Meltdown (youth "poaching")

[Neiler]

If minors were free to change club should they wish to & Rodwell had made that decision it's just be one of those things. But if the rules governing this aspect of football changed then I suspect the structure might change. Perhaps youngsters shouldn't be tied to clubs but local Football Associations.

But would that not again change the equity within the game- the CL clubs hoovering up all the talent at a marginal cost to what their future transfers could be.

A case in point being say Rooney went to Utd for free @ 16, we wouldnt have had 28 mill in our coffers despite the fact he was in our Academy at 8. Subsequently Utd have a 28 mill pound player on a free and 28 mill pound extra on their balance sheet. Thats just one example if it were introduced wholly it would take a lot of money out of the game and i imagine many clubs would go to the wall - its that vital in terms of their operating.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

But would that not again change the equity within the game- the CL clubs hoovering up all the talent at a marginal cost to what their future transfers could be.

A case in point being say Rooney went to Utd for free @ 16, we wouldnt have had 28 mill in our coffers despite the fact he was in our Academy at 8. Subsequently Utd have a 28 mill pound player on a free and 28 mill pound extra on their balance sheet. Thats just one example if it were introduced wholly it would take a lot of money out of the game and i imagine many clubs would go to the wall - its that vital in terms of their operating.

Well, as I mentioned, a change in the rules would probably lead to a change in the structure of the game at this level. Maybe the FA Academy idea might get revisited perhaps on a local level. I still have little sympathy for clubs for whom this is their route to survival - is their business to be a football club or a nursery club?

 

[AdamTheGreatOneB]

Well, as I mentioned, a change in the rules would probably lead to a change in the structure of the game at this level. Maybe the FA Academy idea might get revisited perhaps on a local level. I still have little sympathy for clubs for whom this is their route to survival - is their business to be a football club or a nursery club?

A lot of small clubs have no option but to develop young talent and sell them to survive. I have a huge amount of sympathy for them. The entire football league structure would collapse if you had your way.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

A lot of small clubs have no option but to develop young talent and sell them to survive. I have a huge amount of sympathy for them. The entire football league structure would collapse if you had your way.

Yeah. I think they said the same about scrapping the maximum wage too.

 

[AdamTheGreatOneB]

Yeah. I think they said the same about scrapping the maximum wage too.

Completely different issue. What you're suggesting is just not gonna happen. The clubs who spend years developing these young players deserve to be compensated for their efforts.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

Completely different issue. What you're suggesting is just not gonna happen. The clubs who spend years developing these young players deserve to be compensated for their efforts.

I was really just pointing out that people have over-estimated the potential impact of significant changes in football before & yet here we all still are. However, as with the maximum wage / retain & transfer, then the Bosman case later on - it's all to do with the terms & conditions of players contracts with their clubs - seems to be the same sort of ball-park to me.

You may well be right that changes to the current system won't be forthcoming, but if it did football would adapt to those changes. Clubs who no longer considered the development of young players to be viable would presumably not bother.

Time was clubs had a youth development programme / apprenticeship scheme in order to develop talent for their first team, if some clubs now depend on developing talent to survive financially it doesn't sound like a very good business model, even for football. If lower division clubs are becoming nursery clubs, perhaps there should be formal links between them & the major clubs either as specific feeder clubs or some kind of pool arrangement.

 

[AdamTheGreatOneB]

I was really just pointing out that people have over-estimated the potential impact of significant changes in football before & yet here we all still are. However, as with the maximum wage / retain & transfer, then the Bosman case later on - it's all to do with the terms & conditions of players contracts with their clubs - seems to be the same sort of ball-park to me.

You may well be right that changes to the current system won't be forthcoming, but if it did football would adapt to those changes. Clubs who no longer considered the development of young players to be viable would presumably not bother.

Time was clubs had a youth development programme / apprenticeship scheme in order to develop talent for their first team, if some clubs now depend on developing talent to survive financially it doesn't sound like a very good business model, even for football. If lower division clubs are becoming nursery clubs, perhaps there should be formal links between them & the major clubs either as specific feeder clubs or some kind of pool arrangement.

I don't think teams like Crewe, who are reknowned for their youth development, bring these players up just so they can be sold. They, as you say above, are looking to develop talent for their first team. I believe the majority of Crewe's team are homegrown through their own system. However when players like Rob Jones, Danny Murphy, Neil Lennon, Robbie Savage etc come through, they are naturally going to get offers from bigger clubs which they usually can't refuse. If bigger clubs stepped in and took them away at a young age, Crewe wouldn't survive.

 

[Blue Wiz]

I can understand that a club wants to get money when one of their youths go to another club. But if the player wants to leave he should be able to do that unless he's under contract, for a nominal fee of course.

Yes, very promising youths from smaller clubs will see their talents leave for bigger clubs, but they will also see youths from bigger teams swell their ranks since not all our youngsters go into our first team.

If one of our youths realises that he's not good enough for us and joins a smaller team do they pay us good money for his development?

 

[kenada_blue]

I can understand that a club wants to get money when one of their youths go to another club. But if the player wants to leave he should be able to do that unless he's under contract, for a nominal fee of course.

Yes, very promising youths from smaller clubs will see their talents leave for bigger clubs, but they will also see youths from bigger teams swell their ranks since not all our youngsters go into our first team.

