Manchester United are being left behind in youth development - Andy Mitten

[SirFergie]

Modernising the club from the position of comfort we maintained under Ferguson will take time. Certainly a lot longer than the two seasons he's been gone. What City are doing won't have gone unnoticed, so I'm sure there are plans in place to combat their admittedly impressive outlay.

There isn't much nobility left in any of this, though, is there? Lump sums to parents to send their children to academies? That sort of thing has most likely gone on for a long time, sums appropriate given the era, but it's essentially bribery. Young people being the objects of that, while greedy parents spend their whack on brand new Audi's. Or maybe that's the cynic in me talking...

That's the bit I find galling. People banging on about how great City's academy is when they're systematically poaching youngsters who are at our academy. It's a disgrace that they're allowed to, like you say, bribe their way to the best youngsters and then take the credit for it just so they can be accredited the 'best' academy.

 

[jojojo]

Interesting article. I'd heard most of the elements before but seeing it tied together does make you think. I admit I'm a bit dubious of the private education aspect, it will be interesting to see how much of an edge that does give City.

As far as I can tell every top club in Europe is struggling with the issue of how do you recruit the best, train them well and bring them through into the first team. Real Madrid have a big academy and a reserve team playing in a proper league but they develop a lot of players for other Liga clubs and not many of their own make it into the first team squad, never mind the first choice XI.

Barcelona appeared to have got the whole thing bang on, but Busquets and Pedro who debuted in 2008 are really the most recent Masia graduates to make it as first team regulars. So, like our "class of 92" their home grown team is not an easy trick to repeat.

Personally I don't like the loan model adopted by teams like Chelsea either - it just feels like them hogging talent that should actually be playing for and owned by those smaller clubs.

 

[khoazany]

That's the bit I find galling. People banging on about how great City's academy is when they're systematically poaching youngsters who are at our academy. It's a disgrace that they're allowed to, like you say, bribe their way to the best youngsters and then take the credit for it just so they can be accredited the 'best' academy.

As far as I know we're superior to them in terms of coaching method, though that might change with all the money they spent on the coaches.If we can stop them from poaching our talents we'll be fine, though you can't expect our youngsters to be far superior to them like in the past (which is fair enough, youth system is a market of their own anyway, the more money you have the easier to build a good one).Would be great if we invest more money into the youth academy and I believe we will surpass them again if we do.

 

[jojojo]

Naturally if our youth system pays for itself with a profit, then I see no harm. If that's the case it provides us supplementary income and any player we produce who makes a first team contribution is merely a bonus.

It's not just about profit, it's about the connection between the city, the players and the club. There is something special about giving local kids a thing to aspire to and something great when they come through. There's also the advantage that like Giggs, Scholes and the Nevilles there's nowhere for them to get homesick about.

 

[Flying_Heckfish]

We can reverse all of it, through our name('brand') and cashflow. But as @finneh said, the instruction to make the investment in time and money will have to come from the top.

Ultimately, will generating our own players save us from spending on transfers? If you asked anyone 15 years ago they would say invest immediately - the evidence was there with CO92. But since then we just haven't produced any great players. We've added to the squad, which is great - it helps keep or domestic core up whilst saving lots of cash around the edges - but we've not had top, top stars like the CO92. We did have Pique and Pogba who have shown to be useful players, but they were pinched anyway. Perhaps a UTD 'finishing school' would be an idea the board are thinking about - get the players just before they break through so there's less risk? It's hard to say.

Having said all that, it's a tradition of the club to have great youth coming through and it would be a massive shame if we stopped. The romantic in me says spend what's needed.

 

[Varun]

To be honest I'm getting closer and closer towards thinking we may as well close down our youth facilities, let other clubs do the ground work and then just sign players when they become good enough for our first team. I think a real cost benefit analysis needs to be undertaken as to how much we receive when selling our youngsters vs the cost of infrastructure, wages, improvements etc.

Football is at such an advanced level nowadays that we can't afford to give inferior young players the chance to develop whilst costing us points. Maybe the genius that was Fergie could win trophies whilst developing youngsters, but I can't think of any other club in England that's been successful using this model in the last 15-20 years. The last top class first team player that would have cost more than around £10m-15m to buy from another club that we've produced was Paul Scholes 20 years ago. Ferguson managed to find a really meaningful contribution from the likes of O'Shea, Brown, Fletcher etc but would any top class modern manager be able to do the same?

