[Albion] Dan Ashworth and youth team policy

[GT49er]

Interesting article here about Dan Ashworth's successful youth policy at WBA (still being carried on by his successors).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47766043

I don't know the exact numbers, but it seems to me that we are quite keen on getting in overseas players to our development squad (with a view to them qualifying as 'home grown'?) - which seems rather different from the WBA model. Is Dan Ashworth likely to change, or is it our development squad that is more likely to change?

Rather like the idea of having genuine home grown youngsters coming through, but have to admit some of the overseas youngsters we've been getting in look quite exciting too.

 

[AZ Gull]

Quite a few of the overseas players who have been bought recently are too old to qualify as Home Grown Players (the likes of Viktor Gyokeres, Soufyan Ahannach, Ales Mateju, the departed Mathias Mormann and recent signings Tudor Baluta and Jan Mlakar). And you can spend a fortune on building a wonderful academy and then running it annually - as Tony Bloom has done - but probably the single most important factor in developing young players is having a first-team manager who is willing to play them, and that is one thing that Albion can't lay claim to.

 

[BRIGHT ON Q]

We seem to be very active in Ireland, was reading an article yesterday about us and Cork City. Seems to be working with Connolly and Mulumby looking real prospects.

 

[Icy Gull]

Quite a few of the overseas players who have been bought recently are too old to qualify as Home Grown Players (the likes of Viktor Gyokeres, Soufyan Ahannach, Ales Mateju, the departed Mathias Mormann and recent signings Tudor Baluta and Jan Mlakar). And you can spend a fortune on building a wonderful academy and then running it annually - as Tony Bloom has done - but probably the single most important factor in developing young players is having a first-team manager who is willing to play them, and that is one thing that Albion can't lay claim to.

Selling them on for a decent profit may prove enough to fund the facility with the very occasional exceptional one making the first team is the best we can hope for whilst we are scrabbling around at the bottom of the Premier League. Not many managers would risk academy youngsters over more experienced bought in players in our position imo.

Is there anyone in the academy so far who looks better than players we already have in the first team?

 

[Dirk Lehmann's Python]

Quite a few of the overseas players who have been bought recently are too old to qualify as Home Grown Players (the likes of Viktor Gyokeres, Soufyan Ahannach, Ales Mateju, the departed Mathias Mormann and recent signings Tudor Baluta and Jan Mlakar). And you can spend a fortune on building a wonderful academy and then running it annually - as Tony Bloom has done - but probably the single most important factor in developing young players is having a first-team manager who is willing to play them, and that is one thing that Albion can't lay claim to.

Needs some of them to impress in cup outings really. To date, none of them have.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Needs some of them to impress in cup outings really. To date, none of them have.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Sorry I don’t agree.

In the League Cup, Molumby played very well as did Tilley (who scored last season). Gyokores is obviously on the fringes of the first team coming in in games.

Personally, I don’t think it’s that they haven’t impressed, its more a case of a big difference in playing Barnet to playing Everton.

It was inevitable that as soon as we hit the PL opportunities we’re going to be restricted.

The step up from U23/L1/L2 and even cup football cannot be under-estimated, but of course we won’t know unless we try.

I really think all teams should be forced to include two U21s on the bench in every game.

With the exception of Sanders and Molumby, and possibly Connolly, Sanchez and Ben White, I’m not sure any of our U23s will become established players.

I like Alzate as well, but think he’ll take longer to develop and consequently get released.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dirk Lehmann's Python]

Sorry I don’t agree.

In the League Cup, Molumby played very well as did Tilley (who scored last season). Gyokores is obviously on the fringes of the first team coming in in games.

Personally, I don’t think it’s that they haven’t impressed, its more a case of a big difference in playing Barnet to playing Everton.

It was inevitable that as soon as we hit the PL opportunities we’re going to be restricted.

The step up from U23/L1/L2 and even cup football cannot be under-estimated, but of course we won’t know unless we try.

I really think all teams should be forced to include two U21s on the bench in every game.

With the exception of Sanders and Molumby, and possibly Connolly, Sanchez and Ben White, I’m not sure any of our U23s will become established players.

I like Alzate as well, but think he’ll take longer to develop and consequently get released.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Funnily enough I do agree with you about Molumby, he got a bad injury which set him back. You're right though, they don't seem good enough. It's an odd stick to beat Hughton with as there is no evidence that any of them are near Premier League level. Gyokeres didn't do anything in his starts against West Brom and Derby

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Is there anyone in the academy so far who looks better than players we already have in the first team?

