kempo. I think youth development is now about buying young players and selling them on rather than picking out homegrown youngsters and developing them in an academy.
These two approaches get confused in most of the debates.
I am all for a clever coach like Redfearn or Gray, bringing in young guns from non-league football and selling 'em on for bucket loads.
I think the academy style of youth policy, sadly, is not possible anymore.
Well I think the opposite. Teams like Rotherham and Crewe used to rely heavily on developing youth and selling them in.
In our modern day position there is an undesputable fact.. We cannot compete at championship level on financial grounds. That leaves youth.
With a good youth policy a club will rise from the ashes sooner or later. Much as I dislike the blades they have a fantastic youth policy and it is very soon going to come into fruition. Probably at the expense of a club like ours that has no youth policy.
I haven't seen any evidence that it is expensive to have a good youth policy. I suspect that the cost is probably similar to the cost of having one or two Richard Wood types languishing in the background, and probably not a huge outlay in the big scheme of it. On the other side of the coin, the benefits are substantial. One good player every couple of years (if that us all you get) with any resale value gets you a return, the supporters identify with local players in the team/squad, and having a presence in and around local schools and families also creates an important bond between the local community and the club which helps grow the fan base. It is an essential part of a healthy football club - a must.
ps. Not a dig at Wood who I like. Just saying that in recent years we have thought nothing of shipping in players on good money and then not using them. That money could have been used better.
-- Edited by smiler on Thursday 1st of October 2015 08:38:32 AM
I haven't seen any evidence that it is expensive to have a good youth policy. I suspect that the cost is probably similar to the cost of having one or two Richard Wood types languishing in the background, and probably not a huge outlay in the big scheme of it. On the other side of the coin, the benefits are substantial. One good player every couple of years (if that us all you get) with any resale value gets you a return, the supporters identify with local players in the team/squad, and having a presence in and around local schools and families also creates an important bond between the local community and the club which helps grow the fan base. It is an essential part of a healthy football club - a must.
both great pints by Heman and smiler.
They have won me over. It seems it might just be a question of attitude and will on the part of a club.
It certainly needn't be expensive as smiler points out and the engagement locally (the whole of south Yorkshire could be a cheap pool to fish in) would be nothing other than beneficial.
We won't get the best kids in our academy. The EPPP thing allows the top clubs to take who they want for free, so any that slip the net of the vast trawlers run by Man City etc will get snapped up way before they get near a first team.
But. Man City can only pick 11 to play for the first team and they've so many gifted signings and youth players, that they'll have dozens of 18-21 year olds who are decent, but not good enough yet.
THAT'S our market. We offer first team football. And if we can create a coaching system that helps manage them into the first team, helps them develop, then we all benefit. Players like Thorpe; a development squad of 8 or 9 of him would get us somewhere. They might play 15 games a season between them to start with, but then, Thorpe might replace Collins for next season and so and so might replace Derbyshire and so on. And when we sell Thorpe for £2m, the next one is polished and ready.
Brindley. Newton. Not ready for the first team. Gone. In my world, not ready for the first team ... Yet. Players, outside the exceptional, tend to be up to speed these days by 25 (later than ever); so work on them, sign them on long deals, loan them out, develop them and slot them in as and when.
There is also a worthy project in having a youth policy for local youngsters that wont get picked up by the big clubs. i cant see anything but good coming from that also.
The answer is a better chance of first team action, sooner. And the knowledge that the club can't afford not to cash in if a decent offer comes in.
That applies to players ready for first team action but not younger players who are taken at 14 ,15 16 and developed.
Chances of them coming to Rotherham are nil.
The premier clubs offer family incentives such as 'expenses' which can include cars for transport and even housing....so I would rate the chances of this age group being developed as near to zero.
I would challenge the concept that a decent youth set up would not be expensive.
I would suggest that it is a major investment with the chances of it being value for money less than 'uncertain'
Of course I cannot produce any figures re the cost but I am pretty sure it would be substantial.
The big clubs snap up all the young talent and we need to wait for the discards and take a chance.
Yes, I think I agree with Kempo and David. Perhaps our next manager ought to be someone with good contacts at a couple of big clubs and leave the coaching side to Black.