I suppose the question is: when you have £100m per season to spend on the best talent across the globe; that've already proven they can realise their great potential, is there any need to try (usually in vein) to produce one top class player every decade yourself? Let other clubs go through 3~ seasons of watching their potentially great player miss simple chances, get muscled out of possession, give the ball away needlessly and make basic concentration errors. Then once they've ironed out these developmental issues, swoop in with a hefty bid and benefit.

Naturally if our youth system pays for itself with a profit, then I see no harm. If that's the case it provides us supplementary income and any player we produce who makes a first team contribution is merely a bonus.

The club cant simply lose touch with the entire local community and that's what would happen if they simply shut down the academy. Also, it isnt just about players making it into the starting 11, squad players and even players sold for good fees to other clubs. We can't buy 25 man squads.

 

[finneh]

Pique and Pogba not enough? Welbeck is a starter for England.
Not getting a game because you're stuck behind world class talent or if the manager wants to ease you in is different than not producing the talent in the first place.

It's a bit of a stretch to say we produced Pique or Pogba.

Pogba we spotted as a very talented 16 year old and he left less than 3 years later as a very talented 19 year old. You either have to credit Juventus with turning him into a top class player or his former clubs for his development as a teenager. He didn't really even feature in our first team, which is where most of the actual development occurs, playing against top class players.

Pique we signed as a very talented 17 year old and he left as a very talented 20 year old. Likewise he barely featured in our first team and most of his actual development occurred at Barcelona. Zaragoza should get more credit for his development than United.

However I agree with your general point: Depay has a far greater chance of succeeding vs Januzaj as he's actually played competitive first team Football for the last 3.5 years.

The club cant simply lose touch with the entire local community and that's what would happen if they simply shut down the academy. Also, it isnt just about players making it into the starting 11, squad players and even players sold for good fees to other clubs. We can't buy 25 man squads.

Not training youngsters has no big relation to losing touch with the local community. We'd still do local charitable work, we'd still support local work and we'd still contribute to the local community. We just wouldn't train youngsters.

Of course we can buy a 25 man squad. We'd have 3 "kinds" of players. Younger players who are either spectacular for their age and can contribute as squad players or are good for their age and will be bought and instantly loaned to clubs where they are guaranteed first team Football. Then you have players who have progressed from the aforementioned category and become valuable first team players. Finally players who have been bought for huge fee's in their prime and have slotted straight into the first team.

The only difference between our current squad and this squad would be that our younger players would have first team experience when filling squad roles; rather than the current situation where they are playing what amounts to a different sport the quality is that poor.

We'd have a totally different model where we'd be buying 5-6 talented youngsters for the £5-10m price range every season from across the globe and loaning them out straight away to clubs who'll guarantee them first team Football. Once they were good enough to fill a squad role they'd fill said role.

It's no different to the Chelsea model now. They buy the best young players and loan them out. However I'd definitely give the likes of De Bruyne or Lukaku etc a chance before shipping them off for a profit...

 

[C'est Moi Cantona]

He annoys me a bit does Mitten, his recent articles are clearly lacking any inside knoweledge as to what's going on at United, so he just writes these long conveluted bits of fluff that actually say nothing.

Now he writes this at a time where he really should be getting some juicy inside scoops, I think it's been fairly well documented that LvG doesn't really rate the youth set up, and also doesn't rate some of the training facilities, he wants to change it and I'm sure steps are been made.

We are all well aware of how much the the city owners are investing into the youth set up, we know, it's when we are clearly not doing anything to help our own set up, and theirs is producing world class players that I'll be concerned.

 

[SirFergie]

As far as I know we're superior to them in terms of coaching method, though that might change with all the money they spent on the coaches.If we can stop them from poaching our talents we'll be fine, though you can't expect our youngsters to be far superior to them like in the past (which is fair enough, youth system is a market of their own anyway, the more money you have the easier to build a good one).Would be great if we invest more money into the youth academy and I believe we will surpass them again if we do.

Agreed. The good thing is, after reading that article and through reports in media etc., is that there is an acknowledgement for the need to change which is why we're hearing about a split of what was the Academy Director's job.

LvG also appears to be in the know about what's going on which is reassuring.