Chicken and egg question. If they aren't given an opportunity we have no way of knowing.

 

[Machiavelli]

Sorry I don’t agree.

In the League Cup, Molumby played very well as did Tilley (who scored last season). Gyokores is obviously on the fringes of the first team coming in in games.

Personally, I don’t think it’s that they haven’t impressed, its more a case of a big difference in playing Barnet to playing Everton.

It was inevitable that as soon as we hit the PL opportunities we’re going to be restricted.

The step up from U23/L1/L2 and even cup football cannot be under-estimated, but of course we won’t know unless we try.

I really think all teams should be forced to include two U21s on the bench in every game.

With the exception of Sanders and Molumby, and possibly Connolly, Sanchez and Ben White, I’m not sure any of our U23s will become established players.

I like Alzate as well, but think he’ll take longer to develop and consequently get released.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It sounds as though you've seen our u23s a few times or regularly, and I defer to you on that. I've seen some of their games on Seagulls Player, etc, so have an inkling about the players (I liked Normann, for instance, although he was that much older than the rest of the cohort).

In terms of cup games, I agree with you about Molumby, but not entirely convinced by anyone else. Gyokeres did have a good run or two against West Brom but, beyond that, he didn't show anything that he could challenge our first squad players. Connolly, also, hasn't exactly overwhelmed in his minimal appearances, but he really does look the business, and it'll be fascinating to see if he gets much game time at Luton and how he fares (a year loan there next season might be his next best move).

In terms of the OP's question, I think Ashworth will bring in some exciting young English talent. That's the pool in which he's operated of late. Ashworth is part of a long-term project, which is Bloom's way of thinking. Key to the sustained success of that long-term project, however, is PL survival, which will be the trickiest thing to secure. It's all such a precarious balancing act.

 

[BigGully]

We seem to be very active in Ireland, was reading an article yesterday about us and Cork City. Seems to be working with Connolly and Mulumby looking real prospects.

That would be because John Moreland the Academy Manager has previous professional links with working with the Ireland under 17's or something similar and looking at his CV perhaps the reason he was recruited in the first place and he has a bias towards that, succeeding in that recruitment policy reinforces his worth to the club.

He might well argue 'well why wouldn't' I' quickly citing some progress of Mulumby and Connolly who are seen as 'prospects' just below the first team fringes almost as if his bias hasn't created that progress anyway.

This isn't a gripe towards Moreland or something unique to Brighton, bias exists in every club and perhaps Ashworth is due to implement his own bias which will effect the progress and re-calibrate the young players pecking order and their own progress without even kicking a ball.

 

[Weretheweststand]

We have got to remember with the academy at the moment that we are not going to start seeing the real benefits of it until slightly further down the line yet. We have a decent enough u23's at the moment but most are brought in more recently and any others didn't have the benefit of the training ground until u14's/15's at the earliest.

As time goes on the players will start coming through that have had longer with the better coaching/facilities that have come with the cat 1 status and hopefully that'll mean we produce better players.

Another thing to consider is if we do get relegated any time in the near future then a lot of these players will be much closer to the first team and we will be in a much better position that we were before we got promoted.

 

[studio150]

I really think all teams should be forced to include two U21s on the bench in every game.

And what does this achieve other than effectively reducing the number of substitutes down to 5,as any U21 players are very unlikely to be brought on. I would also fully expect 1 of the 2 to be a reserve goalkeeper given the infrequency that they are required to play.

 

[BNthree]

The academy isn't just the Under 23s! Think with the academy they play the long game. The training ground only opened 5 years ago and that coincided with the academy getting grade 1 status. So the Under 9s (which is the first age group of the academy proper) they recruited then are in the Under 14s now. Since Dan Ashworth started there has been quite a big change in that Paul Holder, who was Head of Academy Coaching, has now left (if he jumped or was pushed I don't know!). The post is being covered by his assistant but whoever gets recruited to the post will be instrumental in unlocking the potential in the kids there.

 

[BigGully]

We have got to remember with the academy at the moment that we are not going to start seeing the real benefits of it until slightly further down the line yet. We have a decent enough u23's at the moment but most are brought in more recently and any others didn't have the benefit of the training ground until u14's/15's at the earliest. As time goes on the players will start coming through that have had longer with the better coaching/facilities that have come with the cat 1 status and hopefully that'll mean we produce better players. Another thing to consider is if we do get relegated any time in the near future then a lot of these players will be much closer to the first team and we will be in a much better position that we were before we got promoted.

