It's all Roman's Fault

Pogue Mahone

Watching Spurs in the wafer cup tonight and I was thinking that O'Hara isn't a bad young player.

Then I thought how it's been ages since we've had a young lad at United come up through the ranks and establish himself in the first team (not since Fletcher, Brown and O'Shea). Then I thought, what's changed since then?

The obvious answer is the massive increase in points needed to win the league, since Chelsea's sugar daddy started to bankroll their way to success. I don't think it's a coincidence that not one of the "big four" has brought a player up through the ranks (or succesfully developed a British or Irish teenager) since West London got deluged with dodgy roubles. Rooney could be the only exception but he is a genuine one off, being one of the best 5 or 6 players in the world of his age-group.

If you look outside the top four, there are plenty of good examples though. You've got Agbonlahor at Villa, Johnson, Richards and Ireland at Citeh, Warnock, Derbyshire and Bentley at Blackburn and O'Hara and Huddlestone at Spurs. The lower down the league you go the more "home-grown" players you see.

But at Arsenal, United, Chelsea and Liverpool? Fuck all. The few genuinely decent "home-grown" players they have brough through the ranks are much more likely to earn a living elsewhere than the club that developed them.

These clubs either buy ready made world-class players (Chelsea) or buy the best teenagers in the world (Arsenal) or a mixture of the two (United and, a lot less effectively, Liverpool)

Now, it has got to be a bad thing for the development in talent in Britain and Ireland if almost all (Celtic and Rangers aside) of the Champion's League clubs are looking abroad to develop young talent.

Obviously, there's the "if they're good enough they'd get a game" argument. But I don't buy that. The fact remains that when we brought through Giggs, Scholes, Neville, Beckham etc. our points total wouldn't have come close to what's needed to win the league. And I don't think the youngsters coming through at the likes of Blackburn and Villa are getting exposed to the type of elite football they need to be the best that they can be.

So there you go. I think it's a real problem and I genuinely believe that fucker Abramovich is stifling the development of young British and Irish talent.

Or am I being paranoid and it's all just part of a cycle?

Discuss.

Wes

we're as to blame as them

Jake

you have a really good point there actually, i would put all the blame on roman, but ever since he took over, looking back, thats when most teams started investing in alot more expensive players (and foreign players)

Lizard King

It's a huge risk to play an unproven youth player, there's too much at stake these days.

I'd love to see some make it though, I think Welbeck has a good chance.

Lizard King

Oh and Evans.

Jake

maybe, i can see welbeck, but i dont think evans will be world class. or even good enough to get into utd's first team the way the EPL is going.

Scholesy

Evans, Welbeck and Pique. Simpson no sorry.

since 1987

Great post Pogue, was thinking about write the same thread. The "people" who had lost the most since Roman robbed the russian public and bought Chelsea is the english players. Chelsea raised the bar and after that, the other clubs had to step up their game. As for some years ago we could try to give the younger boys some time on the pitch. Now every fucking game in the prem is a must win. Cant be good for british youth development.

mosesfromtala

it's true they may not make it into our squads, but they do make it, just look at the number of united and arsenal connections in all the divisions

Striker10

I think Romans definately not helped. His money has raised the bar so for the youth it's been harder for the top clubs to promote because the gains and losses are higher then they've ever been.

Also in the reserves 99% are kids. For what reason - I don't know but before the reserves used to get expereince playing with and against first teamers coming back from injury, needing games etc.

That can't help. Players need everybit of experience they can get, which is why loaning outs become so important but then your loaning out to substandard places so while character development maybe great they might suffer in other areas

I don't know how long the 90 minute rules been in place...but that wouldn't help anyway. It's meant clubs looking abroad and then what you get is hit or miss.

The fact that clubs in this country sell english players etc for crazy amounts is also a reason why youth in general isn't promoted because like ourselves we go out and buy Anderson and Nani and chelsea steal obi Mikel from us and liverpool loan javier and Arsenal steal Fabragas from Barcelona.

We, liverpool and chelsea may have paid alot but it proved to be worth it for the respective clubs. You can't always say that about our youngsters.

