• 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...

    Get involved!

Transfers January Transfer Thread 2024

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Tomo said:
Our academy hasn't been that great really, Kane obviously the exception but otherwise Skipp and KWP, KWP wasn't even that good when he played with us. Chelsea by contrast have had bucket loads of talent come out of their academy that they mostly wasted.

Thankfully that seems to be changing, we are top of the table in both 18/21 leagues and have Moore, Hall, Dorrington, Donley, Devine, Vuskovic, Philips and a few others in the below 20 age group. Never seen us with such a big crop before.

Premier League Table, Form Guide & Season Archives

www.premierleague.com www.premierleague.com

Premier League Table, Form Guide & Season Archives

www.premierleague.com www.premierleague.com
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
And I’d even argue Kane was an anomaly. He had more loans during his time at Spurs than many have had hot dinners.
It could almost be argued he came through in spite of Spurs’ academy, not because of it.

Our current crop do seem very exciting though, but as always with young players, one must keep expectations in check.
 
TomHotspur said:
But there’s also plenty of examples where it wasn’t the case?

For instance, who was the best young player to come through under Poch? Probably Winks, right? He didn’t go on loan once.
Then you look at someone like Josh Onomah, arguably the most highly rated young player we had in the early Poch years, he went out on loan at what, 18/19 years old? Yet look at his career trajectory.

The point is, particularly in this instance, I’d put my faith in the manager being a better judge than arm chair fans going “yeh Edward’s would’ve been the next Messi if it wasn’t for Poch m8.”

If Pochettino believed a young player was good enough to contribute to the first team, he kept them. If not, they were loaned out.
I don’t think there’s much more to it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Of course there are but they're called exceptions, you keep arguing in exceptions to try and prove a point but there's generally a reason why the vast majority of players who go out on loan actually improve, why do you think that is?

The best young player to come through the academy was Kane who went out on loan numerous times - that's the best example I can give you...now before you say anything I don't expect everyone to turn out like Kane but had he not gone out on loan the simple fact is he wouldn't be anywhere near the same player he is now.

Your Edwards point is both stupid and ironic considering Poch actually called him the next Messi. 🤦‍♂️

There's much more to it then you want to let on, look at how he treated KWP for example.
 
TottsAmazeballs said:
I understand what you're saying, particularly about changing minds, but to answer your question; the point is to have a discussion about it, to answer the raised question, to foster debate and conversation, rather than the nuclear war of a 'shots fired/mutually assured destruction' thread-derailer.

I wasn't blown away by his highlight reel, either, but there were glimmers of 'ooh, maybe?', so I could see some reason to ask questions about what others were seeing. SpursEst did that, and probably not as accusationally(?) as you might have thought. i.e. I think it was a genuine 'what am I missing'? rather than as 'what are you guys on'? FWIW, he did 'pull his punches', btw, 'no *real* speed' etc.

But, it's Monday morning and we're 5 days away from a fix, so I won't die on this hill!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Thats not really a way to discuss though is it?

"Oh, I've watched his highlight reel, he's not quick, can't dribble well, Belgian Leagues shit.... But erm... Can someone change my mind plz"

We'd be going round in circles if I combated his nonsencial post with the opposite.

My best advice. Go and watch a Brugge game that involves him and focus solely on him. Watch his appreciation and awareness of his team mates, watch his ability on the ball, his movement.

You can call the league a poor standard (I did just that when talking about Gift Orban) but when a footballer has it. He has it. He does things with the ball you can't train players to have. A natural.
 
Why are people so desperate to get rid of Emerson now when we could potentially sell him in the Summer and have more options and more time to replace him? We literally have 9 days to find a replacement mid season for him and we're talking about a player who can cover the entire backline, it's pointless.
 
Shadydan said:
That's the actual point though, had they gone on loan there is a better chance that they would have improved and level'd up.

There's literal thousands of examples of this being the case.

If he did that then no-one would be sitting here complaining now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not a whinge at you. But one thing I find extraordinary.

Out of every say 100 lads who want to become a PL footballer at a young age its probably less than one who will make it.

However in order to have a full squad (under uefa rules) of 25 players we need to have a minimum of 4 Club Trained players and a minimum of 8 locally trained players (including the 4 club trained players) - and with the cost of HG players getting more than a minimum 4 club trained players so we donlt need to pay a high price for an HG player has an obvious attraction.