I never quite follow that logic, the Academy is a wonderful facility and of course might be an insight to high standards within it, but Brighton has been an Academy or Centre of Excellence going back to the late 70's early 80's, the buildings and the budget has grown but I am not sure what exactly that has brought to the young player development compared to say the Wilkins era, when Ian Chapman, John Byrne, Russell Bromage and Martin Hinshelwood were overlooking the young predominately local players, for certain there seems a wider net eating up a pretty dull (in my view) Scandinavia market, not sure that is necessarily the answer and although we can now trump Millwall, Southend, Portsmouth, Brentford etc. for any young prospect but even then we are unlikely to trump Chelsea, Tottenham, Arsenal for that same player, so progress remains as limited as it always has been irrespective of the facility.

The only way any Academy can become a developer of first team players is opportunity driven by policy underpinned by top class young player coaching.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

It sounds as though you've seen our u23s a few times or regularly, and I defer to you on that. I've seen some of their games on Seagulls Player, etc, so have an inkling about the players (I liked Normann, for instance, although he was that much older than the rest of the cohort).

In terms of cup games, I agree with you about Molumby, but not entirely convinced by anyone else. Gyokeres did have a good run or two against West Brom but, beyond that, he didn't show anything that he could challenge our first squad players. Connolly, also, hasn't exactly overwhelmed in his minimal appearances, but he really does look the business, and it'll be fascinating to see if he gets much game time at Luton and how he fares (a year loan there next season might be his next best move).

In terms of the OP's question, I think Ashworth will bring in some exciting young English talent. That's the pool in which he's operated of late. Ashworth is part of a long-term project, which is Bloom's way of thinking. Key to the sustained success of that long-term project, however, is PL survival, which will be the trickiest thing to secure. It's all such a precarious balancing act.

Normann was good on the ball, and could pick a pass, but I think he is a good example of perhaps being penalised by the first team playing in the PL. I just wonder whether he does/did enough off the ball.

As soon as the U23s reach ‘decision time’, in terms of contract/age and potential, they need to be exceptional to remain.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

And what does this achieve other than effectively reducing the number of substitutes down to 5,as any U21 players are very unlikely to be brought on. I would also fully expect 1 of the 2 to be a reserve goalkeeper given the infrequency that they are required to play.

Quite a lot.

Younger players gain experience of preparation and involvement at a senior level, and when the moment is right gain 15-30 minutes.

It is about enabling younger players to be ready and not intimidated.

Given not so long ago we only had one sub, I can’t see how a team couldn’t survive on five with two youngsters.

Of course teams could use a GK as one, but that would still be a younger player benefiting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Machiavelli]

Normann was good on the ball, and could pick a pass, but I think he is a good example of perhaps being penalised by the first team playing in the PL. I just wonder whether he does/did enough off the ball.

As soon as the U23s reach ‘decision time’, in terms of contract/age and potential, they need to be exceptional to remain.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree with all that and, within that, good assessment of Normann -- I have a similar blindspot to what he didn't do. Compare with Stephens who, largely, does an awful lot that goes unnoticed off the ball.

 

[BNthree]

Quite a lot.

Younger players gain experience of preparation and involvement at a senior level, and when the moment is right gain 15-30 minutes.

It is about enabling younger players to be ready and not intimidated.

Exactly this. Under 23's play in front of 100s of spectators and U18s play in front of 10s. It is about getting them used to there being 10s of 1000s of spectators and the whole experience of first team matchdays.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Agree with all that and, within that, good assessment of Normann -- I have a similar blindspot to what he didn't do. Compare with Stephens who, largely, does an awful lot that goes unnoticed off the ball.

Stephens is a great player, I do think Sanders seems a similar player, and perhaps a future replacement. Who knows?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Weretheweststand]

Quite a lot.

Younger players gain experience of preparation and involvement at a senior level, and when the moment is right gain 15-30 minutes.

It is about enabling younger players to be ready and not intimidated.

Given not so long ago we only had one sub, I can’t see how a team couldn’t survive on five with two youngsters.

Of course teams could use a GK as one, but that would still be a younger player benefiting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think your idea is good but one negative could be that, for example, in a hypothetical situation in which Bissouma was 21 rather than 22, if Chris was 50:50 about whether to start him or Gross and leave one on the bench, he'd probably start Gross because if Bissouma was on the bench he'd fulfill the quota. I know it's a bit of an edge case but it would be a shame to prevent the players that are ready to start from playing. I guess you could include starting players as part of the quota?