Article: Saving English Football - also, are Saints playing their part in player development? | Southampton FC, Football

He didn't do too much as VC of York University though!

Rick Parry has claimed on the BBC that: 'Gareth Bale at Southampton is another example. He was one game away from being released by Southampton. But look at him now'. Anyone know if there is any truth in this or how on Earth he would know that?!

 

Huw Jennings admitted that they almost chose not to give Bale a full-time scholarship, owing to persistent injury problems: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23588541

 

Bravo MailOnline... Having a pop at Pochettino for not buying British, and seemingly not knowing who he manages...

http://twitter.com/DeanEvans_23/status/375286975164456960/photo/1

 

Even by their standards, that's egregious.

We also had nine English players in the squad of each of our first three games (I'm counting Fox based on the technicality that he was born and raised in England, despite playing for Scotland), including a majority of the starters against West Brom and Sunderland.

 

Yep, especially when you consider preseason and cup games.

I make it: K. Davis, Clyne, Chambers, Stephens, Turnbull, Shaw, Fox, Cork, S. Davis, Reed, Ward-Prowse, Lallana, Isgrove, Rowe, Sinclair, Rodriguez, Lambert.

Seventeen since the summer. Nine of which have been with the academy since before the age of fifteen.

But yeah, bloody god damn that Argentine manager for neglecting British talent by signing three foreigners with Champions League experience.

 

We have a foreign manager. That's enough of a reason for the Mail to attempt to put a negative spin on everything we do.

 

I also just realized the hilarity of including Pardew as a manager who "splashed the cash" in this transfer window.

 

And when did that happen..?

 

Dyke & the FA are a joke.

The FA, as governing body for football in England could bring in a rule anytime saying that each team has to field a minimum of 3 or 4 UK passport holders.

The reason it doesn't? Because the Premier League would stick two fingers up at the FA, sever their link with the FA and organise a direct link to uefa. The FA would lose all the money in kickbacks it gets from the Prem and would probably go bust.

So its all hot air. FA have no power over the game in this country anymore and they probably don't deserve any as for decades they creamed off the top, didn't give a **** about fans (until forced to by disasters) and was a glorified gentlemen's club.

 

Sky listed the teams who played the most and least English players. Norwich and Southampton had the most with 6.

 

How is this for a crazy idea:

Create a series of regional development academies (say, a dozen or so) for players between the ages of 13-16. These would focus on developing them into technically-gifted players, and their enrollment would consist of a couple dozen of the best and brightest applicants from their catchment areas...roughly 150 players nationwide per age level. At 16, players would be free to join a club side on scholarship.

If any of that sounds familiar, it's because France has been doing precisely that for the past 25 years, with considerable success.

 

Cortese would explode if changes were brought in that affected our Academy just because others have failed. Perhaps the FA should ask him how to run an Academy, but doubt that will happen. The last time they asked his opinion, he told them...they apparently didn't like criticism from a football newbie.

 

Met him at my graduation, had a good chat..nothing football related-mind. Very intelligent guy and he really does carry a certain authority with him.

 

Prem teams are signing up kids at the age of 6 & 7 now. They would simply not trust "their kids" to get better training at FA acadamies than their own.

When you look at the standard of FA coaches across the age ranges, you can see the clubs point. The best coaches are at the clubs where they probably get paid far more than they would under the FA banner.

Personally, I'd just let international football die. If England are to be forever ****... so what. They've been **** for almost 50 years, even when the top league in this country was 99% English.

 

Did we replace the chap from the Academy who was filched by the FA?

 

I can absolutely see why they would resist it, but at the same time: is what they are doing currently producing anywhere near the number of top-level players that one would expect given the sheer number of kids playing from a very young age within the auspices of one club or another? I don't love the idea of a national academy, either, but it would appear to work for France, and it would very much appear that what is happening in England is not in fact a success. Certain clubs take their responsibility to turn out skilled players seriously...most do not.

This certainly wouldn't remove the club academy system, but rather provide a complement to it. No one would be forced into it, just as they are not forced to go to Clairefontaine.

 

I think all Prem clubs and most down the leagues do take very seriously their committment to home grown talent. It "should" save them money in the long run.

Perhaps less so down the leagues now because of the enormous cost involved to get full academy status, plus they know their kids can get hoovered up by bigger clubs pretty much at any point now the 70 mile catchment area rule has gone.

Plus, gone are the days of clubs in the top leagues filtering money down to lower league clubs by buying their players. It's almost unheard of now that a player of say 16-18 breaks through in league 1 or 2 from nowhere without clubs like Saints knowing this kid's full history.

The French did very well for a number of years, but it's starting (or has for the last 8 years) to go the same as England where the League takes priority and clubs are richer and wanting to do their own thing.

Its a hugely slow process, so in say 5-10 years things will pick up for England. Not because of what the FA are doing NOW, but because of what clubs have been doing for the last 5 or 6 years. A decision taken to change under 10 coaching won't give you an outcome for probably another 10 years.

 

The sheer lack of players rising through the ranks would seem to indicate that many Prem clubs don't take it seriously enough, however one defines that. Even many of those that focus on developing talent do not seem to produce well-rounded, technically-gifted players...England must lead the world in fast, strong, one-footed players with a hard-if-inaccurate shot that cannot change directions without losing the ball.

 

Well I would agree with that.

A common theme is that there are not enough coaches, and current coaches are not good enough. More money in that direction seems like a good fix, for recruitment and training etc. More english players would naturally be brought through to the professional game, and more of those will make it to the highest levels.

 

Hundreds of kids get released at 18 without a pro contract. Surely some of these can go through coaching courses?