Spurs Youth 2018/19

  • 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!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Status
Not open for further replies.
You mention the ageing squad. There are a number of players who are on the wrong side of their peak years (ages as at next Summer window):

Dembele: 32; an obvious one who needs replacing, rumoured to be allowed to go to China on a free when contract up;

Toby: 30; where to start? Would have been a Utd player by now if Woodward hadn't refused the deal that all other parties had agreed;

Jan: 32;

(Sissoko: 30; Llorente: 34; not starters, squad players, but their real value will be decreasing)

2 years ago when Winks broke through it looked very different, possibly the youngest average age in the PL. Sanchez was bought for the future. Foyth too. Sanchez has started way more games than forecast due to Toby's injury last season. Best in a back 3 imo with experience of Jan and Toby alongside.

Leaving aside whether those players you've mentioned get the opportunity, do you think they have a reasonable chance of making it with Spurs? Which presumably is the question that Levy asks quite a bit, seeing as it could save the club a fortune at a time when we're spending one on the stadium. And the Academy was his baby too.

Kyle Walker-Peters is 21 and has started just two league games. For the sake of his own career he has to look for a loan in January and probably move on next summer. Leaving aside the debate of Trippier vs Aurier, one is an England international and the other cost £25m so the youngster is very much at the back of the queue. Poch isn't going to banish the England player but he also has to justify his costly signing.

Onomah - I had high hopes for him. I saw him and Winks in the academy and while I liked Winks from then, it was Onomah who caught my eye as I felt he had more in his repertoire. He played with swagger and belief that he never showed in his appearances for the first team. Admittingly there were mitigating circumstances - namely he played on the wing and mainly sub cameos. When we were flying in 2016/17 winning games at home by 2/3/4 goals with half an hour ago Poch integrated Winks but not Onomah which I think was a massive shame. I don't think he will make it with us now.

Edwards is still a teenager and maybe the penny will drop in Holland. In his case his attitude was questioned at Norwich and he lost his place in his England age group line-up. However too much hype came upon him - none more so from our own manager and he's an example at how dangerous social media attention on a youth footballer can be.

Carter-Vickers is in the same boat as Onomah really. The other two I didn't hold much expectation from. Amos did really well at Stevanage by all accounts and it's a shame about his injury but I never really got what his position was. He was moved about a bit and found a good fit in the Dele Alli role but he's very much a poor man's Dele Alli. As for Sterling, he was good coming through the ranks initially but I think he'll be left behind by younger players. He works very hard, plays off the shoulder of defenders, is a bustler but he just lacks a bit of spark that Griffiths was showing or Parrot has.
 
I don’t want Sherwood anywhere near our club ever again. He’s a talentless blagger who just talks utter bollocks. Even his youth “stance” was more about furthering his own career (and damaging someone else’s) more than actually developing kids. Otherwise why treat Bentaleb like he did, why do what he did at Villa. If he cared so much, why not be arsed to get his coaching badges and actually help develop them?

You know how I feel about Pochettinho and how unimpressed I am with facets of his management (and not just his integration of youth - but that in particular) but having someone like Sherwood is even worse. Just creates a stink and if anything makes the head coach less likely to integrate, as we saw with AVB.

A much better system for me is to have a proper DOF above the “head coach” who dictates a stronger recruitment/integration policy and when you have a player like Onomah, KWP, Edwards you don’t allow the club to spend 80m plus wages on flawed players like Sissoko, Aurier and Moura until you’ve properly road tested (and by that I don’t mean started every week, I just mean fair and reasonable game time) the very talented kids you already have.

To balance that off, and be fair to that head coach, you then also have to be realistic about the criteria of his employment, and as long as his general ethos is still being adhered to and the brand of football still “good” (whatever that may mean) then you don’t go sacking him for finishing 5th, 6th or 7th etc occasionally.

What we are getting now (as Wallander Wallander says) is a “manager” who feels an obligation to pick players he’s requested the club to spend vast sums of money on, to justify his judgement and role as “de facto head of recruitment” to the detriment of the team. It’s not good for him, the team or ultimately the medium/long term of the club who instead of developing another valuable asset, are accruing ones that are depreciating rapidly.