There's probably more reasons but sure Roman is partly to blame as you say. It's a shame but then you have to ask yourself are the youth we have good enough or as good as they should be?

duffer

I disagree with that.

While Abramovic's spending certainly re-inflated the market (at a time when players transfer fees were dropping) it was the ever increasing Sky TV money and then the chase for the Champions league money which made the bigger teams with bigger wage bills less willing to gamble on youth players.

Jens' Face

I agreed with you, Pogue, just on the basis of the thread's title, before I even read your post. Is there something wrong? Anything? Of course it's Roman's fault. Sheesh. Don't need to point that out.


Except, while still agreeing entirely that everything is Roman's fault, I want to challenge one idea in your post. Let's take as given that the thrust of your post -- that teams with an ambition to win the league can no longer afford to develop youth and then play them in the first team.

But I don't understand what that has to do with the development of British players.* It is the case that the top 4 clubs are training British youth in their academies and reserves and U-Whatever teams, right? So presumably they're "getting exposed to the type of elite football they need to be the best that they can be." (The lynchpin contention in your argument, I think, is that they're not.) And, as always, I assume, those youths good enough to get up to the fringes of the first-team squad -- like Wellbeck or Walcott -- are training with the first-teamers on a regular basis. Then, if there's not room for them in the squad, they go on to a play for a midtable or lower-league team.

Just to pick the club I know best, here is a list of British players either not quite good enough to play for the Arsenal, too stupid and drunk to play for the Arsenal, or unwilling to take the various indignities forced on them by the Arsenal: J.Thomas, J.Harper, Muamba, Sidwell, Upson, Pennant, Cole, Bentley. There are probably a couple more; that's just off the top of my head. In any case, it's interesting to note that 3 of them are playing for top 4 clubs. (Sidwell -- actually, blame his career on the Chavs too. So much better to have stayed at Reading ...) Three of them, actually, started the last ntl team match. So they're regarded as very good players.

So what if they don't end up playing for the Arsenal? They've got their training already. They're still playing in the premiership. They're still available (and being picked) for England. Seems to me that not continuing to play alongside a top 4 squad -- when that's the case -- is only a very very small missed opportunity. It could only affect their ability to reach their full potential very marginally.

I'm sure I'd say the same for whatever British players Utd, Pool, or the Chavs produced who were playing elsewhere in the premiership.


*I'll leave out Irish, if we're talking about the Republic of Ireland, since I don't quite see why we'd link them with British players any more than we'd link French players with British players -- neighbors on either side.

cloud218

Even with the inflation, in a sense I believe the Premier League owes Roman (and Mourinho) a thank you, as he and his spendings presented a huge competition in the Premiership. Inflation? Bad? Yes, but also forces many clubs to kick up a notch, and even make players to play better.

Jens' Face

I don't think that actually contradicts Pogue's argument. Perhaps it is the case that the increasing size of the CL pot increased pressure to do well in Europe; and perhaps it is the case that the Sky money gave teams the capacity to spend more to do it (which is what I think you're arguing?). Even so, those are simply sufficient conditions. It can still be true that the necessary condition -- the thing that forced it; the impetus -- was Roman's spending on players.

I mean, we can't miss the forest for the trees. These are the players outside Chelski's first XI: Anelka, Shevchenko, Pizarro, Malouda, Makalele, Mikel Obi, Sidwell, Bridge, Ferreira, Alex, Ben Haim, the new Serbian cb, Cudicini, Hilario. Dude, that team would whip most teams in the world. Probably finish in the top 4 itself.

Alex

The quality of the Premier League has gone up a lot especially at the top since Roman bought Chelsea, not saying that is the reason though

reelworld

Warnock was bought from Liverpool, Bentley was from Arsenal. Spurs bought Huddlestone from Derby.
Clubs outside the top four doesn't exactly done the things differently, perhaps maybe City and West Ham.

demapples

Utd were forking out £20m on players long before Roman came along and had set the benchmark.

As much as I like would to lay the blame for English football's woes at Abramovich's feet, it is disingenuous to do so and all clubs should take the blame, particularly the big ones.