So the task of the club and manager is to find the best way to train Club trained players - and the target is probably one a year so not a high target. And from time to time we'll move on club trained players who do not develop as much as we'd like - and indeed once in a generation we'll find another Harry Kane.

What I fail to understand is posters who say 'its too difficult' , 'it will disturb our squad by bringing through youngsters' (ignoring of course most youngsters need to go on loans to get experience so do not impinge that much on the PL team) etc

Its part of the laws of the game that we need a minimum of 4 club trained players, just as the offside law is something people don't like or red cards. So the challenge is how to achieve the objective of getting club trained players ...... not to constantly whinge how difficult it is.

And BTW every PL team has a similar challenge.

Spurs have the advantage of having a decent academy producing some exciting prospects, despite a period of not producing under Poch which knocked us back. Fortunately we are now back and reckoned to have a good number of talents coming through - only a few will make it (just like anywhere else) but without them we FAIL to have a big enough squad to compete, and that's why its important to train the kids.


.
 
Shadydan said:
Of course there are but they're called exceptions, you keep arguing in exceptions to try and prove a point but there's generally a reason why the vast majority of players who go out on loan actually improve, why do you think that is?

The best young player to come through the academy was Kane who went out on loan numerous times - that's the best example I can give you...now before you say anything I don't expect everyone to turn out like Kane but had he not gone out on loan the simple fact is he wouldn't be anywhere near the same player he is now.

Your Edwards point is both stupid and ironic considering Poch actually called him the next Messi. 🤦‍♂️

There's much more to it then you want to let on, look at how he treated KWP for example.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But it’s not just exceptions.

If you look at all the top clubs now that have academy players in their team doing well, how many of them went out on loan?

Sake? Never went on loan.
Rashford? Never went on loan.
Foden? Never went on loan.
Trent? Never went on loan.

Do you see City loaning out any of their young players that Pep thinks can contribute to the first team, like Rico Lewis or Bobb? You do in your eye.

If a manager thinks a young player is good enough to contribute to the first team, they’ll be kept. If not, they’ll be loaned. (As Poch did with many players!)
 
TomHotspur said:
But there’s also plenty of examples where it wasn’t the case?

For instance, who was the best young player to come through under Poch? Probably Winks, right? He didn’t go on loan once.
Then you look at someone like Josh Onomah, arguably the most highly rated young player we had in the early Poch years, he went out on loan at what, 18/19 years old? Yet look at his career trajectory.

The point is, particularly in this instance, I’d put my faith in the manager being a better judge than arm chair fans going “yeh Edward’s would’ve been the next Messi if it wasn’t for Poch m8.”

If Pochettino believed a young player was good enough to contribute to the first team, he kept them. If not, they were loaned out.
I don’t think there’s much more to it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Very simply, Harry Redknapp, AVB and Sherwood left Poch a number of youngsters with enough PL starts to be options in the squad.

Poch sold them all

Poch's successors Mourhina and now Ange have almost zero youngsters with PL starts because Poch FAILED to develop any (except maybe KWP and Winks).

That is a undeniable.
 
Richard Arlison said:
Emerson is a player that can deputize at RB, LB and CB without really hurting us.

Look at Liverpool's prem winning squad and even the one they have now, if you don't have City money, you need utility players.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If we ever see Emerson at CB again, something has gone terribly terribly wrong.

Emerson is now backup RB, 3rd choice LB and 5th choice CB. You bite off anyone’s hand who offered you £20 mill for that player. Especially if he’s not HG.

We didn’t have City money when we had Walker/ Trippier & Rose/Davies.

Liverpool is a good shout. James Milner was a great utility man for them. They picked him up on a free.
 
TomHotspur said:
But it’s not just exceptions.

If you look at all the top clubs now that have academy players in their team doing well, how many of them went out on loan?

Sake? Never went on loan.
Rashford? Never went on loan.
Foden? Never went on loan.
Trent? Never went on loan.

Do you see City loaning out any of their young players that Pep thinks can contribute to the first team, like Rico Lewis or Bobb? You do in your eye.