If I had to describe Sherwood I could easily use phrases such as him being completely self-serving, a lying toe rag who is narcissistic and clearly politics like hell to get what he wants, which to be fair to him is often what the squad needed.

However I've worked with a lot of people some of whom I liked, others I didn't. Some clearly did good work to the benefit of the organisation and some did not. Unfortunately some people I liked personally were not good at their job whilst others were excellent. Of the people I didn't like, some were very goof at their jobs. Life's like that.

If you look at our last few managers from a youth point of view

Harry Redknapp
- Identified the youth group at about aged 18 with the likes of Mason coming through as the best Spurs had had for years
- Gave Andros Townsend a debut in domestic cup rewarded with MoTM and goal.
- Clearly identified EL as a competition difficult to win due to lots of matches, with many of the matches against beatable opposition, and decided it was tailor made to test out youth.
- Lots of EL debuts, sometimes 5 youngsters in a match. Debuts included Mason, Kane, Parrott and more invaluable minutes to likes of Townsend
- Sadly when we got CL, almost stopped playing youth rather than looking at League Cup to play youth.
- Did also loan out players to develop them, Rose being a good example

AVB
- Why play youth when you can buy the likes of Hulk for a fortune with even bigger wages. I jest but you know what I mean.
- Don't think he was very good at either developing players who had been bought and pretty much avoided playing youngsters where possible, stifling a group who had got to be 'first team ready' under HR
Ironically wasn't personally that good at buying players - several he clearly wanted who had played for him at Porto snubbed him.

Sherwood
- Promoted from a youth coaching background was always seen as likely to reverse the AVB trend, and play youth
- Brought in Bentaleb, a surprise even to youth watchers, at an early stage
- Tried playing Adebayor and Soldado to try to get them to score, recognised Soldado was never going to do that so brought in Kane for his PL starting debut who scored 3 goals in 6 or 7 starts.
- Gave Veljkovic 3 or 4 appearances off the bench.
- So in about 4 months brought in 3 players from youth into the first team
- Identified a 'cancerous' group of players who were not trying, not around in a TW to do anything about it

Pochettino
- Came in saying 'clean slate' to all existing players giving Adebayor and Kaboul in particular the possibility of becoming top players if they put in the effort.
- After a disappointing start the 'young turks' headed by Mason and Kane called out a number of senior players for not putting in the effort.
- Poch backed the youngsters and used Kane, Mason, Bentaleb and Townsend extensively, before selling 3 of them about a season later for circa £50m in aggregate.
- Poch has really only brought Winks through from youth to senior team in 3 or 4 seasons, and relied for much of the first team on players he inherited (Lloris, Vertonghen, Rose, Walker - until sold - Dembele, Eriksen, Kane, Lamela) rather than players he's bought in. So player acquisition into the first team has not been that great from whatever source. So whether Poch likes it or not a change to recruitment is required - if we don't change Poch will leave and the next manager will not have the benefit of good youngsters who previous managers developed for him. And that will be a big problem

So my comment is that Sherwood, whilst not likeable, has been very effective in bringing good youngsters through into the first team. Its never been a pre-requisite that all the youngsters brought through stay within the first team - some do not continue to develop and need to be sold. But that in itself is a success as we've generated multiple millions which can then be invested into bought players.

Problem with Poch is that some players who were good enough were not given a route to the first team and have walked - in effect for 'free', maybe a few hundred thousand. Best example being Milos Veljkovic who left but now plays regularly for Werder Bremen and was with Serbia WC squad - I'd guess worth £30m - £50m. Part of his discontent was Poch bringing in Wimmer which blocked his possibilities of playing as CB - and Wimmer of course was not a success, left for £16m and was not playing regularly at Stoke.

The lack of a path to the first team has already resulted in a number of youngsters turning down pro contracts to go elsewhere. So its not a time for urgent action as we now have a very talented youth group who if we don't develop will go elsewhere - and frankly if they stand no chance at Spurs they should leave ! KWP I think could leave this summer if he doesn't play much - he should have been playing more for the last 3 seasons, and this will be his fourth, but he's probably had more E u21 games than at Spurs.

So Spurs do need a shake up to get some of the best of the youth on a route to the first team.

