What are peoples thoughts on it?

It were described as child exploitation on BT sports by a pundit yesterday and I think its absolutely bang on when you look at the hours and dedication these kids put in for a very long time to have just as much chance of being hit with a Bus than becoming a paid footballer.

I know of kids as young as 4 that have been signed up by Man City

It's the parents that are the problem, they want success so bad for the kids they're willing to put them through hell to achieve it.

I have lots of friends who brag about their kids in the acadamies, it's like their showing off new cars.

I was really pleased to hear that Burnley were stopping the nonsense rule that acadamies have of preventing kids from playing for their schools or teams with mates in.

My nephew trains with Man City who is 8, but he was watched at 5.

And there's a reason why BT Sport suggested it was child exploitation - because they aren't Sky Sports.

My lad plays against a club that takes on academy rejects, they as young as 8 and 9 and classed as failures. It's the Hoover up as many kids as possible and drop them when they don't show enough potential, it's disgraceful but it's the modern way.

Takes a strong-willed parent to say no, i'd imagine. So many would just see the pound signs.

If the kids likes it and say they want to do it what other choice is there but to let them try and give them the best chance.

No different from parents who send young kids of to ballet school If they show promise. Most aren't going to make it to a top professional level but such is life.

It’s such a difficult one.

There were kids training at Gawthorpe who were as young as 6, normally brothers of kids on trial or signed. some were good too but I don’t think it’s fair to have them signed to clubs .

At 8 they were competitive little so and so’s at times. But also the pressure can be tough.

I remember one lad, his dad was driving 250 miles a week taking him to train with Man Utd and at Burnley at 8 years old. Nearly signed for Burnley but went to Utd in the end, saw his dad 4 years later and he was still at Utd. Shame I cannot remember his name, should be under 18 by now. My point is you could see the pressure taking its toll on an 8 year old lad.

It's the parents putting the pressure on the kids, they think once their at academy level they've made it. If the kids are left to enjoy themselves it's fine but the kids are made to feel it's all competition by the parents. Even at a low level some parents and coaches take it far to seriously.

My nephew's team played against some Man City academy or other based in Leeds - under 7's

My brother said it was horrendous; coaches bellowing about "shape" all game. Seems like all the fun has been taken out of it for the 0.001 chance of making it.

He also told me that when the scouts come round and see a decent player, the first thing they want to know is who their parents are and how big they are.

Go to any football tournament in the summer and if you want to find the scouts - just head to the under 6 matches and you'll be spoilt for choice.

A mate of mine had his lad dropped by Everton after a year or so and told he was not good enough ......,. He was 7 when dropped and then didnt want to play football again for a while, til his dad really went back to basics with it and made it fun again.

It amazes me how they can make a judgement on whether a kid is good enough at 6 or 7 years old. What are they looking for at that age?

TheFamilyCat wrote:It amazes me how they can make a judgement on whether a kid is good enough at 6 or 7 years old. What are they looking for at that age?

Always stunned me - I spoke to a chap who was a scout for a decent club a while back and he said he always looked out for little markers which show how a lad will grow. He said he looked out for the backs of players legs (behind the knees) as if that area was thick and "strong" looking then the general rule is they'll have a strong build. Looking for natural movement off the ball and how they get into space rather than chase the ball like a lot of kids do etc..

It still baffles me as over the years I have watched my nephew play on Sunday mornings and it's crazy how when he's up against the same kids he played against a couple of years ago that looked like wonderkids - they have just looked average at best later and look lost as other lads catch up to them.

TheFamilyCat wrote:It amazes me how they can make a judgement on whether a kid is good enough at 6 or 7 years old. What are they looking for at that age?

I watch my nephew who is 8 and I saw a lot of him when he was 5-6-7 in football games. You can tell with the players who were around him.

You can tell as there's often a significant difference between someone who is naturally gifted at aged 5, vs somebody who just isn't. But I think that's more to do with attacking players. A player who is young can want to be a striker, like so many youngsters want to be, yet when they get older, turn out to be better defenders and then grow into superb defenders when they get into their teens.

Programme said that some are looking at kids as young as 3 years old.

CFS wrote:Programme said that some are looking at kids as young as 3 years old.

Give it 3 years and there will be scouts stood in the delivery room offering £££ to sign them up.

CFS wrote:Programme said that some are looking at kids as young as 3 years old.

This is true. My grandson is being monitored by city. He's three and a half. They've told him that they'll have him in their academy when he's five.
He attends weekly coaching sessions run by city coaches.
I've done quite a bit of coaching and I think it's easier to spot a child with potential when they're younger. They tend to stand out, mainly due to body shape as they address the ball.
That said, I think three years old is too young and I think city are just aggressively minesweeping kids into their system.

ewarwoowar wrote:This is true. My grandson is being monitored by city. He's three and a half. They've told him that they'll have him in their academy when he's five.
He attends weekly coaching sessions run by city coaches.
I've done quite a bit of coaching and I think it's easier to spot a child with potential when they're younger. They tend to stand out, mainly due to body shape as they address the ball.
That said, I think three years old is too young and I think city are just aggressively minesweeping kids into their system.