If a manager thinks a young player is good enough to contribute to the first team, they’ll be kept. If not, they’ll be loaned. (As Poch did with many players!)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And that is the issue, Poch said numerous times he hated loans.

Therefore did not send youngsters out on loan and did not platy them regularly in first team

That is a definition of FAILING to develop youngsters.

Its really not difficult to understand.
 
Macch said:
If we ever see Emerson at CB again, something has gone terribly terribly wrong.

Emerson is now backup RB, 3rd choice LB and 5th choice CB. You bite off anyone’s hand who offered you £20 mill for that player. Especially if he’s not HG.

We didn’t have City money when we had Walker/ Trippier & Rose/Davies.

Liverpool is a good shout. James Milner was a great utility man for them. They picked him up on a free.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Things go terribly wrong quite often.
 
LeParisien said:
Starks Starks had a strong window so far - one of the forums most reliable posters… but he’s just gone in two-footed on the Estonian winger TheSpurEst . Completely uncalled for and he’s lucky not to be carded. Hope he can sort himself out for the rest of the window.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Seen nothing at all wrong in his posts tbh.
 
TomHotspur said:
But it’s not just exceptions.

If you look at all the top clubs now that have academy players in their team doing well, how many of them went out on loan?

Sake? Never went on loan.
Rashford? Never went on loan.
Foden? Never went on loan.
Trent? Never went on loan.

Do you see City loaning out any of their young players that Pep thinks can contribute to the first team, like Rico Lewis or Bobb? You do in your eye.

If a manager thinks a young player is good enough to contribute to the first team, they’ll be kept. If not, they’ll be loaned. (As Poch did with many players!)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You're just proving my point - you've just named me 4 top players playing for their clubs who have gone onto have the perfect career trajectory, they are exceptions because you'll rarely get scenarios where this happens. There are literally thousands of young players who go out to other clubs up and down the country, whether they go to lower divisions or abroad who improve as players.

It's never been suggested that the likes of Onomah, KWP will be first team players like Saka or Foden were, the point is that those players would have likely improved to a level where they were good enough to be in contention for a first team spot and if not then the club would move them on for good money. What happened with Onomah is that we got pittance for him and KWP we ended up losing money on him as we swapped him for Hojbjerg with Southampton.

Again the point about City, Lewis/Bobb/Foden are exceptional players, your standard academy player doesn't have that level of ability or talent, nor does the vast majority of clubs have an academy like City, pointless examples.

Your last line has confused me by the way, if Poch thought they were good enough for the first team then why didn't he play them more often?
 
Spursidol said:
And that is the issue, Poch said numerous times he hated loans.

Therefore did not send youngsters out on loan and did not platy them regularly in first team

That is a definition of FAILING to develop youngsters.

Its really not difficult to understand.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Right, course mate.

So Josh Onomah making 19 first team appearances at age 17 in 15/16 season wasnt giving him a chance?
Or Harry Winks becoming a first team regular in 16/17?

If you were good enough, you got your chance. If not, you were loaned out.
 
Macch said:
Of course there are. Because those 6 players probably have no value.

Ask yourself, is Emerson really a player you feel comfortable deputizing for Porro if we’re making a title run and playing in the Champ league ?

Useful player. Great person. But he’s not at the level we need. To break even on him would be fantastic business.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah I'd be okay with him deputising for whomever. Lose a first team player and you are diminished that's going to happen full stop. But commitment and bravery count for a great deal. Its why Djed Spence is in Italy and we have turned down a serious bid for Emerson. No team bar city have eleven backups as good as starters. I think people desperate to see Emerson gone will be disappointed you can hear Anges respect when he talks about him. I'm starting to fully understand Ange's philosophy, he values squad coherence and character over pure technical ability its why I've stopped whining about selling Hojbjerg. #BACKANGE
 
Richard Arlison said:
Emerson is a player that can deputize at RB, LB and CB without really hurting us.

Look at Liverpool's prem winning squad and even the one they have now, if you don't have City money, you need utility players.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Even when you're Fergie's Utd at their peak you still need them......

Park, O'Shea, Brown, Evans.

Too much bollocks about "yeh, but he's not as good as Porro on the ball"...... Yet another sign that people don't really understand the concept of depth/cover/pecking orders etc. and just throw words about until it's time for them to actually mean something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top