 

[cyberman]

It's a bit of a stretch to say we produced Pique or Pogba.

Pogba we spotted as a very talented 16 year old and he left less than 3 years later as a very talented 19 year old. You either have to credit Juventus with turning him into a top class player or his former clubs for his development as a teenager. He didn't really even feature in our first team, which is where most of the actual development occurs, playing against top class players.

Pique we signed as a very talented 17 year old and he left as a very talented 20 year old. Likewise he barely featured in our first team and most of his actual development occurred at Barcelona. Zaragoza should get more credit for his development than United.

However I agree with your general point: Depay has a far greater chance of succeeding vs Januzaj as he's actually played competitive first team Football for the last 3.5 years.

What I meant by my post is that no matter what young player we had during those periods, they would never have had game time over those players in the reserves or limited first team games ( Carling Cup) etc
Also Pique and Pogba basically walked into Barca and Juve and shone from day one, forcing their way into their sides. It's not as if they had to adapt or be brought along. United should get huge credit for that and be an example of how we can develop genuine talent when it's there.

 

[Van Piorsing]

Theres alot of similarities between what SAF did to our YS when he first came to United and what City have been doing since their Oil sheiks arrived.

- SAF found City had double the number of scouts to us in manchester. He reversed that.

- He employed Brian Kidd and Nobby Stiles, both legendary and influential figures in the local area, to aggresively pursue the best talents.

- He instructed the club to pay what was neccesary to make sure the players families where asssured the club could look after them better than anyone else.

- 9 years later we had something special.

Its gone full circle. City have more influence in local community again with more scouts than us and people like Viera influencing players families. They offer more money, better facilities and a higher standard of coaching.

Fergie took over in 86. CO92 established themselves in 95. City still need a brave skilled manager and lots of luck to do something similair but its better to have the possibility of talent then not to have it at all.

You absolutely nailed it with that post. I just hope LVG will be here long enough to get majority of positive reforms done. Infrastructure can be upgraded and expanded over time with solid funding from countless sponsorship deals but like you said perhaps we could use more friendly football figures to influence all major local talents to set their mind on United from early years. Someone in vein of Beckham, maybe even Scholesy or other well known legend designated to establish some good relationships with youngster's families could be a key factor to try and at least replicate at some point the CO92 effect.

Fingers crossed about the long term future plans. I don't even imagine how City could produce their super generation with countless spending recently but they're definitely not waiting on us in terms of development. I guess in some cases we were the sleeping giant after all.

 

[finneh]

What I meant by my post is that no matter what young player we had during those periods, they would never have had game time over those players in the reserves or limited first team games ( Carling Cup) etc
Also Pique and Pogba basically walked into Barca and Juve and shone from day one, forcing their way into their sides. It's not as if they had to adapt or be brought along. United should get huge credit for that and be an example of how we can develop genuine talent when it's there.

Again I agree with the overriding point, but tend to disagree re: Pogba & Pique. My belief is that the main thing that differentiates merely talent and true quality comes from proving yourself by playing first team Football and improving because of it. Juventus could easily have left Pogba in the reserves and we'd be thankful that we didn't pay him a big salary to stay. They put up with all of his youthful naivety in his early days to get the player they have now. Any team can have a talented player, it's how you turn them into a quality first team player that contributed to trophies that is meaningful.

 

[Verminator]

Every top club want to have a B team.The problem lies with FA and the Football League clubs.

Where do you get this info? Genuinely interested.

 

[khoazany]

Where do you get this info? Genuinely interested.

Did you not hear about the proposal of having B teams not long ago?It didn't get the support from the FL clubs.Then there're talks about getting Reserves team to play in Johnstone Paint Trophy but it all gone quiet since.

 

[gooDevil]

I'll start to worry when we stop producing such talented prospects and the much-lauded academy of City starts to produce... literally anything.

Pogba is proof of the success of our youth development, not its failure. It's not the academy's fault that we couldn't keep hold of him, but they have a lot to do with the fact that he's now considered possibly the hottest young midfield prospect in world football.

