Transfer Deadline Day - a different perspective

[Lff]

First of all, apologies for starting a new thread but this one is more about the concept of the thing rather who has or hasn't been signed.

Transfer Deadline Day is, I know, an invention primarily of Sky TV. It used to be, simply, the last day on which you could buy new players until Sky decided it needed a cheap way of filling not one but two channels' schedules.

It struck me yesterday, how farcical it has become with reporters standing in empty car parks all over the country more often than not reporting on who hadn't signed or hadn't been seen.

More importantly, the principle of buying success has become totally ingrained in football culture, one journalist congratulated Harry Redknapp for a successful 'Deadline Day'. It seems that any idea that clubs should coach players to become first team footballers has finally died; Southampton being the final candle in the wind which was brutally extinguished this summer.

How about this for a fact, I read it somewhere so it must be true, Manchester United didn't buy any players between 1953 and 1957 and only bought 3 players between 1964 and 1972. Incredible. This is what all clubs should be aiming at. For most Premier League clubs, the under 21 teams and the academies are a complete waste of time. All they do is breed players for loaning out to 'lesser' clubs. They might as well abandon ALL pretence of coaching so that these players can get a proper start at a league club.

Am I alone in thinking this or have we all become seduced by Sky's 'monster'?

 

[----HistoryRepeating----]

Whooping and air punching as it goes beyond £800m, yes, its gone totally ****ing bonkers.

 

[Archers Road]

I agree with a lot of those sentiments, but I wouldn't be quite as pessimistic as you. Our academy has served us well and will continue to do so, though this summer has made me despair of ever seeing a Saints team built around academy graduates. Still, you never win anything we kids though, eh?

As for buying success, yes, it is ingrained in football culture. That doesn't mean it's the only, or even the best, way to build for the long term future. It's not how Man Utd or Arsenal established themselves at the top of the pyramid, though both clubs have spent big this summer so perhaps they've both changed their philosophies to fit the current reality.

 

[Le Tissier's Laces]

I thought you'd be too busy celebrating Cork staying LFF to worry about such things!

 

[CBK]

It's all a bit sickening really. I won't use the lazy and stupid "soldiers wages" retort in regard to the money spent, but I would say that if the FA/Prem League had invested even just 20% of what was spent during the window on offering free coaching badges and building 3G pitches, we'd probably have the best youth football infrastructure in the world.

Which, in the long term, would be better for everyone, including Premier League teams.

God knows how much of this window's fees have gone to agents, lawyers, hangers-on etc. all money out the game and much of it out the country too.

 

[Libby]

Spot on CBK

 

[steve79]

It's all a bit sickening really. I won't use the lazy and stupid "soldiers wages" retort in regard to the money spent, but I would say that if the FA/Prem League had invested even just 20% of what was spent during the window on offering free coaching badges and building 3G pitches, we'd probably have the best youth football infrastructure in the world.

Which, in the long term, would be better for everyone, including Premier League teams.

God knows how much of this window's fees have gone to agents, lawyers, hangers-on etc. all money out the game and much of it out the country too.

This. Was talking to the mrs about how stupid amounts of cash is killing the game.its not a level playing field anymore.(mrs sat there rolling eyes as i spoke)

 

[fran-MLs little camera]

Celebrating how much was spent was pointless, because can't see how that is a good thing. However, they were only reporting what was happening rather than creating it. As long as there is a deadline day and teams persist in leaving it till the last day, you can't blame tv for reporting it. However, please put the reporters somewhere away from the eejits who gather behind them. I don't need reminding there are morons out there. I don't believe for one minute that they are necessarily real club fans.

 

[CBK]

However, please put the reporters somewhere away from the eejits who gather behind them. I don't need reminding there are morons out there. I don't believe for one minute that they are necessarily real club fans.

Define "real club fans" ? Yep, no doubt many were just local urchins wanting to gurn & be silly on tv, but funnily enough, that sort also go to games and write on the internet too.

 

[Beef]

It's all a bit sickening really. I won't use the lazy and stupid "soldiers wages" retort in regard to the money spent, but I would say that if the FA/Prem League had invested even just 20% of what was spent during the window on offering free coaching badges and building 3G pitches, we'd probably have the best youth football infrastructure in the world.

Which, in the long term, would be better for everyone, including Premier League teams.

God knows how much of this window's fees have gone to agents, lawyers, hangers-on etc. all money out the game and much of it out the country too.

The agent of Falcao was the agent of Di Maria and about 6 others that moved(at least). I bet he made about £50m, madness when you think about it.

 

[fran-MLs little camera]

Define "real club fans" ? Yep, no doubt many were just local urchins wanting to gurn & be silly on tv, but funnily enough, that sort also go to games and write on the internet too.

As I said 'not necessarily real fans.' Some will be and some will be people who go where the cameras are.