A shake up isn't evolution, so its by its nature bound to be disruptive. So Sherwood, who with all his faults is good at selecting good youngsters to move forward is a candidate

At random, someone like Mark Warburton might be a candidate, but its got to be someone determined to fix the problem. And that as I say doesn't necessarily mean someone likeable
 
Spurs work on the strenghth conditioning of a youth player? I've never seen it happen.
If our players are skinny, they stay skinny. It's very Spursy. The club needs to overhaul its training methods imo.
I'm hearing rumours of unrest among the senior players because they're being flogged to death in training.
(Which would explain the low energy levels shown on match days).
Of our home grown players, I can only think of Harry Kane, Danny Rose and Eric Dier who have increased their
muscle mass. I think if a Spurs player bulks up, he does it of his own volition.
Funny you should say that about unrest in the team as being flogged to death training , as I also heard the same about the youngsters ,I heard it’s more like being in the army and that anyone who voices their opinion about this starts to get frozen out of game time , which does answer some questions as to why we keep losing and will continue losing some of our best youth.
 
If I had to describe Sherwood I could easily use phrases such as him being completely self-serving, a lying toe rag who is narcissistic and clearly politics like hell to get what he wants, which to be fair to him is often what the squad needed.

However I've worked with a lot of people some of whom I liked, others I didn't. Some clearly did good work to the benefit of the organisation and some did not. Unfortunately some people I liked personally were not good at their job whilst others were excellent. Of the people I didn't like, some were very goof at their jobs. Life's like that.

If you look at our last few managers from a youth point of view

Harry Redknapp
- Identified the youth group at about aged 18 with the likes of Mason coming through as the best Spurs had had for years
- Gave Andros Townsend a debut in domestic cup rewarded with MoTM and goal.
- Clearly identified EL as a competition difficult to win due to lots of matches, with many of the matches against beatable opposition, and decided it was tailor made to test out youth.
- Lots of EL debuts, sometimes 5 youngsters in a match. Debuts included Mason, Kane, Parrott and more invaluable minutes to likes of Townsend
- Sadly when we got CL, almost stopped playing youth rather than looking at League Cup to play youth.
- Did also loan out players to develop them, Rose being a good example

AVB
- Why play youth when you can buy the likes of Hulk for a fortune with even bigger wages. I jest but you know what I mean.
- Don't think he was very good at either developing players who had been bought and pretty much avoided playing youngsters where possible, stifling a group who had got to be 'first team ready' under HR
Ironically wasn't personally that good at buying players - several he clearly wanted who had played for him at Porto snubbed him.

Sherwood
- Promoted from a youth coaching background was always seen as likely to reverse the AVB trend, and play youth
- Brought in Bentaleb, a surprise even to youth watchers, at an early stage
- Tried playing Adebayor and Soldado to try to get them to score, recognised Soldado was never going to do that so brought in Kane for his PL starting debut who scored 3 goals in 6 or 7 starts.
- Gave Veljkovic 3 or 4 appearances off the bench.
- So in about 4 months brought in 3 players from youth into the first team
- Identified a 'cancerous' group of players who were not trying, not around in a TW to do anything about it

Pochettino
- Came in saying 'clean slate' to all existing players giving Adebayor and Kaboul in particular the possibility of becoming top players if they put in the effort.
- After a disappointing start the 'young turks' headed by Mason and Kane called out a number of senior players for not putting in the effort.
- Poch backed the youngsters and used Kane, Mason, Bentaleb and Townsend extensively, before selling 3 of them about a season later for circa £50m in aggregate.
- Poch has really only brought Winks through from youth to senior team in 3 or 4 seasons, and relied for much of the first team on players he inherited (Lloris, Vertonghen, Rose, Walker - until sold - Dembele, Eriksen, Kane, Lamela) rather than players he's bought in. So player acquisition into the first team has not been that great from whatever source. So whether Poch likes it or not a change to recruitment is required - if we don't change Poch will leave and the next manager will not have the benefit of good youngsters who previous managers developed for him. And that will be a big problem

So my comment is that Sherwood, whilst not likeable, has been very effective in bringing good youngsters through into the first team. Its never been a pre-requisite that all the youngsters brought through stay within the first team - some do not continue to develop and need to be sold. But that in itself is a success as we've generated multiple millions which can then be invested into bought players.

