Youth Development

Being a fan of Southampton and England and someone with an interest in football in general, one thing that fascinates me is the process of youth development.

Something that intrigued me was this blog by Paul Fletcher with regards to the planned reforms to youth development.
LINK: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulfletcher/2011/02/football_league_fears_over_pla.html#283800

One matter it raised was abolishing the 90 minute rule, stating that players shouldn't travel more than 90 minutes to get to their academy of choce. This isn't hugely significant for me, young players have been relocated by clubs for years.

The more significant matter for me is the planned re-classification of academies as category 1,2, 3 and 4 with category 1 being the most desirable. The issue is that a category 1 academy will cost £2.5m per annum to run, thus pricing out most of the football league and some teams lower down the premier league.

As a Southampton fan, its hard to know what to think about this. With wealthy owners willing to invest in youth and a good reputation for bringing youth into the first team, we could potentially monopolise a large sector of talent. Good for us obviously, but is it good for football development to be monopolised by a few teams that can afford it, especially if those teams would rather buy ready made foreign players for crazy money than bring through youth?

---
These are some banal rantings I put on the England section of the original 606. Naturally it got zero replies as is the way wiith 606 - You actually put a bit of effort into venting your spleen or presenting an article and get sat on by the pointless, the incoherant and the wind-ups. Well done to the makers of not606.

Firstly, the mega-money in the Premier League is limiting the opportunities for the young players it produces due to foreign players coming in. Because of the financial implications of getting relegated or not qualifying for Europe, teams often don't give their youth adequate opportunities and even neglect to play decent football - that is entertaining football that people want to watch. I actually don't know the answer to this one: Do we watch and wait for market forces to dictate our policy or do the FA step up their ‘homegrown’ legislation and introduce financial fair play (spending relative to turnover) legislation, like they have in Germany? Bearing in mind that football, at the top anyway, is one of the few industries that hasn’t tightened its belt in the recession, mainly due to the super-rich still being super-rich and owning top football clubs.

Secondly is youth development, or the distribution of it to be precise. Due to financial reasons outlined in the paragraph above, most of the top youth facilities are at the top Premier League sides while the best opportunities are to be found lower down. A tiny minority of naturally gifted young players make it into the elite straight away, but most of them don’t and a lot of talent goes to waste. Its inevitable that there will be players that aren’t good enough in any youth system, but having young players that are good enough who are kept out by massively overpaid foreigners is shameful.

Thirdly is footballing philosophy. In the Premier league, there are teams playing a standard 442, a European 433, a defensive 451, teams trying to pass the ball and teams playing very direct. With so many strategies in use, its hardly surprising that the England team shows little cohesion. Not that there isn’t a place for this variety, but it does no favors when it comes to the England team. Playing like Barcelona only works for the very elite sides, but a style that’s direct, fast and physical whilst still keeping a passing ethic is a good compromise.

Lastly for now, the belief that a winger is merely a quick player who beats his man and puts the ball into the box. Granted that is one of the duties of a winger. The best ones though are much cleverer than leaving it at that. They can cut inside, make clever runs, score goals and use their intelligence to feed through team mates in better positions. With 3 in the middle, wingers have the freedom to do that, but a lot of English wingers chose not to or weren’t trained to be free. Teams with 2 good wingers and a good striker are very difficult to deal with – Man U were untouchable when they had Ronaldo, Rooney and Nani all in form.

 

Great Piece.

The money in the game is spoiling it totally, and a person has the right to earn whatever they can get but it is so far out of control.
I think the German top flight league will become very strong over the next few years mainly because financially they have things done in the correct way and that the youth is so so key to all teams, but this has taken time to happen and they have been patient. I also believe that because the wages are out of control then then players is now fully in charge when it should always be the club. How i would love to see a player sign a 4 year contract and see that contract out, the greed is there, and not having a Southampton pop, but recently you even had that Chamerberlains dad stating what club would be best for his son, which shows no respect for the club, yet the player is so so young that he should develop fully at your club and only move on when the club states he should.

 

Players themselves aren't usually motivated purely by greed and a desire to make a quick buck, but unfortunately the agents and the powers that be usually are. The head of a young and impressionable footballer is easy to turn. The prospect of being the next big thing, making lots of money, earning a fancy car, playing in the spotlight on the world's biggest stage, the vision is not hard to sell even if the reality is often different.