Pogue Mahone

Mate, I hope so.

But does anyone else think that Fletcher, Richardson and (possibly) Phil Bardsley would all be playing regular football for us, in a different era?

The pressure to win points is so high that young players aren't allowed to play themselves back into form any more. If they put in an average 90 minutes of football and we drop points, you won't see them again for another 10-20 games, if at all.

And, when they do get a chance, the spotlight is so intense it takes an extremely special talent to cope, with fans yowling at every misplaced pass and Fergie prepared to hook them at half-time, if there's any chance the game is running away from us.

It's a bit depressing really. I would almost rather we had a few seasons without trophies if I could have the satisfaction of watching 2 or 3 young lads come up through the ranks and really establish themselves as first-teamers. It's one of the biggest buzzes there is as a fan, IMO. And that's why I feel so jealous of fans of Villa/Blackburn/City when Agbonlahor/Derbyshire/Johnson scores a cracking goal. It's just not the same buzz when Nani scores a 25-yard screamer

Pogue Mahone

That's my point, though. I think all three of these players, given time, could establish themselves in the "big four" and they would be much better players for it. But, apart from some crazy scenario where they spend most of their career on loan, they end up being forced out, in pursuit of first-team football.

And I have no doubt that all of them would have been better served, as players, if they had been able to train under Arsenal and Benitez(stretching a bit here!) and alongside the likes of Gerrard and Fabregas, week in week out.

Pogue Mahone

I don't have any problem with forking out £20m for genuinely world-class players. It's when your whole team is made up with players like this that you create problems.

Chelsea have a ridiculous policy, when it comes to building a team. They want two world-class seasoned pros in every position and if the manager decides any member of their squad ain't good enough, they go running off to Roman and beg some funds to buy the best available player in that positiion, no matter what it costs.

Not a hope in hell of any other club competing with a team like that, whilst attempting to develop young players coming up through the ranks.

redman5

Excellent post. It was something I was discussing with a mate of mine a few months back, but couldn't be arsed going to the trouble that you've gone to by putting it up for debate.

Any club that has big ambitions, simply can't afford to take the risk with youngsters nowdays, as they can be too unpredictable, & ultimately, could cost the team vital points throughout the season. The first 7 or so years of The Premiership, it only took an average of around about 76 or 77 points to win the title. But since the turn of the century, its averaging somewhere around the 85 mark.

That said though. United were splashing mega bucks on players such as Ferdinand, Veron & Rooney well before the Russian rode into town. So on that score, your club is just as culpable.

demapples

You are right about Chelsea, although I think it was only a matter of time before that happened. All the big clubs seem to be heading that way.

How are Utd's youngsters looking?

We seem to have bought every young footballer on the planet recently. There are a few decent prospects in among those apparently. Haven't seen anything myself though, so just going off what I read from other fans.

Reddish

But we also had young players coming through. We didn't just spend stupid amounts on every position throughout the squad.

Reddish

You seem to have bought every footballer on the planet recently.

Pogue Mahone

Oh, one last point (and apologies for banging on and on in this thread) does anyone think the performance of the Scottish national team, in the WC qualifiers is probably linked to the young lads at Rangers and Celtic playing Champion's League football on a regular basis?

By all accounts, Hutton was quite shite at Rangers up until a couple of seasons ago. But Rangers were able to stick with him and he managed to get some exposure to football at the highest level. Sure enough, a couple of seasons later, he's blossomed as a footballer and is marauding down the wing against Italy.

Jens' Face

don't apologize. I think this is a great thread because it gets to really a large number of important issues in English football -- and, because they are issues that are very hard to think about, it's nice to have a thread to discuss them, bounce ideas off one another, etc.

Can you quantify, even in some vague way, the impact you think some of its players playing CL football has had on the Scottish ntl team? My first instinct is that it's one of those things that looks like it matters but, if you were to break down all the factors about what makes a player good, it wouldn't loom very large.

Raven_Blade

Well this is a good time for the 7 subs to be introduced as a solution. More options will give young British players much more chances to be involved in the first 11. From next season we will see if it starts to make a difference.