Problem with Poch is that some players who were good enough were not given a route to the first team and have walked - in effect for 'free', maybe a few hundred thousand. Best example being Milos Veljkovic who left but now plays regularly for Werder Bremen and was with Serbia WC squad - I'd guess worth £30m - £50m. Part of his discontent was Poch bringing in Wimmer which blocked his possibilities of playing as CB - and Wimmer of course was not a success, left for £16m and was not playing regularly at Stoke.

The lack of a path to the first team has already resulted in a number of youngsters turning down pro contracts to go elsewhere. So its not a time for urgent action as we now have a very talented youth group who if we don't develop will go elsewhere - and frankly if they stand no chance at Spurs they should leave ! KWP I think could leave this summer if he doesn't play much - he should have been playing more for the last 3 seasons, and this will be his fourth, but he's probably had more E u21 games than at Spurs.

So Spurs do need a shake up to get some of the best of the youth on a route to the first team.

A shake up isn't evolution, so its by its nature bound to be disruptive. So Sherwood, who with all his faults is good at selecting good youngsters to move forward is a candidate

At random, someone like Mark Warburton might be a candidate, but its got to be someone determined to fix the problem. And that as I say doesn't necessarily mean someone likeable


I think there's a whole bunch of erroneous assumptions and oversimplifications there SI.

Despite being the "champion" of youth, the only player Sherwood really introduced when he got the gig he'd been stabbing everyone in the back to get was Bentaleb, who for no apparent reason he was equally quick to drop like a stone when people started criticising Sherwood. Kane didn't get a look in for four months, until April, and then he scored on his first three starts, so made himself undroppable for the next (last) three games of the season.

Sherwood was never "good" at his job. What was his job anyway ? he couldn't coach. We already had a brilliant academy director, who could coach and also instruct coaches how to coach, we also had other excellent coaches like Inglethorpe and Ramsey. Was his job to get the manager to integrate academy kids? If so he failed miserably at that, because he put AVB's nose out of joint the minute he arrived at the club. Did he organise good loans? Apart from feeding his mate at Swindon, many of his loans were daft. So fundamentally his job was to schmooze parents of kids and be the "famous proper football geezer" telling them anecdotes and how great their kid is and how if he ruled the world their kid would be playing in his team. Which I'm sure he excelled at. But it's not a job we really need him back for, I'm sure we could get someone who isn't a complete twat to do that.
 
Don’t understand why you think bulking up is a good thing? Or am I misunderstanding you?
The premier league is perhaps the hardest most physically demanding league to play in.
I'm not sure what you misunderstand about that. You need to have a certain physicall prowess to be able
to compete effectively in it. You can bulk up too much though. Eric Dier is arguably too big now, same with Lukaku,
Gareth Bale and Micah Richards.At the other end of the scale is Marcus Edwards who is patently not strong enough to play in the premier league.
 
The premier league is perhaps the hardest most physically demanding league to play in.
I'm not sure what you misunderstand about that. You need to have a certain physicall prowess to be able
to compete effectively in it. You can bulk up too much though. Eric Dier is arguably too big now, same with Lukaku,
Gareth Bale and Micah Richards.At the other end of the scale is Marcus Edwards who is patently not strong enough to play in the premier league.

Are Silva, Hazard, Sterling, Aguero, Kante to small for the PL?

It just depends on the player and his make up, but carrying extra body mass, especially muscle around a high tempo league is rarely a good idea.
 
Last edited:
Nonsense. Are Silva, Hazard, Sterling, Aguero, Kante to small for the PL?

It just depends on the player and his make up, but carrying extra body mass, especially muscle around a high tempo league is rarely a good idea.
Here we go again. Kante is not weak. Neither is Aguero, Hazard or Alexis Sanchez for that matter.
Other players can negate a lack of strength by having a quick turn of pace to avoid physical contact.
If you don't have these physical attributes you are going to receive the ball and and then get knocked off it
legitamately and lose possession.
 
