Why have we not been more successful in bringing through our academy - for us?

[Toronto Villa]

3-4 sounds high, maybe 1-2 breaking into our first team. But you would think if players are worthy of future consideration for our first team at minimum they should be on loan with more of an insistence they play wherever they go. Certainly I’d love to see us giving players a chance in our first team if they are good enough or if we have an injury crisis. Recently I didn’t get why Revan was overlooked and instead Smith played 3 RB’s. It was just daft.

[SoccerHQ]

I read it as SHQ saying we should have 3-4 new young players breaking into the squad each season, not including the likes of Jack in with them.

Think I got carried away with the every season bit, 3-4 year cycles are more realistic. 2004-06 crop of Ridgewell, Cahil, Gabby and Davis and then 2009-10 of Fonz, Bannan, Albrighton and Hogg would be examples of this.

[tomd2103]

Main reason is they haven't been good enough to play for us. Most of that article is just waffle and some is just plain incorrect. I do think we should be sending some of them out on loan earlier than we do, but who have we let go that would have made us better if they'd stayed at the time? Cahill and Albrighton is pretty much it. Nearly all the others we sold to the lower leagues where they've invariably stayed, players like Johnson only seem appealing now because we're down at their level but we weren't when we sold them. There's a reason Johnson (using him again as an example) has played so many second division games, it's because he's a second division player.

Agree with that PWS.  The article refers back to O'Neill's tenure when we were comfortably a top six side.  Cahill aside, I don't think we have produced many players in the last decade who could have played at that level.

The one bit in the article I do agree with, however, is the need to handle the players in such a way that they can be sold on for decent fees if they are not considered good enough. 

[brontebilly]

Main reason is they haven't been good enough to play for us. Most of that article is just waffle and some is just plain incorrect. I do think we should be sending some of them out on loan earlier than we do, but who have we let go that would have made us better if they'd stayed at the time? Cahill and Albrighton is pretty much it. Nearly all the others we sold to the lower leagues where they've invariably stayed, players like Johnson only seem appealing now because we're down at their level but we weren't when we sold them. There's a reason Johnson (using him again as an example) has played so many second division games, it's because he's a second division player.

Agree with that PWS.  The article refers back to O'Neill's tenure when we were comfortably a top six side.  Cahill aside, I don't think we have produced many players in the last decade who could have played at that level.

The one bit in the article I do agree with, however, is the need to handle the players in such a way that they can be sold on for decent fees if they are not considered good enough.

Steven Davis wasn't rated by MON but was miles a better footballer than the likes of Steve Sidwell or even Craig Gardner. Said it all for MONs football philosophy not to give Davis much of a chance. Cahill if I recall got plenty of game time in MONs first dreary season. Knight gets compared a bit unfavourably to Cahill, Curtis Davies was who MON replaced Cahill with wasn't it?

I guess the key point is that academy players if developed correctly could at least be appropriate squad players rather than spending huge money on crap like Lansbury and Hogan. Then again sometimes players just have to leave to improve, can't imagine there were too many fans upset to get 5m or so for Ciaran Clark. Yet he was Newcastles best defender when they went up.

Ferguson did it well at United by giving the likes of Brown, Fletcher and O'Shea game time to keep them content as squad players in the main.

[Drummond]

Statistically more chance of being struck by a meteorite than breaking through and playing top flight football

Though if you got hit by a meteorite you wouldn't really be focused on making it.

[SaddVillan]

Question :

Do we just consistently recruit crap kids who are never going to be good enough?

Or despite getting our "fair share" of youth talent do we just fail to coach/manage/develop them into first teamers ?

Logic tells you it must be the latter.

[XXVilla]

Institutional bullying and harrassment perhaps?

[sirlordbaltimore]

What clubs do have a high success rate of bringing through academy kids into their first team ?

[JJ-AV]

The irony is that if we had Albrighton, Bannan, Hogg, Johnson and Robinson as our midfield 5 now behind Tammy we'd probably be top 2.

Should always put buy-backs in. although only 3 of them haven't moved since we let them go.

[Mister E]

The irony is that if we had Albrighton, Bannan, Hogg, Johnson and Robinson as our midfield 5 now behind Tammy we'd probably be top 2.

Should always put buy-backs in. although only 3 of them haven't moved since we let them go.

Robinson?
Callum is a striker, isn't he?

[JJ-AV]

Thought he play on the left of a front three

[sirlordbaltimore]

The irony is that if we had Albrighton, Bannan, Hogg, Johnson and Robinson as our midfield 5 now behind Tammy we'd probably be top 2.

Behave 

[TB]

What clubs do have a high success rate of bringing through academy kids into their first team ?

I cannot give you a list of the clubs that do have a high success rate. But IMO clubs that do:

a) are generally regarded as the best club in their region, thus being approached by/able to bring in the best local talents
b) are systematically coaching all age groups to the same system as the first team
c) have a first team manager/coach willing/able to send players to other clubs playing in a similar system, and daring to give them a chance in the match squad....

would have a good chance to bring through academy kids. Two of those points might suffice. I hope Villa qualifies on all three points in the future.

[adrenachrome]

For many years, Crewe were considered to be the most the successful and supplied many players to higher league clubs. After that I remember Middlesboro and Leeds being mentioned quite a lot, along with ourselves.

I remember SirAlex exclaiming "why do we need a youth team?" after we had beaten them in the semi final of the FAYC. This was around the time of the change in the number of substitutes allowed in the PL, and he was asking why can't we have eleven or more, the reserve league is a waste of time.

Interestingly, Brentford disbanded their academy setup in 2016 and made a decent case for so doing.
Club statement: Brentford Academy restructuring

[Lastfootstamper]

Didn't Newcastle bin theirs, around KK time?