The competiiton at Acasdemy Level

[Chester Perry]

Hell of an article on the BBC as to just how fierce the competition at Academy Level and earlier is - just as we are seeking to get embroiled (necessarily I believe)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt ... r_cold_war" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Even with our new found riches this is going to be difficult and we will be picking up others rejects - Fans need to have their eyes open to the scale of the competition

[Sidney1st]

That was a really good read, cheers.

Sounds pretty brutal out there and shows what other clubs in the area are up against.

Trying to spot future players at 3 yrs old is ridiculous though.

[Chester Perry]

Incredibly brutal - City are paying for the private education of 100+ kids - even those they have decide to let go at 14 and 15 - how do you compete with that? even united have found they can't

leaves the rest of us picking up the scraps - though they still have to bring someone through to the 1st team - if they are not careful they will be complete copy of Chelsea - with their Academy becoming a loans business only

[Sidney1st]

Chelsea's will change with managers like Conte.

Jose didn't use it because either the players weren't good enough or he wasn't interested in using it.
On the basis of the players not being good enough, I can't think of any that would be a regular starter for Chelsea if they were still there.
Cork isn't as good as someone like Matic for example.

One of the things a club like us needs to do is pick up lads from places like City / Utd and play them in our first team, like we've done with Mee, Trippier and Keane.
Giving O'Neill those chances earlier in the season didn't do us any harm either.

This can then be used to help lure kids into joining our academy, although the wages on offer at places like City will be difficult to combat.

There should be a wage cap for young players though, because there's no way players like Bamford should be earning £30-40k a week right now.

[geopancake]

"Bamford on £30-40k a week", I've just spent last night in my car crying, whilst playing my violin, but still can't get my head round it. However throwing my violin at a barn door (and missing) has made me feel better.

[Indecisive]

Think I'm actually a bit scared by that article. A five year old chosen to play at city's academy and then 'released' 12 weeks later for not being good enough. WTF. A five year old!

I know they can't be 'signed' to an academy until later. For me though, they shouldn't be able to 'sign' anything until they are 16. The focus should be on enjoying the sport and letting them have a childhood outside that.

I like to think as a parent, I wouldn't knowingly put my child in a situation where they are likely to be chewed up and spat out.

[claretabroad]

Our Academy is more successful than City's? I suppose in terms of producing players who get at least one first team game but I wouldn't describe our academy as being particularly successful over the last 25 years.

[Walton]

There should be a wage cap for young players though, because there's no way players like Bamford should be earning £30-40k a week right now.

Bamford's 23 though, that's not young.

[Sidney1st]

Chalobah was rumoured to be on something similar when he was on loan with us 2 yrs ago and he was 19/20 then.

Several of the bigger clubs are known for paying what could be considered daft wages to their younger players.

In fairness to UTD Rashford was on less than £7k until he'd proven himself in the first team and then he got offered the payrise to approx £25k.

Whilst £7k can be deemed a lot, it's not stupidly large.

[Quickenthetempo]

Chalobah was on 37k a week when we signed him, not sure if we paid it all or not.

City have invited quite a few football clubs in the Burnley area for their coaching sessions, the parents love bragging about their kids training at City.

[lucs86]

Really good article.

There's something a bit tyrannical about it when they're talking about kids that age, but then in reality who could turn it down? The private education thing City are doing must be such a selling point too, we've absolutely no chance of competing on any sort of level with either of them.

What we are hopefully doing though is getting in a good position to catch the best of the many cast offs. Although we've not been good at bringing our own through for a while (hopefully O'Neill and Agyei are a sign of better youth development to come) we should be able to offer a more realistic route to a professional career for those of them who want to prove themselves and work for it.

[Hipper]

Thanks for the article. People like Dave Horrocks (manager of Fletcher Moss Rangers) are the real backbone of football.

'Burnley's academy more successful then City's at the moment'???

No mention of money paid to parents - does that still go on?

Watford had some educational arrangement for their boys although I don't know what age it started, so that is nothing new I don't think.

[bfccrazy]

Thanks for the article. People like Dave Horrocks (manager of Fletcher Moss Rangers) are the real backbone of football.

'Burnley's academy more successful then City's at the moment'???

No mention of money paid to parents - does that still go on?

Watford had some educational arrangement for their boys although I don't know what age it started, so that is nothing new I don't think.

If I remember rightly, Watford just built a little school and had all the age groups as seperate school years so they were learning academically, training and playing together all week.

City have offered a chance at a private education to every player at an eatablished school alongside their football education.

[lakesclaret]

Excellent article and it does indeed outline the sheer competiveness and brutality of the academy systems.
It's one of the reasons we have so many league teams in the UK , While we tend to lack world class we have a huge amount of depth at pro level players with " average ability" far far in excess of our European neighbours whose lower leagues are turd.

The big boys have " nursery" academies from 5 up and the likes of city and Utd go through 100's of lads by the time they get to under 10's.Even at the lower level the competion is huge .My lads currently moving clubs ( were relocating) and the fa transfer stuff is a nightmare with clubs having to actually pay a kind of compensation for the loss of player plus any " future value" tie ins .Hes by no means top level either.

Clubs like Oldham,Rochdale,Bury have cracking academy teams as they get the lads not quite good enough( or ready) for the big boys .

[Chester Perry]

Given the cost of running all this and the rise of club tv and televised youth matches how long before multi-million pound sponsorship of Acdemies

Man Utd led the move to separate sponsorship of training kit and training ground (currently something like £20m a season), City have the whole complex sponsored

club

Did you know that Utd have a sponsor of medical technology - they have their own scanners and x-ray machines and the like provided by a sponsor!!

as we see in the article it has become a numbers game - the running costs of these places are getting close to that of a mid table Championship team, with untested teenagers on significantly bigger wages than established Championship ones - no wonder the loan factory at Chelsea works like it does. And no wonder many struggle with the change if they don't make it at their big club

In many ways I remain hopeful that we can pick up the ones that fall by the wayside relatively early - they may be more hungry and prepared not to have the extravagance lavished on them to get that second chance - the experience should toughen them up a bit - well that is my hope!!??

[quoonbeatz]

i actually think the academy system is fairly detrimental to player development, especially at the younger ages.

i remember chris waddle saying that youngsters should be left to play football with their friends in local junior teams, school teams, in their spare time in the park as thats where they learn the game, play with bigger lads than themselves, naturally fall into positions and, most importantly, enjoy the game.

i very much agree with that. the vast majority who go to academies won't make it. academies have become the in-thing because of the success of la masia and whilst there's definitely a place for them and its good that they're improved so much, i think they've taken over too much.

money talks though doesn't it.

[J50]

City have invited quite a few football clubs in the Burnley area for their coaching sessions, the parents love bragging about their kids training at City.

That's called getting teams in so they can scout their best players and saves them bothering going to see them play for their usual team. Chelsea do the same, son's club was invited at U7 I seem to remember. The Manager of one of the other U7 teams got all excited about it and I told him not to be such a tw@t.

And yes parents still do get money. Chelsea have been known to nick a player from Fulham and take £XXk in a brown envelope to the parents' house.

[aggi]

Chelsea's will change with managers like Conte.

Jose didn't use it because either the players weren't good enough or he wasn't interested in using it.
On the basis of the players not being good enough, I can't think of any that would be a regular starter for Chelsea if they were still there.
Cork isn't as good as someone like Matic for example.

Chelsea don't necessarily use their academy as a place to bring through Chelsea quality players though (although it's obviously a bonus for them if they do).

They have a steady stream of players out on loan (for a loan fee) and then not being good enough for Chelsea but good enough to command a decent fee to head elsewhere, players like Bamford, Josh McEachran, George Saville, etc

[Chester Perry]

Chelsea's Academy has been run like a parallel business (with it's loan's fees and sales) rather than a route to the first team - Man City have to be careful not to fall into the same rut or it will kill them with the local boys

[Chester Perry]

Chelsea's will change with managers like Conte.

It is interesting that at Chelsea that it is only the experienced Italians - Ancelotti and Conte - that have included Acasemy prospects in the squads even with the pressure to succeed.

The other thing with Academies is how long it can take to see the pull through to 1st team having gone through a Strategic upheaval - here's an article arguing that it can take 10years - don't necessarily believe that (see Southampton) - but accept that depending on what you want to do and the status of competition in the 1st team it may take longer

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... rplan.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[J50]

Chelsea's Academy has been run like a parallel business (with it's loan's fees and sales) rather than a route to the first team - Man City have to be careful not to fall into the same rut or it will kill them with the local boys

Why will it 'kill them with the local boys' when it hasn't done that at Chelsea?

[Chester Perry]

According to the article City are filling the Academy with local boys - if none make it through to the team and Man utd keep their phenomenal record of 78 years of naming a former youth team member in the Match day squad - future scholars may see utd as a better option - don't believe Chelsea have the same high profile completion right on their doorstep (training ground is in Surrey not central London) or the same percentage of local boys could be wrong

[J50]

Yes I know where the training ground is, we live 10 minutes away! I'm not sure anyone around the age we are talking about would opt for an academy where there was a better chance of first team football, I don't think they really think about it that much - the parents might but unlikely, most just see the money and potential for bright lights and their own personal future. Chelsea takes in the best players around the area and beyond, the main rivals being Fulham; though there are many others vying for players in SW London, some not that local - from Watford to Palace to Brighton and Soton, they and others all have scouts in London and surrounds. Most boys around the U9-U14 age that are dumped by the Chelsea academy end up somewhere else like Palace or QPR, and often Chelsea play other academy teams a year up in order to make it even.