Here we go again. Kante is not weak. Neither is Aguero, Hazard or Alexis Sanchez for that matter.
Other players can negate a lack of strength by having a quick turn of pace to avoid physical contact.
If you don't have these physical attributes you are going to receive the ball and and then get knocked off it
legitamately and lose possession.

If you've got great technical attributes you don't need to be bulking up, and if you haven't, bulking up isn't going to make you a better footballer.

Marcus Edwards, like Silva, Hazard or even Messi, uses different a skill set, balance, agility, dexterity and technique - being a bit taller and naturally stronger wouldn't hurt him, but unnaturally doing it might.
 
Crazy. We seem to have a lot of good youngsters coming through and in terms of the u18 side are top of the group and scoring for fun, so without being specific about which player, I cannot understand NO players being called up.

Forgot to mention Cirkin who was called up. Surely we must have a couple of players on standby.
 
If you've got great technical attributes you don't need to be bulking up, and if you haven't, bulking up isn't going to make you a better footballer.

Marcus Edwards, like Silva, Hazard or even Messi, uses different a skill set, balance, agility, dexterity and technique - being a bit taller and naturally stronger wouldn't hurt him, but unnaturally doing it might.

I tend to agree with this, for certain players.

Edwards for example won't be barged off the ball because by the time the opponent is near him and given up space, Edwards is beyond him.

It's such an old school way of looking at things and it's probably a big reason England don't produce players like those abroad bevause the youth coaches do tend to favour physicality over skill most of the time.
 
I tend to agree with this, for certain players.

Edwards for example won't be barged off the ball because by the time the opponent is near him and given up space, Edwards is beyond him.

It's such an old school way of looking at things and it's probably a big reason England don't produce players like those abroad bevause the youth coaches do tend to favour physicality over skill most of the time.
You mean players like Mount, Maddison, Mason, etc? No disrespect but I think this view is a little outdated.

We produce plenty of technical, slight players now and that's great, so long as their bodies can cope with the demands of our gruelling seasons.
 
You mean players like Mount, Maddison, Mason, etc? No disrespect but I think this view is a little outdated.

We produce plenty of technical, slight players now and that's great, so long as their bodies can cope with the demands of our gruelling seasons.

The view is outdated.

I probably should have been "hadn't" as there has been a clear change over the last few years in terms of how England and English teams are looking at developing youngsters.
 
You mean players like Mount, Maddison, Mason, etc? No disrespect but I think this view is a little outdated.

We produce plenty of technical, slight players now and that's great, so long as their bodies can cope with the demands of our gruelling seasons.


We are producing them, and I agree that emphasis has slowly shifted, and Spurs were particularly strong on this shift toward technique over physicality, but I think it's still prevalent Windy. I still think managers, even Poch, have an inherent bias toward the "unit " at times, hence people like Sissoko existing - terrible footballer - great physical specimen. Why was Loftus-Cheek picked ahead of someone like Will Hughes? Will Hughes is twice the footballer he is. I have a sneaking feeling if Edwards was 5'10' and built like Sancho, Poch would have been a bit more tolerant of the fact that he wasn't Mary Poppins emotionally. Just a hunch.
 
I think there's a whole bunch of erroneous assumptions and oversimplifications there SI.

Despite being the "champion" of youth, the only player Sherwood really introduced when he got the gig he'd been stabbing everyone in the back to get was Bentaleb, who for no apparent reason he was equally quick to drop like a stone when people started criticising Sherwood. Kane didn't get a look in for four months, until April, and then he scored on his first three starts, so made himself undroppable for the next (last) three games of the season.

Sherwood was never "good" at his job. What was his job anyway ? he couldn't coach. We already had a brilliant academy director, who could coach and also instruct coaches how to coach, we also had other excellent coaches like Inglethorpe and Ramsey. Was his job to get the manager to integrate academy kids? If so he failed miserably at that, because he put AVB's nose out of joint the minute he arrived at the club. Did he organise good loans? Apart from feeding his mate at Swindon, many of his loans were daft. So fundamentally his job was to schmooze parents of kids and be the "famous proper football geezer" telling them anecdotes and how great their kid is and how if he ruled the world their kid would be playing in his team. Which I'm sure he excelled at. But it's not a job we really need him back for, I'm sure we could get someone who isn't a complete twat to do that.

