[Albion] Who was the last player to break through from the youth team/development squad?

[TSB]

Just reading through that article and this caught my eye:

"The new status also gives us a better scope for recruitment opportunities as well as in developing the players we already have. We now feel with a Category one academy, a commitment from Sami and his staff to give the young players a pathway, along with the qualified development staff who provide bespoke training plans for our young players, there is a recipe success here at Albion.”


Which is exactly what isn't happening and hence the moans on this thread!

Still it is quite early days for the academy as a Cat 1 and with the Lancing training grounds. Kids can officially sign for a Cat1 academy at U9 level so those first recruited in 2014 won't even be in the U16 team yet. It is all about playing the long game.

Hang on: you want Semi back as manager to provide a pathway to the first team?

 

[Dirk Lehmann's Python]

Yeah get Forster Caskey back too

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[BensGrandad]

The most successful for us has been Dunk and March who makes it in the future remains to be seen but I dont hold out too much hope for Gyokeres. I believe the most likely are Molumby Sanders and Sanchez and possibly Connolly at a lower level.

 

[piersa]

I love Max Sanders maybe he could be the next

He should be. Defo good enough as an attacking midfielder, but too attacking for CH, hence why they've tried to turn him into a CDM.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Chelsea are perhaps not the best comparison as they and one or two others are paying vast sums of money to acquire and keep the best young players from around the country. Some of their U18s are on £30k/wk plus for their first professional contract at seventeen.

It would be more useful to see how we compared to other clubs in and around our position. Watford don't seem to use Academy players. Huddersfield abandoned their academy two years ago. I can't think of a Bournemouth youngster in the first team apart from that keeper Eddie Howe played in their meaningless last home game and a defender whose name escapes me but who their fans mostly think is crap. Burnley have played Dwight McNeil this season, very much the exception to the rule. Cardiff? No recent academy graduates there. Palace used to bang on about their academy but after Zaha, nobody even had a sniff of a first team place until Wan-Bissaka came along, and he (bizarrely now) was only played out of desperation, and wasn't even one of the higher rated players in their system. Fair play to him for making the most of his chance. Saints haven't had so many hits in recent seasons following a glut of talented youngsters previously. Newcastle have hardly been filling their squad with eager Geordie lads in recent years.

Fulham have produced Ryan Sessegnon and his brother, and also played a sixteen year old in their last game, so seem to be making progress. Wolves occasionally give Morgan Gibbs-White a go. But generally, clubs in the Premier League can't afford to take too many chances on playing young footballers because the cost of failure is so high.

Newcastle play Dummett regularly who is a 'vintage' academy graduate like Dunk. they were also starting Sean Longstaff regularly until he knackered his knee.

The Bournemouth defender is Simpson? they have played other 'youngsters' of course in Lewis Cook and David Brooks. Those haven't come through at AFCB but they've brought them in and actually played them, rather than chucking them out of loan.

Your assessment of Southampton is harsh. It might dipped from the dizzy heights of Bale, Shaw and Walcott, but over the last season or so, they've still regularly fielded academy products in Ward-Prowse, Stephens, McQueen, Targett, and this season given PL debuts to Jan Valery, Callum Slattery and Michael Obafemi

 

[macbeth]

He should be. Defo good enough as an attacking midfielder, but too attacking for CH, hence why they've tried to turn him into a CDM.

Is this true? If so, those who jokingly say CH coaches all the attacking talent out of players may have a case

 

[AZ Gull]

We've only had a top flight academy for two years so give em a chance!

We've had a Category One Academy for five years.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Is this true? If so, those who jokingly say CH coaches all the attacking talent out of players may have a case

Nah we're just here for the muppets that can't see past their noses.

 

[Machiavelli]

Not quite true. the club can only have 17 non HGP's in the squad, we don't have to fill the extra spots instead just name a smaller squad. Considering the game time that players like Steele & Burn were likely to get was only ever going to be a cup run or being on the bench I would rather we gave those spots to U23's to help them gain experience. Otherwise they will never get a chance

OK. I wrote: "You'll find that clubs need to name eight home grown players (HGPs) in order to name a 25 man squad."
You wrote your first sentence (or it might have been two, but I'm referring to what ends in the word 'squad'). Now tell me why what I wrote isn't quite.

 

[Perkino]

OK. I wrote: "You'll find that clubs need to name eight home grown players (HGPs) in order to name a 25 man squad."
You wrote your first sentence (or it might have been two, but I'm referring to what ends in the word 'squad'). Now tell me why what I wrote isn't quite.