If one of our youths realises that he's not good enough for us and joins a smaller team do they pay us good money for his development?

I agree.

And probably not for the last question.

 

[AdamTheGreatOneB]

I can understand that a club wants to get money when one of their youths go to another club. But if the player wants to leave he should be able to do that unless he's under contract, for a nominal fee of course.

Yes, very promising youths from smaller clubs will see their talents leave for bigger clubs, but they will also see youths from bigger teams swell their ranks since not all our youngsters go into our first team.

If one of our youths realises that he's not good enough for us and joins a smaller team do they pay us good money for his development?

The point is, they want compensation for players they've developed and that would have made a difference to their club. They want to be compensated for what they'd lose.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

I don't think teams like Crewe, who are reknowned for their youth development, bring these players up just so they can be sold. They, as you say above, are looking to develop talent for their first team. I believe the majority of Crewe's team are homegrown through their own system. However when players like Rob Jones, Danny Murphy, Neil Lennon, Robbie Savage etc come through, they are naturally going to get offers from bigger clubs which they usually can't refuse. If bigger clubs stepped in and took them away at a young age, Crewe wouldn't survive.

I think you're starting to contradict yourself a bit now : "looking to develop talent for their first team ... If bigger clubs stepped in and took them away at a young age, Crewe wouldn't survive."

Also, as others have pointed out, how many youngsters don't make the grade at top clubs & move down the leagues to have a decent career at the appropriate level & how well compensated are those clubs for the investment in their development?

If all we're saying is that this is a necessary mechanism to move money from the top clubs to the lower divisions, then I'm sure there are other ways of doing that if it's agreeable to do so. Let's face it, the top clubs could just increase the size of their respective acadamies so as to recruit more of the promising talent around & thereby make it even harder for lower division clubs to unearth the odd gem to polish & resell, so the current system could be made to work less well for the small clubs anyway.

 

[AdamTheGreatOneB]

I think you're starting to contradict yourself a bit now : "looking to develop talent for their first team ... If bigger clubs stepped in and took them away at a young age, Crewe wouldn't survive."

Also, as others have pointed out, how many youngsters don't make the grade at top clubs & move down the leagues to have a decent career at the appropriate level & how well compensated are those clubs for the investment in their development?

If all we're saying is that this is a necessary mechanism to move money from the top clubs to the lower divisions, then I'm sure there are other ways of doing that if it's agreeable to do so. Let's face it, the top clubs could just increase the size of their respective acadamies so as to recruit more of the promising talent around & thereby make it even harder for lower division clubs to unearth the odd gem to polish & resell, so the current system could be made to work less well for the small clubs anyway.

I'm not contradicting myself at all so don't try and devalue my arguement which is perfectly valid. Teams like Crewe look to bring through youngsters which they hope to push to their first team in the future. If the most promising talent they have constantly get taken away by bigger clubs without compensation, the club will not survive. Bigger clubs are only trying to get these promising players when they're really young to try and avoid paying a fee for them later on.

 

[AdamTheGreatOneB]

Also, as others have pointed out, how many youngsters don't make the grade at top clubs & move down the leagues to have a decent career at the appropriate level & how well compensated are those clubs for the investment in their development?

They would agree a transfer fee if the player was old enough or if not then usually the bigger clubs simply releases the player.

The difference is the small club values the player highly and doesn't want a big club to poach him as he could prove to be vital to the club. Whereas a player deemed not good enough already at a bigger club is obviously not a vital asset and the club would not ask to be compensated for their loss.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

I'm not contradicting myself at all so don't try and devalue my arguement which is perfectly valid. Teams like Crewe look to bring through youngsters which they hope to push to their first team in the future. If the most promising talent they have constantly get taken away by bigger clubs without compensation, the club will not survive. Bigger clubs are only trying to get these promising players when they're really young to try and avoid paying a fee for them later on.

Well, you said that they don't "bring these players up just so they can be sold" & then said that without those sales they wouldn't survive, which seems somewhat contradictory to me. So if that apparent contradiction devalues your argument, it's your contradiction - I've just highlighted it as I don't see how your argument can be valid if it's contradictory. Following your own argument, if those youngsters only developed as far as the first team & no offers came in for them then Crewe, to use your example, wouldn't survive. Therefore, they must be dependant on those sales. It seems to me the whole process is just a way for the more affluent clubs to subsidise the less well off & as such I doubt it will continue in the current form, particularly if prices are on the rise. If the top clubs wanted to be supportive of the lower divisons we would never have had the breakaway from the Football League to form the Premier League.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

They would agree a transfer fee if the player was old enough or if not then usually the bigger clubs simply releases the player.

The difference is the small club values the player highly and doesn't want a big club to poach him as he could prove to be vital to the club. Whereas a player deemed not good enough already at a bigger club is obviously not a vital asset and the club would not ask to be compensated for their loss.

I agree with all you've said there, however, when these players are released or sold for a nominal sum due to not making the grade at the top level they must obviously still be attractive to the lower division clubs that take them on. Often some of these players have a successful career in the lower leagues, but the club that invested in their development doesn't get much, if any compensation - presumably on the basis that they can afford it. So the system isn't really about compensating clubs for their investment, but profiteering on youngsters potential.