The point which you've entirely missed is that after the AVB stint, there was a shift towards youth.

Not to be belittled is Kane actually starting 6 or 7 PL games, scoring 3 so that whoever was managing the following season couldn't overlook the fact that Kane was PL ready and able to score - something AVB had found lots of ways to avoid including the infamous loan to Leicester where Kane spent a lot of time getting splinters talking to Jamie Vardy on the bench.

And to answer your point, Sherwood had to play Adebayor and Soldado to try to get Soldado scoring, but also involved Kane in quite a few matches in parallel. Once it was clear Soldado couldn't score, Kane started rather than being a sub and the rest is history.

If only your favourite AVB had done that.......

But back to the point, OP was triggered by a press article featuring Sherwood, I've made it clear change is necessary, not that Sherwood is the only option, so can we leave it there.
 
eXb9zUIl_bigger.jpg
Tottenham Hotspur‏Verified account @SpursOfficial

1f4f0.png
270d.png
We are delighted to announce that young goalkeeper Alfie Whiteman has signed a new contract with the Club, which will run until 2020.pic.twitter.com/TivMwn2lXR

Do-iy8bX0AA9TGb.jpg


Excellent news, he's been on the bench whilst Lloris and Vorm were injured.

Hopefully he or Brandon Austin will be considered in January or summer as no 3 goalkeeper, so as to free up one of the 17 places reserved for 'overseas' trained players.
 
The point which you've entirely missed is that after the AVB stint, there was a shift towards youth.

Not to be belittled is Kane actually starting 6 or 7 PL games, scoring 3 so that whoever was managing the following season couldn't overlook the fact that Kane was PL ready and able to score - something AVB had found lots of ways to avoid including the infamous loan to Leicester where Kane spent a lot of time getting splinters talking to Jamie Vardy on the bench.

And to answer your point, Sherwood had to play Adebayor and Soldado to try to get Soldado scoring, but also involved Kane in quite a few matches in parallel. Once it was clear Soldado couldn't score, Kane started rather than being a sub and the rest is history.

If only your favourite AVB had done that.......

But back to the point, OP was triggered by a press article featuring Sherwood, I've made it clear change is necessary, not that Sherwood is the only option, so can we leave it there.


AVB isn't my "favourite" and I was as critical of him for not playing some of the kids as any of our other managers, but I don't think Sherwood helped that at all. I have just defended AVB's tenure generally, in as much as he had to work under extremely difficult circumstances, on and off the pitch, and did a decent job, and our football was never as bad as some make out.

It is to be belittled a little bit isn't it? It took Sherwood - the great champion of youth - four months to give Kane a start, and if he hadn't scored on each of his first three starts, I'm pretty sure Sherwood wouldn't have kept him in next game, judging by the way he treated Bentaleb, and what he did subsequently at Villa.
 
AVB isn't my "favourite" and I was as critical of him for not playing some of the kids as any of our other managers, but I don't think Sherwood helped that at all. I have just defended AVB's tenure generally, in as much as he had to work under extremely difficult circumstances, on and off the pitch, and did a decent job, and our football was never as bad as some make out.

It is to be belittled a little bit isn't it? It took Sherwood - the great champion of youth - four months to give Kane a start, and if he hadn't scored on each of his first three starts, I'm pretty sure Sherwood wouldn't have kept him in next game, judging by the way he treated Bentaleb, and what he did subsequently at Villa.

As I said, I'm not biting !
 
We are producing them, and I agree that emphasis has slowly shifted, and Spurs were particularly strong on this shift toward technique over physicality, but I think it's still prevalent Windy. I still think managers, even Poch, have an inherent bias toward the "unit " at times, hence people like Sissoko existing - terrible footballer - great physical specimen. Why was Loftus-Cheek picked ahead of someone like Will Hughes? Will Hughes is twice the footballer he is. I have a sneaking feeling if Edwards was 5'10' and built like Sancho, Poch would have been a bit more tolerant of the fact that he wasn't Mary Poppins emotionally. Just a hunch.

Poch likes physicality, definitely. And isn't that fond of using academy-produced players (for whatever reason). But I don't think academy coaches are bothered.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom