Also a lot of the academy lads are with the first team squad so don't always get the opportunity to play for the relevant age group
Our academy could see he had the abilities to start and win MOTM against a premier league side, whereas the England set up hasn't yet seen the qualities yet to include him in the squad for the u19's.Someone on the radio asked a couple of days ago [sorry, I really can't remember when or if it was BBC, talkSport, or another station, I wasn't in charge of the radio] why, if Southampton's Academy is so good, how come their under-age sides aren't at the top of every league.? As far as I know, nobody had an answer. Of course, nobody was really that interested in looking into it either. Most of these pundits and presenters pay lip service to what might be called 'research' and 'knowledge', preferring 'hearsay' as their main incoming newsfeed. Anyway, I have one reason, that is fairly well known amongst Saints followers. The Saints Academy process is to promote the best players from a younger age group, upto the next age group, when they show definite signs that they are capable of it. What it means is that the under-age group they leave behind becomes weaker for their promotion, and hence they often don't lead their respective leagues. But the individually promoted players become fast-tracked and learn much quicker, according to their potential. And that's where it really matters. Not that the under-age team wins the league, but that the players progress. Josh Sims is a perfect recent example.
Hopefully a pundit read that.![]()
As Sims is still 19, it's strange he never made the u 19 team ( if elligable ) probably should be in the u21 anyway
. Playing for results is a reason the national team is **** as they just pick the most developed athletes who can win at u16/u17/u18 level in academies, not the best players
I don't even think results are that important at youth level tbh.
Gone are the days of the "Stiffs"! The reserve team was very much used to keep game time up for supporting players and those returning from injury, there seems to be a reluctance to do that these days. The U23's side is certainly used more to assess players coming up through the ranks. On many occasions this season young players have been playing "above" their designated level and although it doesn't get match results it does give youngsters plenty of opportunity to show what they are made of. What has happened to Two Bob, is his career on the rocks?
I'm a huge believer that they are not important, not in the slightest. I know we have some (Fran mentions this at times) that think winning is good for them, but that approach is part of the reason we are not as good at producing players good enough to be the best in the world.
Barcelona as an example, don't play 11 v 11 games until about 15 or 16. Parents aren't allowed to ask about the result for younger age groups.
I agree that results are not important, but I think it's difficult to remove competition. I don't think kids should be protected from the thrill of winning and the disappointment of defeat, after all, that's the goal of the sport.
it's up to parents and coaches to be mature and appreciate its not the be all and end all.
You'll have me reaching for my soap box again in a minute.
Not sure about Sheff Weds, but in my day Watford were the "best" youth side around. They did have some of those players make it, though I can only think of David James who played at the top regularly
This is the crux of the issue. The competition will be there. It's natural and you'll see it all over the pitch in every game, so you don't need to even mention it. However the "competition" is always the focus at junior level and it needs to be controlled. The focus should be the technicality and use of the ball, however here it just doesn't happen enough.
I went on a radio show years ago, arguing on this very point with the host. I said at the time that my kids were 6 and 7. Put them in the floor with a board game and they'll compete like crazy. It's natural, so you don't need to do anything else around competition. Focus everything on how to play the game and the skills. Then things will improve.
Good luck with your last sentence. Not a chance.
https://arsenalyouth.wordpress.com/...an-tella-joins-southampton-in-permanent-deal/Young Nathan Tella has signed apparently:
You must log in or register to see media
Conjugations, indeed.![]()

This is the crux of the issue. The competition will be there. It's natural and you'll see it all over the pitch in every game, so you don't need to even mention it. However the "competition" is always the focus at junior level and it needs to be controlled. The focus should be the technicality and use of the ball, however here it just doesn't happen enough.
I went on a radio show years ago, arguing on this very point with the host. I said at the time that my kids were 6 and 7. Put them in the floor with a board game and they'll compete like crazy. It's natural, so you don't need to do anything else around competition. Focus everything on how to play the game and the skills. Then things will improve.
Good luck with your last sentence. Not a chance.