[Football] At the weekend the Chelsea academy had 75% match involvement

[Stat Brother]

from the top 2 divisions:-

[tweet]1426960321906978819[/tweet]

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Would Salah and De Bruyne not count?

I actually think the loan system should be abolished.

It would be terrible for us. But the hoarding of players by big clubs can't be good for the game.

If there was no possibility of loans, players would have to think a bit more about where they can get the game time to start their careers. Talent would become less concentrated in the big few clubs, meaning wealth would ultimately become less concentrated in the big clubs and other divisions and leagues would become more competitive. Which in turn would mean fewer chairmen putting their club's existence at risk for the sake of gambling on promotion or survival.

Clearly it would have to be introduced incrementally.

 

[studio150]

Would Salah and De Bruyne not count?

I actually think the loan system should be abolished.

It would be terrible for us. But the hoarding of players by big clubs can't be good for the game.

If there was no possibility of loans, players would have to think a bit more about where they can get the game time to start their careers. Talent would become less concentrated in the big few clubs, meaning wealth would ultimately become less concentrated in the big clubs and other divisions and leagues would become more competitive. Which in turn would mean fewer chairmen putting their club's existence at risk for the sake of gambling on promotion or survival.

Clearly it would have to be introduced incrementally.

Or would it mean:

Far lower wages for those that don't make the elite teams smaller academy and therefore they may be lost to the game

A number of lower League teams folding or going part time as they are unable to bring in loan players were the parent club currently continues to pay a large part of the wages.

Clubs decide that running an academy is not financially viable as they can not develop players to a sufficient level to play for the first team or recoup investment from sales.

Elite teams look to effectively buy feeder teams and 'sell' youngsters to the feeder team and buy back when ready for their first team thereby B teams are all but in name in the league system.

Rather than actually increasing standards it may well mean a lower standard overall

 

[hans kraay fan club]

from the top 2 divisions:-

[tweet]1426960321906978819[/tweet]

To suggest that ALL of those players are former Chesea 'academy' players, is stretching things a little. Patrick Bamford for example, was bought at 18 or 19, for a couple of million (a figure that would have been our record signing at the time), then loaned out for 5 years, then released. He's as much a Chelsea 'academy product' as Tariq Lamptey could be considered an Albion academy product.

Bertrand Troare is another that joined at about 18 years old.

 

[B-right-on]

Or would it mean:

Far lower wages for those that don't make the elite teams smaller academy and therefore they may be lost to the game

A number of lower League teams folding or going part time as they are unable to bring in loan players were the parent club currently continues to pay a large part of the wages.

Clubs decide that running an academy is not financially viable as they can not develop players to a sufficient level to play for the first team or recoup investment from sales.

Elite teams look to effectively buy feeder teams and 'sell' youngsters to the feeder team and buy back when ready for their first team thereby B teams are all but in name in the league system.

Rather than actually increasing standards it may well mean a lower standard overall

Pretty much what I was going to say. Sure Chelsea 'hoard' youngsters, but look how many end up signing for other clubs. Would we have Lamptey if not for Chelsea academy system?

 

[Swansman]

Pretty much what I was going to say. Sure Chelsea 'hoard' youngsters, but look how many end up signing for other clubs. Would we have Lamptey if not for Chelsea academy system?

A lot of these guys would have become something elsewhere as well (though some wouldnt).

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Or would it mean:

Far lower wages for those that don't make the elite teams smaller academy and therefore they may be lost to the game

A number of lower League teams folding or going part time as they are unable to bring in loan players were the parent club currently continues to pay a large part of the wages.

Clubs decide that running an academy is not financially viable as they can not develop players to a sufficient level to play for the first team or recoup investment from sales.

Elite teams look to effectively buy feeder teams and 'sell' youngsters to the feeder team and buy back when ready for their first team thereby B teams are all but in name in the league system.

Rather than actually increasing standards it may well mean a lower standard overall

They would just get a club at their level, there's a lot between elite teams and "lost to the game". We lose sight of this.

If players perform well, a bigger club could buy them. But crucially the wealth then goes to that "smaller" club and generally is distributed around more clubs in more countries and more divisions rather adjust concentrated in the hands of the very few super clubs. Much more healthy.

And yes the standard of the PL would drop, because the effect of the extreme concentration of talent we're seeing would be less. But the standards of other leagues (for example the ones we've spent 90%+ of our existence in) would increase.