What our youth development really needs is a firmer route into the first team. I was hoping to see a more radical move in that direction under Van Gaal, but it's yet to fully materialise. He's obviously happy for youngsters to fill in in positions where injuries leave us thin on the ground (Blackett and McNair, for example), but what I really want to see is the real talents - the likes of Januzaj, Wilson, Pereira, Pearson etc - getting a proper chance. We're never going to establish a tradition for promoting youngsters on the back of average gap-fillers like Blackett and McNair. But if Wilson, Januzaj and Pereira are all established in the first team in four years, it'll be so much easier for the next generation to get their chances.

You don't rate McNair? I'll admit it's hard to rate a 20yo CB, but I think he's a good prospect.

 

[prath92]

There are no top clubs right now who still produce reasonable quality of youth products and play them in the first team

Chelsea/city - they have decent to very good youth players but very few get a reasonable amount of games and they are mostly moved on by 22.

Arsenal - their academy never had many top players. Cole Wilshere Gibbs are the only ones to play reasonably in their own team in the last 10 years or so

Liverpool - just like United they too have prospects coming. Players like sterling ibe rossiter are exactly like those you find at United in all fairness

Barca - biggest myth in football is barca have the best academy. Since 2011 they have promoted players who are squad player level. The likes of rafinha bartra Montoya tello etc are hardly the same level as the earlier ones

Bayern are the only team which can still say they have good players coming. The likes of Can hojberg are highly rated at least till now and even they are finding it difficult to hold on to their players

Teams like Real Madrid PSG have very few players from their academy. Not really sure about juve but they buy a lot of players so it would seem they too aren't exactly trusting their youth

United may have slacked off in comparison to previous eras but so have rest of Europe s elites. It's what has to be done to compete year on year at the highest level

 

[Sad Chris]

Youth development is dead. It lays burried next to world peace, kids with manners and Liverpool's title hopes.

 

[Someone]

It's easy to point fingers at united, but how many english top players have all english clubs produced since the class of 92? on average i doubt you'd have 1 per club.

Off the top of my head i'm thinking:

1- Owen
2- Gerrard
3- Rooney
4- Lampard
5- Terry
6- Rio
7- Ashley cole
8- Carrick
9- Baines

Currently there're potentially some top players in the making, like kane, shaw and sterling, but the the truth remains that the talent pool in england is poor, and the odds of united or city producing anything other than squad players are slim.

 

[Sandikan]

that article is all nice and all that, but no youngsters ever come through at City.

That should be a slight warning to those kids who take the short term easy money option!

 

[hebegebe]

that article is all nice and all that, but no youngsters ever come through at City.

That should be a slight warning to those kids who take the short term easy money option!

You're missing the point, City are doing the groundwork now for a successful academy 5-10 years down the road. Also it's not the kids that take the easy money, it's the parents, a 10yr old doesn't really care where he plays football.

Anyway, regarding the article, there is a grain of truth in a huge pile of uninformed bullshit by Mitten.

 

[hebegebe]

Youth development is dead. It lays burried next to world peace, kids with manners and Liverpool's title hopes.

It connects the club with the community and it also makes a tidy profit each season.

 

[iammemphis]

Im not worried in all honesty. While it would be nice to have facilities like City, we still give debuts to so many players. Blackett, McNair, Pereira, Januzaj, Wilson are all involved in the first team over the past couple of seasons. Its up to them to make the next step up to become first teamers.

What have City and Chelsea been doing? Maybe in the future they will be able to attract the talent we mah be interested in but we will never, ever be short of money so if its offering good contracts to 18/19 year olds to fend off interest im sure we will do it - especially after the Pogba saga.

 

[darioterios]

Lampard, Rio, Carrick all came from West Ham, could even reluctantly count Terry in there. Actually this generation of West Ham guys (adding Joe Cole, coupled with some decent, lesser than top like Defoe, Johnson...) would be a slightly lesser version of Class of 92

It's easy to point fingers at united, but how many english top players have all english clubs produced since the class of 92? on average i doubt you'd have 1 per club.

Off the top of my head i'm thinking:

1- Owen
2- Gerrard
3- Rooney
4- Lampard
5- Terry
6- Rio
7- Ashley cole
8- Carrick
9- Baines

Currently there're potentially some top players in the making, like kane, shaw and sterling, but the the truth remains that the talent pool in england is poor, and the odds of united or city producing anything other than squad players are slim.