 

The other issue to consider is, and we Saints have suffered from this for a number of years, is that as soon as you do find and develop a top youngster, the premier division clubs swoop like voltures and snatch them away to sit in their reserves for years
This practice isn't in the young players interest (as they would be better getting game time in a lower league) nor the developing team & their fans as they never see the benefit of seeing these "super kids" playing for them
The youngsters (& their parents) just see the mega bucks on offer and jump at the chance without thinking about what is best for them as footballers

 

Here here Dark Lord.

We have probably the best under 18 team in the country, so it is self evident that young players who then move on to bigger clubs very early are probably not doing it for football reasons, as they would still be able to move on later if they are real talents and could continue with the club that developed them.
Agents are the curse of football, and their slimy tentacles reach right down into the youth teams these days - I can't see a change until their activities are restricted and regulated, which isn't going to happen as UEFA have given up trying.

If our current crop of youngsters stayed with Saints for the next 2 or 3 years, they could all stand a chance of playing at the highest level without having to change clubs, I wonder how many will?

 

Big clubs poaching/buying decent nippers from clubs lower than them in the league has been going on since professional football started.

We don't complain when we "compensate" the likes of Swindon for a stupidly small amount for Theo Walcott.

But this proposal to rank the academies seems daft, although there must be more detail behind it.

 

The 90 min rule was always a load of pony anyway and I know that for a fact. My nipper was interesting Pompey and he played a few games for them and trained with them. We live just about 90 mins away,but it was touch and go, but there was another nipper coming from Portland which was a lot further. The head honcho told his Dad in front of me that it didn't matter and nobody ever checked.

 

Ever since football agents were brought into the game there has been differing sorts of trouble. One of the rules that need strengthening is probably the rule of contact. "No club is allowed to make an approach for a contracted player with out express permission of the parent club" So how do they do it "SEND A MATE ROUND" or leak it to the press!!! Personally I think they should make a rule that if things go public before the signing then their fee should be forfeited.......you would not hear much about transfers then I'll bet!! In regards to the youngsters we bring on there seems to be different view points as to whether to have your own academy or to buy them at a later date. As has been said an academy is quite an outlay and can be costly to run. So somehow you have to recoup those costs somewhere. So yes you are going to have to let go at some stage players of the like of Chamberlain to be able to maintain those academies. It is interesting to note that on average someone without financial clout is not going to afford to run an academy. So it is unlikely that teams in the 3rd tier as we are now are going to be able to afford one, not many in my book in the Championship either. One of the reasons for this IMO is because there does not seem to be an even playing field when it comes to the distribution of money feeding down through the leagues to grassroots football. The Premier league has got very Greedy and complains that they have to play players more and more money. If they didn't have the money they wouldn't be able to pay them would they. That might just bring a balance back into football at the highest level to how it used to be where teams outside of the top 4 or 5 could actually win the league and Compete on a level playing field. JMO for what its worth........

 

I think most people can accept a bright, young player leaving for the betterment of his footballing career, but its quite hard to swallow when a young player leaves to sit in someone's reserves for the next 2-3 seasons only to not have improved that much, because the money is good.

It is true that the Football League is very physical and it can be difficult for technically gifted players to develop in, but short of sending them to the continent, its the best thing going for young, English talent. For a player like Alex Chamberlain, Southampton is a very good club for him. He has the pressure of earning promotion, but also the freedom to make mistakes and learn from them in a league with relatively little media coverage. With the pace of Chamberlain, its unlikely that his fullback will deck him twice anyway!

 

I'm a bit concerned with the mentality of some of these really top clubs. A bright, young player like Daniel Sturridge does naff all for Chelsea, but he can't stop scoring in a Bolton shirt in the same league against the same opposition. Coyle is not a better manager than Acelotti and Chelsea are a much more gifted side than Bolton. If a team's situation and a player's status within that team has such a huge bearing on the confidence with which that player plays with, surely its worth considering whether super academies at the top clubs are really a good idea?

 

If I am correct, Arsenal had only one English player on the pitch yesterday, the Football League I believe is trying to redress this by changing how many home grown players a Premier team must have, can anyone enlighten me on that? If that is the case there is going to be a scramble by the big clubs to trawl up any potential home grown players from the lower Leagues, their object being to get the best for themselves, and to deny other Clubs the opportunity to buy players that could be a threat to them? If our Academy can produce some good players we won't be able to keep all of them so any fees that can be got for them will be good for our finances.