 

[BNthree]

Chelsea academy is basically a football conveyor belt churning out players to either keep or sell. The numbers of players they get through are big and from where it is located their catchment area (for the younger players) is huge. Pretty sure they have about twice as many players in each age group as the Albion has and definitely loads more coaches. Plus their Foundation set up too (much like our Albion in the Community) which has centres in Crawley and Lancing even. It's a huge business for them so can easily see how so many players at a high level have been involved with their system at some stage.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

They would just get a club at their level, there's a lot between elite teams and "lost to the game". We lose sight of this.

If players perform well, a bigger club could buy them. But crucially the wealth then goes to that "smaller" club and generally is distributed around more clubs in more countries and more divisions rather adjust concentrated in the hands of the very few super clubs. Much more healthy.

And yes the standard of the PL would drop, because the effect of the extreme concentration of talent we're seeing would be less. But the standards of other leagues (for example the ones we've spent 90%+ of our existence in) would increase.

From the players perspective, elite academies help them. Would Lamptey be as good as he is if he hadn't been in Chelsea's academy during his teenage years? We'd have a foreign import, ie Montoya or Veltman in that spot, rather than a young British talent.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

From the players perspective, elite academies help them. Would Lamptey be as good as he is if he hadn't been in Chelsea's academy during his teenage years? We'd have a foreign import, ie Montoya or Veltman in that spot, rather than a young British talent.

Lamptey was never loaned out of course. So it would have been the same. He started in Chelsea Academy and eventually asked for a transfer.

I'm not saying that my view that big clubs shouldn't develop young players or have Academies. I just think that the loan system is the main mechanism whereby a few clubs get to continually hoard talent and wealth. The industrial scale Chelsea one in my view leads to lots of unhealthy outcomes. Lots of smaller academies would be much better than few gigantic ones.

We're in on it as well, so I know it's not a popular view with Brighton fans

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Lamptey was never loaned out of course. So it would have been the same. He started in Chelsea Academy and eventually asked for a transfer.

I'm not saying that my view that big clubs shouldn't develop young players or have Academies. I just think that the loan system is the main mechanism whereby a few clubs get to continually hoard talent and wealth. The industrial scale Chelsea one in my view leads to lots of unhealthy outcomes. Lots of smaller academies would be much better than few gigantic ones.

We're in on it as well, so I know it's not a popular view with Brighton fans

I suppose that Chelsea and Brighton invest a fortune in our academies because the current loan system increases the odds of producing stars. Remove it, we don't invest as much and the quality of training isn't as good - maybe Lamptey wouldn't have been as good...

What would we have done with Ben White or Robert Sanchez ? Maybe we would have released them, and they'd be making their way through the leagues; maybe we'd have kept them but without experience from loans they'd still be in the reserves; most likely we'd never have signed them in the first place and they'd be making their way through the leagues.

But I would be certain that neither would have been in their national squads for the euros this year.

The loan system helps clubs willing to invest in player development - but that should be encouraged, not discouraged. Far better that all clubs invest in player development because that helps the players, compared to teams with no youth system at all who just buy-in ready-mads talent from elsewhere. THAT has been the main mechanism by which a few clubs get to continually hoard talent and wealth - they buy the best players. A top youth system helps clubs outside the elite get better - the fact that Brighton are doing it shows exactly how this is a challenge to the established elite. Nearly every club in the top divisions could afford to do what we have done with our academy.

Man

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

I suppose that Chelsea and Brighton invest a fortune in our academies because the current loan system increases the odds of producing stars. Remove it, we don't invest as much and the quality of training isn't as good - maybe Lamptey wouldn't have been as good...

What would we have done with Ben White or Robert Sanchez ? Maybe we would have released them, and they'd be making their way through the leagues; maybe we'd have kept them but without experience from loans they'd still be in the reserves; most likely we'd never have signed them in the first place and they'd be making their way through the leagues.

But I would be certain that neither would have been in their national squads for the euros this year.

The loan system helps clubs willing to invest in player development - but that should be encouraged, not discouraged. Far better that all clubs invest in player development because that helps the players, compared to teams with no youth system at all who just buy-in ready-mads talent from elsewhere. THAT has been the main mechanism by which a few clubs get to continually hoard talent and wealth - they buy the best players. A top youth system helps clubs outside the elite get better - the fact that Brighton are doing it shows exactly how this is a challenge to the established elite. Nearly every club in the top divisions could afford to do what we have done with our academy.

Man

You don't think it's possible Ben White or Sanchez for example would have been snapped up like a lower league team aged 18ish, performed really well, been snapped up by a Championship team, done really well, got snapped up by a top team.

It's absolutely possible. Players like Vardy and Toney and countless others have taken this pathway.

And surely lack of loans would incentivise smaller clubs to have their own youth system. The reason Brentford cancelled theirs is that Chelsea are hoovering up anyone worth developing.