 

[bosnian_red]

Mitten likes being all dramatic and stuff with his articles recently since he's not getting as much of a inside scoop as he used to probably. It obviously has room for improvement, like everything, but he's making it out like City have a revolutionary youth system that will 100% work (what youth players have come through there by the way?) and that United have an incredibly outdated and shite youth system which obviously just isn't true.

 

[FromTheBench]

I think theme of article is right, but contents are all way exaggerated.

Some exaggerated reactions too.


And Gribbin was the one who had offer from liverpool no ? He's signed a scholarship IIRC.

We've managed to keep Pereira now as well which is a change and recently acquired Fosu mensah and are reportedly beating city for Upamecano. For 16 year olds it is more about route into the team and money anyway plus brand value of club.


Lower down the age ladder is a issue as simply put City are throwing money at youngsters. Unheard level of money to poach the best talents and even offering facilities. That is something we need to cope with especially improving facilities and education etc.. From what i have heard our coaching is still better than City at that level.

They focus more on team work while we tend to focus more on developing individual talents/skills.

 

[Vooon]

I've a hard time understanding why the English league system doesn't have B or even C teams like most of Europe. Even Norway does this. It's obvious that there are issues to be sorted at the FA level as well.

 

[pascell]

I'm more than sure, van Gaal knows what needs to be done regarding the whole youth infrastructure and will make sure the right changes happen.

I'm not really for giving the youth too much money too soon, as this is likely to cause problems further down the line, ie contract negotiations.

Playing under Vieira probably is a pull for City, we can easy become just as much of a pull, hiring someone like Rio, if he's a good enough coach.

Because the first team standard isn't up to scratch to win titles etc just yet, we can't pay big wages for youth coaches like City can do.

Even Woodward will know what improvements need to be made to the youth system but for the time being it'll be a gradual process until the first team is back at the top.

 

[FromTheBench]

I've a hard time understanding why the English league system doesn't have B or even C teams like most of Europe. Even Norway does this. It's obvious that there are issues to be sorted at the FA level as well.

I think it's a legacy issue and now with the most successful lower league structure and long history it's tough to push in B or C teams straight in the middle without widespread protest from fans/clubs at that level.

It would seem the big boys are devaluing their competition etc..

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Question: is Chelsea's youth talent much better than ours. If so then by how much?

 

[JackXX]

If you want to see United produce more players I think we need a b team in a competitive league. The jump between playing youth/reserve football to playing for United is ridiculous. Players need to be able to benefit from our coaching and get plenty of minutes playing competitive football.

 

[Raoul]

The article is a bit delusionally nostalgic and fails to recognize the big white elephant in the room - that sugar daddy ownership has fundamentally changed football forever, in that the pressure to win now is too great to sustain drawn out youth programs as in the past. Clubs instead buy more established players who can deliver an instant return on investment, for fear that they don't get outflanked by other big clubs. The dynamic has fundamentally changed and people need to get over the fact that it will never go back to the way it was before the likes of Roman and the Arab sheikhs started buying their success.

 

[Walrus]

We keep hearing about how wonderful City's academy is and how rubbish ours is, but the fact remains no-one is coming through City's academy into the first team. Two players in the last 10 years still play for them, let alone made it. Their youth teams came mid table in the U21 league and in the U18 league.

We played 15 academy graduates this season alone.

You have to allow a decent amount of time for results to show. Denayer and Iheanacho both stand a great chance of being in City's first team squad next season. Neither are out-and-out "joined the club at age 9", but both would definitely qualify as academy products.

To be honest, it is attitudes like the above that to me show complacency and arrogance when it comes to the club, and those same sorts of attitude which you can argue has led to the stagnation of several areas of it [the club].

 

[C'est Moi Cantona]

The article is a bit delusionally nostalgic and fails to recognize the big white elephant in the room - that sugar daddy ownership has fundamentally changed football forever, in that the pressure to win now is too great to sustain drawn out youth programs as in the past. Clubs instead buy more established players who can deliver an instant return on investment, for fear that they don't get outflanked by other big clubs. The dynamic has fundamentally changed and people need to get over the fact that it will never go back to the way it was before the likes of Roman and the Arab sheikhs started buying their success.

Spot on.

As for Mitten there's just something about his waffling articles that gets on my wick, way too much rambling and fluff, with nothing really of note to say.

 

[FC Ronaldo]

The problem with youth systems is that it's only ever as good as the products that use it and the football world is changing while that model remains the same.