Don't mean to be rude or disrespectful but potential in a 3 year old can be spotted? Sorry but I don't buy that nonsense how an earth could you tell a kid can make it from that age and for all you know in 15 years time the game could have evolved or changed in a way where them 3 year olds are deemed not good enough.

CFS wrote:Don't mean to be rude or disrespectful but potential in a 3 year old can be spotted? Sorry but I don't buy that nonsense how an earth could you tell a kid can make it from that age and for all you know in 15 years time the game could have evolved or changed in a way where them 3 year olds are deemed not good enough.

Not rude, but you're not buying that nonsense! ok.
Potential is one thing. Making it, as you say, is completely another.

CFS wrote:Don't mean to be rude or disrespectful but potential in a 3 year old can be spotted? Sorry but I don't buy that nonsense how an earth could you tell a kid can make it from that age and for all you know in 15 years time the game could have evolved or changed in a way where them 3 year olds are deemed not good enough.

But you're changing variables and constants there.

Can the potential of a 3 year old be seen? No, not for sure.
Can the possible potential of a 3 year old be seen, over other 3 years olds? Yes. Because there's something they can compare with.

And that's what they go off. They compare 3 year olds and go for the attributes that professional footballers had at 3 years old, or what attributes players had to make a certain level.

When I was younger and played, the parents were far worse than the coaches. Shouting, screaming at other kids to pass the ball to their child. Screaming at me to "track back". **** that I thought, I'm Luis Figo.

As for Academys signing 6 year olds. How do they know what football will be like when their 20? You've coached 10/15 6 year old David Silvas for 15 years when football could have changed to playing 10 Kevin Balls

Dyched wrote:As for Academys signing 6 year olds. How do they know what football will be like when their 20? You've coached 10/15 6 year old David Silvas for 15 years when football could have changed to playing 10 Kevin Balls

You're missing the point. It's not about seeing into the future. It's about comparing with the present.

They compare the youngsters against the stats they have now. It makes sense to compare against the present vs compare against nothing.

... What about all the kids talented at everything else?

Motzart had pushy parents and wrote his first compositions at 5.

Nothing new to see here except 21st century commercial expansion.

ewarwoowar wrote:Not rude, but you're not buying that nonsense! ok.
Potential is one thing. Making it, as you say, is completely another.

Guess we will be seeing your grandson playing for city in the premier league in 15 years? Along with the 100's of kids who go there with him?.

FactualFrank wrote:But you're changing variables and constants there.

Can the potential of a 3 year old be seen? No, not for sure.
Can the possible potential of a 3 year old be seen, over other 3 years olds? Yes. Because there's something they can compare with.

And that's what they go off. They compare 3 year olds and go for the attributes that professional footballers had at 3 years old, or what attributes players had to make a certain level.

Haha boll ocks. 3 year olds being identified to be footballers when they grow up. Make sense.

Dyched wrote:When I was younger and played, the parents were far worse than the coaches. Shouting, screaming at other kids to pass the ball to their child. Screaming at me to "track back". **** that I thought, I'm Luis Figo.

As for Academys signing 6 year olds. How do they know what football will be like when their 20? You've coached 10/15 6 year old David Silvas for 15 years when football could have changed to playing 10 Kevin Balls

English football doesn't want David Silvas though, they've always wanted the biggest & strongest kids

Croydon Claret wrote:I know of kids as young as 4 that have been signed up by Man City

Is that allowed?

That is incorrect can't sign for a club till u9 age group and only for 12 month periods up to age 12

I have been coaching an u8 team for the last 6mths

We a new team of players and it’s even great seeing them develop and being part of it

Obviously I have 6 strikers in a squad of 7 and it can be frustrating when they all bomb forward together, but I also do have a couple who I can see will be great at defending when the time is right

The main thing I do though is make sure the kids have fun. All they want to do at that age is play football.

Both my kids play, one at U9, the other at U11.

The coaches they have are sound as a pound, and just enjoy the fact that the kids are playing.

However, I've also seen other coaches of other teams do stuff that makes you wonder what makes them tick.

ClaretTony wrote:Is that allowed?

Don't know. It's my dad's partners grand child. Apparently there's also some clause that he won't be allowed to sign for anybody else when he's old enough.

As mentioned previously it's a massive hoovering up exercise, the legitimacy of which is questionable

I've been involved in coaching for about 15 years. I took my team from under 4 through to under 15's. We, at our club, do try and push the "enjoyment is everything" card which we just feel is the key to young kids in football.

