes didn't quite line up. Michael Owen, anyone?
Exactly. I have long talked about good timing. It's about being in the right place, at the right time, with the right attributes. Those attributes for a footballer could be pretty average yet, if they are required, that player is valuable to a club. It's the same in everyone's life. Some people have good timing, others bad, and it changes. Inevitably, some people lives are blighted by bad timing. The tumblers never seem to fall into place for them, whether they be footballers [Ryan Dickson..?], other sports-persons or ordinary working/non-working people.