And sorry mate, "every club in the top two divisions could afford to do what we have done?" Build and finance a cat 1 academy? Not a chance

 

[Billy the Fish]

Would Salah and De Bruyne not count?

I actually think the loan system should be abolished.

It would be terrible for us. But the hoarding of players by big clubs can't be good for the game.

If there was no possibility of loans, players would have to think a bit more about where they can get the game time to start their careers. Talent would become less concentrated in the big few clubs, meaning wealth would ultimately become less concentrated in the big clubs and other divisions and leagues would become more competitive. Which in turn would mean fewer chairmen putting their club's existence at risk for the sake of gambling on promotion or survival.

Clearly it would have to be introduced incrementally.

Think you're being a bit naive. Players would still back themselves even if it's misguided. You'd just end up with everyone playing academy football.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

You don't think it's possible Ben White or Sanchez for example would have been snapped up like a lower league team aged 18ish, performed really well, been snapped up by a Championship team, done really well, got snapped up by a top team.

It's absolutely possible. Players like Vardy and Toney and countless others have taken this pathway.

And surely lack of loans would incentivise smaller clubs to have their own youth system. The reason Brentford cancelled theirs is that Chelsea are hoovering up anyone worth developing.

And sorry mate, "every club in the top two divisions could afford to do what we have done?" Build and finance a cat 1 academy? Not a chance

It depends if you think whether a Cat 1 academy improves players skills above what they would do elsewhere. If you think its irrelevant, then your argument works. I disagree, I think for the likes of Lamptey, White, Sanchez, Connolly, Molumby, Alzate, they wouldn't have got to where they are now at this stage of their careers without it, and all with so much potential ahead of them.

Toney is 25, Vardy didn't get to the premier league till 26 or 27. White, Sanchez, Connolly, Molumby and Alzate are all in national squads at a much younger age.

I dont know *how* much it costs to have a top academy, but most of the teams in the top two divisions have recently received Premier league millions and spent upwards of 10 million on individual players, or been taken over by rich businessmen. If we could do it when in the Championship having never been in the Premier league, most of them could too.

Brentford and Huddersfield may have given up, but that's not an argument that it doesn't work, however many players Chelsea have they cannot possibly exhaust the talent pool, and again, Brighton are the example. We signed White, Connolly and Sanchez to our academy when we were in the Championship.

I will always argue for investing in player development here in the UK, right down to lower youth levels, men and women, in the club and in the community, rather than just making money off shirt sales and media rights so you can buy a first XI and pocket the change.

I dont agree in loaning players within the same division as disrupts competitive balance, but otherwise, if it is necessary to support the investment in academies then I support it.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Think you're being a bit naive. Players would still back themselves even if it's misguided. You'd just end up with everyone playing academy football.

At first, yes

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

It depends if you think whether a Cat 1 academy improves players skills above what they would do elsewhere. If you think its irrelevant, then your argument works. I disagree, I think for the likes of Lamptey, White, Sanchez, Connolly, Molumby, Alzate, they wouldn't have got to where they are now at this stage of their careers without it, and all with so much potential ahead of them.

Toney is 25, Vardy didn't get to the premier league till 26 or 27. White, Sanchez, Connolly, Molumby and Alzate are all in national squads at a much younger age.

I dont know *how* much it costs to have a top academy, but most of the teams in the top two divisions have recently received Premier league millions and spent upwards of 10 million on individual players, or been taken over by rich businessmen. If we could do it when in the Championship having never been in the Premier league, most of them could too.

Brentford and Huddersfield may have given up, but that's not an argument that it doesn't work, however many players Chelsea have they cannot possibly exhaust the talent pool, and again, Brighton are the example. We signed White, Connolly and Sanchez to our academy when we were in the Championship.

I will always argue for investing in player development here in the UK, right down to lower youth levels, men and women, in the club and in the community, rather than just making money off shirt sales and media rights so you can buy a first XI and pocket the change.

I dont agree in loaning players within the same division as disrupts competitive balance, but otherwise, if it is necessary to support the investment in academies then I support it.

On this I believe some players will develop better because of a higher quality academy and some players will develop better because they are playing first team football in their own country or in the town they grew up in, which will be of a higher standard because they're not haemorrhaging talent to super academies and wealth to super clubs. No idea of the proportions

And I doubt any of White, Alzate, etc you named above will go on to have the career that Vardy has. Love to see it. but doubt it.

 

[AZ Gull]

It depends if you think whether a Cat 1 academy improves players skills above what they would do elsewhere. If you think its irrelevant, then your argument works. I disagree, I think for the likes of Lamptey, White, Sanchez, Connolly, Molumby, Alzate, they wouldn't have got to where they are now at this stage of their careers without it, and all with so much potential ahead of them.