As mentioned above, it's usually the parents who are the difficult ones. Just at last nights club meeting we had our U9 coach saying two parents may take their "star" kids to another club as the weaker players in that team are getting equal game time. I'm pretty sure the two kids are just happy playing with their mates and maybe love being there. These pushy parents could spoil their kids enjoyment by trying to take them to a more competitive side. Over the years I lost a couple of good players around about the 13/14 year old age as I still rotated players evenly and the parents thought their kid deserved more time in games as they were one of the stronger ones. I tried to talk them round but they left. I always thought we can't keep everyone happy so it was better to lose a couple rather than reduce playing time for weaker players and cause 4 or 5 to stop playing.

As for the academies, my lad was scouted at 13 and trained with City for about 6 months. It wasn't the full academy but the coaching was excellent and I told my lad it was a great opportunity to be training with good quality kids and he played at the amazing facilities that City use. I never expected or let my lad think he was going to signed by them. Blackburn then offered him a trial so he spent 8 months at their academy but then they released him, the same then happened at Bury. Being released by Bury was tough as he was then 15 and was looking more at the possibility of gaining a scholarship. All through this I always kept him grounded, saying it was just fantastic experience and he was training and playing 3 or 4 times a week and I could see him improving as a player. Fortunately, AFC Fylde have now offered him a scholarship and he's absolutely loving it. Being a non league club, I think, takes the "big time charlie" kind of feel from the players there. It's a great set up though and the facilities are extremely good. It's only now that I really think my son has an outside chance of playing at a reasonable level (I'm not even saying FL level) but at least at semi pro. We'll see what happens.

I have a son who's now 16 and played grassroots, school, district and finally academy football. I've read the book that led to the program and whilst the concerns he raises are valid as parents we need to take some level of responsibility. All a club offers is the opportunity and there are no guarantees. When he joined the academy he was told that very clearly although at 15 both of us were under no illusions. As a parent it's my job to keep his feet on the ground / encourage him when necessary. It is brutal especially at this time of year when initial decisions have been made about scholarships. There are lads in my son's team that had been with the club since 9 but were told that they weren't being kept on. I'd say the experience / coaching and life lessons are excellent and they do grow up very quickly in that environment. It's not easy for parent or child, round trips of 200 miles for a match, training three times a week etc but if you go in with your eyes open it's worth it. Remember it's about the happiness of your son, once the fun stops, stop.

Sidney1st wrote:English football doesn't want David Silvas though, they've always wanted the biggest & strongest kids

I don’t know about Our club now, but when I was helping small gifted kids were always welcome and if good enough were offered contracts.
I spotted on lad who lived in Kendal, he was really small. He was offered a contract but decided to take one with Carlisle.

Also one of the Everton scouts used to pass me names of kids he had spotted who he was not allowed to take to Everton as they were not big enough. Under Moyes, anyone not going to be 6 ft plus was not signed by them

Holdo wrote:I have a son who's now 16 and played grassroots, school, district and finally academy football. I've read the book that led to the program and whilst the concerns he raises are valid as parents we need to take some level of responsibility. All a club offers is the opportunity and there are no guarantees. When he joined the academy he was told that very clearly although at 15 both of us were under no illusions. As a parent it's my job to keep his feet on the ground / encourage him when necessary. It is brutal especially at this time of year when initial decisions have been made about scholarships. There are lads in my son's team that had been with the club since 9 but were told that they weren't being kept on. I'd say the experience / coaching and life lessons are excellent and they do grow up very quickly in that environment. It's not easy for parent or child, round trips of 200 miles for a match, training three times a week etc but if you go in with your eyes open it's worth it. Remember it's about the happiness of your son, once the fun stops, stop.

Couldn't agree more with all that Holdo and good luck to your son! I always told my son if it got too much or he lost that "drive" then walk away and go back to grass roots. Happiness is key

Its ******* ********. And the parents who constantly tell you that their lad is at utd - you know full well theyre the ones who wont make it. Wrong attitude.

The worse of it is though how kids of that age are on diets and not allowed to play with their mates for school.

My school were ****. But i absolutely loved playing for them. Kids these days arent allowed.

Give me a room full of 100 3 year olds and I bet I can pick 50% who have the possible potential of playing in the Premier league

Not hard that though, the 50% that look like beach balls will be easy to spot

Or the 50% that are male

Lowbankclaret wrote:I don’t know about Our club now, but when I was helping small gifted kids were always welcome and if good enough were offered contracts.
I spotted on lad who lived in Kendal, he was really small. He was offered a contract but decided to take one with Carlisle.

Also one of the Everton scouts used to pass me names of kids he had spotted who he was not allowed to take to Everton as they were not big enough. Under Moyes, anyone not going to be 6 ft plus was not signed by them

I went to Accy Stanley a few years ago to watch Everton Vs Burnley youth teams when the likes of Jack Rodwell were playing for them. Burnley had a small but good footballing side but we're overpowered by the Everton side who towered over them.
We all want to see footballers but Everton have produced more players from their academy than any other premier league club in recent times.