There is no point in naming a 25 man squad that contains such players when it limits the development of younger players and prolongs the opportunity of having players progress from the academy

 

[AZ Gull]

The biggest crime to me is us signing players like Steele & Burn last summer. Both were clearly not going to get a run in the first team and would only be squad players, why didn't we leave the space for Sanchez and White to gain some matchday experience?

Not quite true. the club can only have 17 non HGP's in the squad, we don't have to fill the extra spots instead just name a smaller squad. Considering the game time that players like Steele & Burn were likely to get was only ever going to be a cup run or being on the bench I would rather we gave those spots to U23's to help them gain experience. Otherwise they will never get a chance

There is no point in naming a 25 man squad that contains such players when it limits the development of younger players and prolongs the opportunity of having players progress from the academy

I'm not really sure what point you are making here. Buying Steele and Burn did nothing to prevent Hughton using the likes of Sanchez and White, if he was so inclined (which he clearly wasn't). As both still qualified as U-21 players this season they didn't need to be named in the 25-man squad.

 

[Perkino]

I'm not really sure what point you are making here. Buying Steele and Burn did nothing to prevent Hughton using the likes of Sanchez and White, if he was so inclined (which he clearly wasn't). As both still qualified as U-21 players this season they didn't need to be named in the 25-man squad.

But having such players in the squad means he has a larger number of 1st players to try and keep happy, they would expect to get a run out in cup games and be on the bench when injuries and suspensions impact the matchday 18.

 

[AZ Gull]

But having such players in the squad means he has a larger number of 1st players to try and keep happy, they would expect to get a run out in cup games and be on the bench when injuries and suspensions impact the matchday 18.

Hughton clearly had no intention of using academy players in the Premier League. When we had only two fit and available centre-backs for three matches in December, rather than put Ben White (or Ben Barclay, who was named in the 25-man squad) on the bench, he went with NO recognised back-up centre-back in the 18. The problem isn't the size of the 25-man squad (which was actually only 23 strong from February onwards), it is Hughton's lack of trust in youth.

 

[Perkino]

Hughton clearly had no intention of using academy players in the Premier League. When we had only two fit and available centre-backs for three matches in December, rather than put Ben White (or Ben Barclay, who was named in the 25-man squad) on the bench, he went with NO recognised back-up centre-back in the 18. The problem isn't the size of the 25-man squad (which was actually only 23 strong from February onwards), it is Hughton's lack of trust in youth.

Agreed and that lack of trust has in both seasons in the premier league led him to have 3 goalkeepers and 4 centre backs when these players have had 0 appearances between them. They have however been involved in matchday squads on the bench and I think there needs to be a shift in mentality to create opportunities for such players to gain experience and game time or more trust from the manager to include youngsters

 

[Machiavelli]

There is no point in naming a 25 man squad that contains such players when it limits the development of younger players and prolongs the opportunity of having players progress from the academy

That might be the case, although I disagree with you. That said, it's an entirely separate point than the one that was raised.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

We've had a Category One Academy for five years.

But only one attached to a premier league club for two years. The best kids will want to go to Premier league clubs, that's just natural, so we can attract better talent now than five years ago

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Hughton clearly had no intention of using academy players in the Premier League. When we had only two fit and available centre-backs for three matches in December, rather than put Ben White (or Ben Barclay, who was named in the 25-man squad) on the bench, he went with NO recognised back-up centre-back in the 18. The problem isn't the size of the 25-man squad (which was actually only 23 strong from February onwards), it is Hughton's lack of trust in youth.

But we go back to Bissouma making his debut at 21, if they're good enough he'll pick them. Just because White and Barclay are our best young cb's it doesn't mean they're good enough (yet) and if he rather play Bruno or Bernardo there and have more attacking options on the bench that's a fair enough call.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Teddy Jenks, playing for England U17s has scored against Sweden.

[tweet]1126533811616063488[/tweet]

 

[AZ Gull]

Teddy Jenks, playing for England U17s has scored against Sweden.

[tweet]1126533811616063488[/tweet]

Unfortunately, today's 3-1 win was insufficient to see England progress to the knockout stages. Haydon Roberts played every minute of the three matches for England (Jenks was unused in the first game and made a late substitute appearance in the second game).

In the same tournament, Albion's Matt Everitt scored the Republic of Ireland goal in their 1-1 draw with Greece and also played the whole match in their 1-1 draw with the Czech Republic. He has played the whole game so far against Belgium (about 8 minutes left). Currently 1-1, they need to win to advance.

 

[Lush]

They have played other 'youngsters' of course in Lewis Cook and David Brooks. Those haven't come through at AFCB but they've brought them in and actually played them, rather than chucking them out of loan.

The Alexander-Arnold approach. And what you get is that fearlessness that comes with playing a skilful 20-year-old.