Profitable academy

Ibe signed as a 16 yr old and you agreed a fee that could rise to £5m for Sterling.

The difference is that if you're taking a kid at 12 for £3k, you can say with credibility that you've developed him if he makes the first team at 18

If you've paid £5m for a 15/16 yr old you know you're buying a real potential star. Sure you can take some of the credit but you can't claim him as a homegrown ffs.

 

Can in PL squads

#repeat
#cucumber

 

that honestly depends.

southampton are not taking in 8 year olds and turning out just that either.

lfc are scouring europe to put guys in our academy. thats part of the staffing of said academy and when we talk about profit on academy our cost are higher as we are paying fees for players

"selling clubs" can sell what they make and get so far but the biggest and best example is ajax.... southampton have merely cashed in on crazy money fees. ajax year on year churn players out and make more but also can buy anyone in holland as well.

 

can you explain the difference between "academy player" and "homegrown player"

if the title of the article is profitable academy then if a player is in an academy on a "scholarship" contract (no player can sign pro forms before 17) then no matter if you find and import him at 15 or 12 who cares?

ffs how many scots and irish came to engalne at 14/15 to be yts in the old days... were they not academy players?

 

Of course we criticize Southampton for selling but they are having a solid season.

If they had not sold maybe they would be champions...

 

Champion ??. You're having a laugh

 

Yes I am. But they would have a solid team so I dont think they would be far off.

 

You're forgetting that the teams around them would be stronger having not signed their dross

 

I'm also forgetting they would have Lovren at the back.