 

There is already legislation in place to increase the number of 'homegrown' players. 8 in each team. I can remember though that because the legislation applied to players who had been in England for 3 years before turning 21, Fabregas and a number of other Arsenal players counted as homegrown despite not being English. Also, clubs are under no obligation to play their homegrown players, just to have them in their 25 man squad. Players under 21 can come and go from the senior squads to their club's choosing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/8960853.stm

 

Youth Development is the future and i think even thie lieks of us are looking encourage out youth, which we once had.
I ageree the Premier league takes all of the money and is has to stop.

i look at players like Shaun Wright-Phillips and to me there is no ambition as he is on 100k to play 30 minutes every few minutes, and these are not role models.

Even though you keeping Chamberlain from a Bournemouth fan i would prefere he wnet in temrs on enhancing our chances but from a fan he has to stay and develop. If Say saints did not get promoted this year i think Lallana would move on but he has given the club time and had developed and would be the best thing for him. Chamberlain i think should stay but no way as his head would be turned.

It does make a joke of contracts

 

I think Lallana will be leaving if we don't go up this season and to be honest I won't blame him. He'll be 23 by the summer and needs to be playing Championship (at least) football to progress his career. I think he made the correct position to stay with us until now, playing week in week out and being given a real responsibility in the team.

A lot has been said regarding the influence of foreign players in English football and I believe what it has done is highlight the young talent in the Football League. Over the last few seasons look at some of the players coming through: Alex Chamberlain, Dale Jennings, Jonjo Shelvey and Connor Wickham.

 

There are plenty of skillful players that have made it in the football league despite its physical nature, Lallana being a prime example. The best defenders close down quickly and get the ball, less good defenders might dive in cynically and get booked, as Alex Chamberlain has found out on many occasions! It certainly doesn't discourage him. Good teams don't stand off and let teams play, those that do usually get stuffed by skillful and creative sides.

Arsenal/Barcelona football looks nice going forward, but if you don't do the basics like marking men or having your keeper cover the near post, you get beaten.

There are consequences for being unnecessarily tough, that's why defenders don't kick seven shades of **** out of the opposition. Purists might not like it, but being physical and fair is a big part of the game and part of being a complete player is being able to overcome that. As for Arsenal, they make their fair share of rash tackles and unsportsmanlike behavior.

I have no gripes with foreign players. They add an extra dimension to the game if a certain set of skills is lacking for a comfortably affordable price. Its not in their interest to refuse if an offer gets delivered in a security van. My gripe is with the clubs bowing to media pressure and fan pressure when they demand bigger, better, more investment. That's one thing that I like about Wenger though, he stays strong and sticks to his guns even when fans/media tell him to buy experienced players.

 

They certainly won't deck him twice after Danny Butterfield has had a word in their ear after the first one.

 

The whole thing has been very badly worked out for me. The idea of a few clubs holding sway over the poorer clubs is just another kick in the teeth for those poorer clubs. Aren't the cards stacked against them enough already?

What about the boys themselves who often support the club where they start out? I know that they can all move once they have learned their trade but the parent club should be able to claim a larger slice of the cake if they do have to sell. A good school will always be sought after by parents for their offspring. Luckily Saints have one of the best as can be seen by the fact that we are leading the U18 table with games in hand. We have arrived at this position because of the hard work done by the Academy over the recent years. Other clubs chose a different route so why should they benefit from some stupid rule change. Best to leave things alone rather than destroy work that many clubs have done.

 

A youth develpment model needs to go through from the kiddies right through to the first team. If it doesn't, it just produces could have beens and players for other teams. If Sheikh Loadsamoney at Man City continues to spend as much as he has on first team stars, what's the point of even having an academy? They'd be better off paying for other team's academies in return for first refusal on the players it produces!

 

Perhaps we should be looking at a broader picture. Why have an acadamy at all when you can pick up decent players quite cheap and bring them on? Isn't that what most lower league teams do? The Austins the Beckfords and the like?
On the other hand a club the size of Southampton having an acadamy to bring on its own youngsters from the age of nine onwards. That isn't a cheap way of doing things. What that does is create continuance of young players and giving them a better chance to progress in the game. However there is no guarentee of success for the club nor the players. So you need a good scouting system to keep an eye out for talent, again costing more money. Also remember acadamy's do not just cater for English players although ours seems to keep to the near continent with a few exceptions. So there is a broader picture to look at and I have only gleaned the surface.

 

You're right BT. A fully functioning academy is expensive to run, which is why teams with them should be doing more to justify having them. The fees we have received for players plus the values of Lallana and Chamberlain probably cover the cost of our academy, but I doubt the Chelsea or Man City academies pay for themselves.

I thought all of the players in the Saints academy were English or Welsh? I could be wrong though.