City can spend £500m on a new centre if they wish, if they're not developing players, it's a "waste". If they're bringing other players in and winning youth trophies as they have done but then not progressing them into the team, it's viewed as a failure. But yet if they sell those products for profit, much like Chelsea do, then it is still a success to some degree. The business around youth has changed while the morality of the whole process is nice, it's not the sole barometer anymore and that isn't being recognised.

For the sake of balance, look at how United's CO92 came out of The Cliff and that place was in need of development. They could have been sold for millions but Ferguson was brave enough to make room for them. When was the last time a top club did that? Wenger spent years moulding young, heavily scouted arrivals into a continual process of it but I can't recall a top club bringing through such a wave of players other than us and Barcelona. Bayern have always bought the best but sought to develop a few of their own each season too but not to the same extent.

The nature of football clubs these days is that there will always be players that can't get games at youth and reserve level because of stars ahead of them that are contractually obliged to play etc and other clubs with vacancies and cash ready to chuck at them to prize them away. Players hold more power than ever and that influences chances around them for others. Managers' hands can be tied by the contractual situation and reputation of players and the risk of losing their jobs and livelihood all too easily these days. It all adds up to make life more difficult for players to break through on paper.

To judge a youth system only by it's production of players into the first team is flawed, likewise by how shiny and sparkly the building and facilities are is because while the objective remains the same, the game has changed - notably the instantaneous nature to demand results on the field, and if they don't come, satisfying that with a marquee signing to fix the flaws youths would have stepped up to fill at every transfer window instead.

Providing the youth process available performs the functions required of the club, coaching and medical staff with moderately comfortable surrounds it will achieve the results eventually.

Besides, while United's first team may not be benefiting from our youth development quite so prolifically currently, it's a glaring omission to ignore the fact we've propped up most of English football's clubs with our youth products for the past 25 years consistently. Our education and development practices are clearly working even if the quality of the player after they "graduate" hasn't hit the desired levels as consistently as the beautiful dream hopes.

 

[Sandikan]

Spot on.

As for Mitten there's just something about his waffling articles that gets on my wick, way too much rambling and fluff, with nothing really of note to say.

It's the writing with an air of authority as if he's some kind of in the know massively knowledgeable figurehead who should be bowed to.

I haven't once read his stuff and thought, wow what an insight.

 

[C'est Moi Cantona]

It's the writing with an air of authority as if he's some kind of in the know massively knowledgeable figurehead who should be bowed to.

I haven't once read his stuff and thought, wow what an insight.

Who is he anyway in relation to the club?

 

[RoadTrip]

To be honest compared to some other journalists, Mitten offers far more insight and has a better writing style, all be it very story-like.

 

[Varun]

The article is a bit delusionally nostalgic and fails to recognize the big white elephant in the room - that sugar daddy ownership has fundamentally changed football forever, in that the pressure to win now is too great to sustain drawn out youth programs as in the past. Clubs instead buy more established players who can deliver an instant return on investment, for fear that they don't get outflanked by other big clubs. The dynamic has fundamentally changed and people need to get over the fact that it will never go back to the way it was before the likes of Roman and the Arab sheikhs started buying their success.

While that is widely accepted now Raoul, the need to have a top youth system in place is never going to be eliminated by it. It isn't just about getting these players into the starting 11 right away. Clubs can always use the loan system to prepare these players. Moreover, one never knows when the penny might drop in regards to clubs having B teams. If it happens, it will be a big boost to the system.

In any case, the connect with the locals, the money to be made, etc are vital and youth systems go a long way towards it. It's not as if we don't have a system in place, so we are spending the money anyways. Fine tuning it and keeping up with our rivals will just mean the money actually gives us a better return.

 

[khoazany]

Question: is Chelsea's youth talent much better than ours. If so then by how much?

Yes.By a good margin but tbf they're now better than everyone, maybe even Barca.

I don't really care about Chelsea as they have a different catchment area so not really our "competitors", plus they invested loads of money into the their system 5-10 years ago.Unlike City they invested very smartly into the coaching methods and staffs, not throwing money into facilities to make a "shiny looking" academy.

 

[khoazany]

Who is he anyway in relation to the club?

Someone who used to be fed info but wasn't anymore by the club recently.