 

[CBK]

Statistically, when you go to a football match with 30,000 people, you are more likely to be close to a murderer/child abuser/drug dealer than at any other point in your life (unless you knowingly hang around with those kind of people).

Makes you think eh?

*that bloke to the left of me at SMS is definitely dodgy*

*he probably says the same about me*

 

[fran-MLs little camera]

Frighteningly, a chap on TV said 2% of priests are *****philes, but added (to make you feel happier about it) that that is the same as the general population !!!

 

[tiggermaster]

I can't help but agree with the sentiment of developing and keeping our players. With the original argument of this thread making the case for the Man Utd team of the 50s so dreadfully decimated in Munich, I was moved to examine Saints teams/players since my SFC addiction that started in 1957 as to how many came through our youth systems and went on to play 150 first team games.. There may be the odd mistake but going by debut dates and split into decades it runs like this....

57-59.... 2... Paine and Sydenham
60-69.... 2... Chivers and Channon
70-79.... 5... Holmes, Williams, Moran, Waldron and Baker G.
80-89.... 6... Le Tissier, Benali, Wallace D. Maddison, Shearer and Wallace R.
90-99.... 2... Oakley and Bridge
00-09.... 1... Lallana

18 players in 57 years you could argue paid backed what was invested in them. Or one every 3 years, on average.

Might it be that we look back with tinted glasses? There were certainly eras.. when it seemed the core of the teams were home grown. It also seems we have just had a season when a vision of a core of home grown promised a full bloom. The sentiment behind this idea is perhaps what we are grieving, The squashing of a maturing promise. But only Channon played in a trophy winning team.

 

[fran-MLs little camera]

We know about our academy, but what about other academies. The perception (and not just amongst Saints fans) is that our academy is one of the best, but do we really have greater success rate than others or is it just because we have produced some high profile players, such as Bale.

 

[TheSecondStain]

Very good post indeed, Lff [and CBK too]. I'm much of the same opinion. That headline bit of trivia that has done the media rounds, that in Di Maria alone, Man U spent more than Burnley have in their entire 132 year history, shows the ridiculous nature of transfer dealings. And of course, ManU are not even the lone PL club to pay out such statistic beating sums for one player. Chelsea did it with Torres [what a waste], and Liverpool just this season have matched it with two, in Lovren and Lallana. I thought I knew, but I've actually no idea where will it end..? It just seems to keep growing.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...-45m-on-transfer-fees-since-1882-9700722.html

 

[Piebacca]

Statistically, when you go to a football match with 30,000 people, you are more likely to be close to a murderer/child abuser/drug dealer than at any other point in your life (unless you knowingly hang around with those kind of people).

Makes you think eh?

*that bloke to the left of me at SMS is definitely dodgy*

*he probably says the same about me*

He's right

 

[Tottonsaint]

I can't help but agree with the sentiment of developing and keeping our players. With the original argument of this thread making the case for the Man Utd team of the 50s so dreadfully decimated in Munich, I was moved to examine Saints teams/players since my SFC addiction that started in 1957 as to how many came through our youth systems and went on to play 150 first team games.. There may be the odd mistake but going by debut dates and split into decades it runs like this....

57-59.... 2... Paine and Sydenham
60-69.... 2... Chivers and Channon
70-79.... 5... Holmes, Williams, Moran, Waldron and Baker G.
80-89.... 6... Le Tissier, Benali, Wallace D. Maddison, Shearer and Wallace R.
90-99.... 2... Oakley and Bridge
00-09.... 1... Lallana

18 players in 57 years you could argue paid backed what was invested in them. Or one every 3 years, on average.

Might it be that we look back with tinted glasses? There were certainly eras.. when it seemed the core of the teams were home grown. It also seems we have just had a season when a vision of a core of home grown promised a full bloom. The sentiment behind this idea is perhaps what we are grieving, The squashing of a maturing promise. But only Channon played in a trophy winning team.

Holmes played in the cup final

 

[Beef]

We know about our academy, but what about other academies. The perception (and not just amongst Saints fans) is that our academy is one of the best, but do we really have greater success rate than others or is it just because we have produced some high profile players, such as Bale.

Well having produced higher profile players makes our academy good right? There will always be more players that don't make it then do, our academy is here to make the better players reach their potential. Which is pretty obvious we do.

 

[TheSecondStain]

We know about our academy, but what about other academies. The perception (and not just amongst Saints fans) is that our academy is one of the best, but do we really have greater success rate than others or is it just because we have produced some high profile players, such as Bale.

Yes, our academy is very successful in the amount of players who make the grade. Even a good percentage of the players we let go early make the grade, because we've given them a very good foundation. One of my occasional bits of trivial things to do is to count up how many ex-Saints academy players get mentioned in match round-ups on a Saturday. Invariably, there are anything upto half a dozen or more. Most of the ones we don't employ are in the FL. The ones who are PL grade, or similar other, the media will have made you aware of many times.