Toney is 25, Vardy didn't get to the premier league till 26 or 27. White, Sanchez, Connolly, Molumby and Alzate are all in national squads at a much younger age.

I dont know *how* much it costs to have a top academy, but most of the teams in the top two divisions have recently received Premier league millions and spent upwards of 10 million on individual players, or been taken over by rich businessmen. If we could do it when in the Championship having never been in the Premier league, most of them could too.

Brentford and Huddersfield may have given up, but that's not an argument that it doesn't work, however many players Chelsea have they cannot possibly exhaust the talent pool, and again, Brighton are the example. We signed White, Connolly and Sanchez to our academy when we were in the Championship.

I will always argue for investing in player development here in the UK, right down to lower youth levels, men and women, in the club and in the community, rather than just making money off shirt sales and media rights so you can buy a first XI and pocket the change.

I dont agree in loaning players within the same division as disrupts competitive balance, but otherwise, if it is necessary to support the investment in academies then I support it.

Steven Alzate DIDN'T come through a Category One academy - he came through at Leyton Orient. He served his two-year scholarship with the O's, and only joined Albion in the summer that his scholarship ended (the equivalent would be Antef Tsoungui moving on this summer to a "big" club).

 

[Easy 10]

You don't think it's possible Ben White or Sanchez for example would have been snapped up like a lower league team aged 18ish, performed really well, been snapped up by a Championship team, done really well, got snapped up by a top team.

It's absolutely possible. Players like Vardy and Toney and countless others have taken this pathway.

And surely lack of loans would incentivise smaller clubs to have their own youth system. The reason Brentford cancelled theirs is that Chelsea are hoovering up anyone worth developing.

And sorry mate, "every club in the top two divisions could afford to do what we have done?" Build and finance a cat 1 academy? Not a chance

The primary reason Brentford binned their academy is for the simple reason it had not produced anyone of note who had been good enough to find their way into the first team, so it was not felt the "sterile" environment of academy football was a worthwhile or productive enough investment for them. Instead, through their sporting director Rasmus Ankersen, they have broadened their scouting network throughout UK and Europe, to discover and bring in the promising talent who are going under the radar - and it clearly works.

One mildly interesting revelation I read over the weekend is that they also peruse the fans messageboards of other clubs in order to gage opinion and get a feel on their potential targets. Ankersen said (and I'm paraphrasing) "our scouts may just see them for 5-6 games, but if we then also look and see what fans are saying about them, they have seen them over the course of a whole season or more, it can be valuable information and costs nothing".

Obviously every messageboard has its fair share of GOONS to sift through - but there will also be the considerable knowledge of an [MENTION=1276]AZ Gull[/MENTION] for example, who can pass on some articulated titbits, as well as the opinions of other (literate, articulate) fans who can write their thoughts and opinion about a player without sounding like a wood-brained pillock straight off AFTV.

Interesting methods, I thought.

 

[Machiavelli]

It depends if you think whether a Cat 1 academy improves players skills above what they would do elsewhere. If you think its irrelevant, then your argument works. I disagree, I think for the likes of Lamptey, White, Sanchez, Connolly, Molumby, Alzate, they wouldn't have got to where they are now at this stage of their careers without it, and all with so much potential ahead of them.

Toney is 25, Vardy didn't get to the premier league till 26 or 27. White, Sanchez, Connolly, Molumby and Alzate are all in national squads at a much younger age.

I dont know *how* much it costs to have a top academy, but most of the teams in the top two divisions have recently received Premier league millions and spent upwards of 10 million on individual players, or been taken over by rich businessmen. If we could do it when in the Championship having never been in the Premier league, most of them could too.

Brentford and Huddersfield may have given up, but that's not an argument that it doesn't work, however many players Chelsea have they cannot possibly exhaust the talent pool, and again, Brighton are the example. We signed White, Connolly and Sanchez to our academy when we were in the Championship.

I will always argue for investing in player development here in the UK, right down to lower youth levels, men and women, in the club and in the community, rather than just making money off shirt sales and media rights so you can buy a first XI and pocket the change.

I dont agree in loaning players within the same division as disrupts competitive balance, but otherwise, if it is necessary to support the investment in academies then I support it.

Good contributions to this thread.
On it, the issues of the academy and the loan system have got a little mixed up, but your comment about not loaning within the same division would be a welcome change.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Oh the shame ….grandson now part of their academy…….still he’s only 7 so plenty of time yet (make sure he wears his Brighton shirt) and i’ll wear my Albion baseball cap when i take him