-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
- Status
Hi Windy. Question for you mucker.
Do you believe that every academy player has a price on his head, and if that price is met we would sell, regardless of how highly rated that kid is ?
WindyCOYS
The Fighting Cock
Hmm, tricky one that. Longo potentially points to: "yes". £400k plus 50% sell-on felt cheap to me at the time, but that was obviously more than they felt he was worth.
Would we sell Onomah if we got a £5m bid? Probably not. £10m? Possibly. £15m? Certainly.
Sorry not Spurs but thought I'd post here as thought it has some relevance to the above posts and what strategy we might be employing.
Chelsea's loan system and strategy:- http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2014/9/9/6123149/chelsea-loan-army-cost-ffp
Chelsea's loan system and strategy:- http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2014/9/9/6123149/chelsea-loan-army-cost-ffp
Interesting
Guido 🇺🇦
. Not really much to do with youth/acadamy activity though as most of those players have been stolen away from the club that actually developed them... That looks more like a very cynical version of Moneyball to me.
I would actually say that Chelsea's acadamy is horrific, probably because they are more focused on this model. De Bruyne, Marin, Kakuta, van Ginkel, Moses, Atsu etc. etc. all purchased pretty much developed from an acadamy point of view and just need experience.
I know every club does it, ourselves included, but Chelsea take he piss imo. Loaning your own nurtured acadamy players is different to taking smaller clubs star products at discount and farming out till something pops.
Still, it only makes what we're doing look all the more impressive. Build a legacy instead of stealing someone else's.
COYS
Guido 🇺🇦
. Not really much to do with youth/acadamy activity though as most of those players have been stolen away from the club that actually developed them... That looks more like a very cynical version of Moneyball to me. I would actually say that Chelsea's acadamy is horrific, probably because they are more focused on this model. De Bruyne, Marin, Kakuta, van Ginkel, Moses, Atsu etc. etc. all purchased pretty much developed from an acadamy point of view and just need experience.
I know every club does it, ourselves included, but Chelsea take he piss imo. Loaning your own nurtured acadamy players is different to taking smaller clubs star products at discount and farming out till something pops.
Still, it only makes what we're doing look all the more impressive. Build a legacy instead of stealing someone else's.
COYS
Interesting
I would actually say that Chelsea's acadamy is horrific, probably because they are more focused on this model. De Bruyne, Marin, Kakuta, van Ginkel, Moses, Atsu etc. etc. all purchased pretty much developed from an acadamy point of view and just need experience.
I know every club does it, ourselves included, but Chelsea take he piss imo. Loaning your own nurtured acadamy players is different to taking smaller clubs star products at discount and farming out till something pops.
Still, it only makes what we're doing look all the more impressive. Build a legacy instead of stealing someone else's.
COYS
Agreed who is the last player Chelsea has actually developed into a Premiership footballer? Bertrand sort of? McEachran was touted as the saviour of English football and he can't even get games in the Championship
**Edit nevermind they didn't develop Bertrand either poached him off Gillingham
Not disagreeing with you, but having seen their U18's and U21's almost as much as ours over the last couple of years I'd say their development squad is just as strong as ours. It's too early to call weather they will break into first team, be loaned out or simply sold but the next 3 or 4 years the strategy should be clear for both clubs. My guess is we would go with the main intention of trying to develop players that end up in the first team (primary focus), whilst Chelsea will go the route of developing players to be sold and/or loaned out with loan fees whilst they buy the top players in the world for the first team (I expect Man City to also do this with their new training centre, they are already buying up youth players).Interesting
I would actually say that Chelsea's acadamy is horrific, probably because they are more focused on this model. De Bruyne, Marin, Kakuta, van Ginkel, Moses, Atsu etc. etc. all purchased pretty much developed from an acadamy point of view and just need experience.
I know every club does it, ourselves included, but Chelsea take he piss imo. Loaning your own nurtured acadamy players is different to taking smaller clubs star products at discount and farming out till something pops.
Still, it only makes what we're doing look all the more impressive. Build a legacy instead of stealing someone else's.
COYS
I think the article is good, this is what's happening at Chelsea, and in a similar way, at Spurs. This approach is nothing new though, Spurs have been doing this since at least Frank Arnesen and I expect Chelsea began doing this once they bought Arnesen off us years ago. Before that I think we had moved some way toward these strategies but not on the scale it is now. Although it is very effective, it is also really obvious in my opinion.
This system at Spurs and Chelsea is slightly different as probably more players from the development team will become good enough to play for Spurs, whereas at Chelsea they have to be good enough to compete with the toys that get bought in. Spurs also have toys, just not quite as expensive ones.
Obviously, the chances of making these programmes successful are influenced by other factors too:
- Who the team is. Chelsea will attract better players than Spurs, in theory as they have won more recently and have more money.
- The track record. Arguably Spurs have a leg up here over Chelsea, but it's become closer in recent year.
- The coaches. Kane and co definately benefited from the coaching of Clive Allen for instance, and Tim Sherwood and co. Before that? Not sure how effective it was...somewhat, but not as good I think. Now? I think with Poch and his team it ought to be even better than before because he is very youth focused.
- Facilities. Honestly, I don't really know much about Chelsea's facilities, so I can't comment. But it is well-known that Spurs have fantastic facilities and that investment is wise as it pays off a hundred fold.
- Talent scouts. Playing the numbers game is definately part of these strategies, but picking the right players makes a huge difference. If you look at the attributes of Spurs development players coming through at the moment, something they all have is great technical ability. This is partly down to the right training and practice, but I think it is also down to spotting the right talented kids in the first place.
- Loan clubs. Almost forgot this one. Your kid signs for Spurs or Chelsea but you know they are going to get loaned out. What quality of club? I think both Spurs and Chelsea have good relationships with 'lesser' clubs and that helps.
He had to retire unfortunately
Just to add we wont sell to our rivals judging by the Kudos bid from Chelsea who got released a short time afterwards
The chelsea loan system was them basically copying us tbh, we brought in alot of youth players to make a profit and develop away on loan but they just took that idea and did it on a bigger scale
Poor lad.
We don't have the money Chelsea do to play their game, and we also don't have a Chelsea B to ship them to (Vitesse). I get why they do it, as it is an effective was around FFP, but I agree completely that I prefer our approach. It seems to be about to bear fruit too, with the players we have who are ready to step up.Interesting
I would actually say that Chelsea's acadamy is horrific, probably because they are more focused on this model. De Bruyne, Marin, Kakuta, van Ginkel, Moses, Atsu etc. etc. all purchased pretty much developed from an acadamy point of view and just need experience.
I know every club does it, ourselves included, but Chelsea take he piss imo. Loaning your own nurtured acadamy players is different to taking smaller clubs star products at discount and farming out till something pops.
Still, it only makes what we're doing look all the more impressive. Build a legacy instead of stealing someone else's.
COYS
It just doesn't make financial or footballing sense to sell prospective talents off for peanuts, when there is the chance they will develop further, not only do we seem to want to integrate them into first team football, saving us a fortune while we try to build a new stadium, but home grown qualified footballers are a very valuable commodity as well under new FFP rules aren't they.
Look at the price we got for Livermore. I think Luongo was a long way behind a lot of experienced CM's and others were coming through like Carroll, Bentaleb, Veljkovic etc.
It was odd that we sold him for 400k a month after agreeing a year loan though.
WindyCOYS
The Fighting Cock
Livermore just made the Luongo deal even more odd, because Mass was and is more talented than Jake IMO. But there was the English premium, I guess.
But yeah, we should certainly have held on to Luongo far longer.
Maybe he was the victim of the Ferdinand/Sherwood doctrine that there is no place for limited CM's and they viewed him as reasonably one dimensional, i.e. a bit of a busy **** but not an expansive footballer.
Would be interested to hear your thoughts,
WindyCOYS
on who you thought looked better at the development squad stage. The generation of Townsend, Caulker, Carroll, Pritchard, Mason, Kane etc or the current crop of players such as Winks, Onomah, Oduwa, Carter-Vickers etc. Cheers! 
WindyCOYS
on who you thought looked better at the development squad stage. The generation of Townsend, Caulker, Carroll, Pritchard, Mason, Kane etc or the current crop of players such as Winks, Onomah, Oduwa, Carter-Vickers etc. Cheers! 
Honest question: Do we now have the best academy in Europe?
Another honest question: Did Bale's father have a second family on the side?
Too early to say that, but give it 5/10 years and I think we'll be considered to be up there.
- Status