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...
Some interesting comments from Pep about youth players, after having lost Sancho last year he's now losing Diaz. The reality is as good as these kids might be Sancho was not going to replace the likes of Sane, Aguero, Sterling or Mahrez equally Diaz was not getting past KdB, Silva, Fernandinho or Gundogan.
Whilst we may not have the strength in depth that City have it's still pretty hard for a Spurs youth player to get an EPL game, especially as a Striker or AM - Dele, Son, Lamela, Moura, Erikson, Kane all in their way.
I'm surprised Man City couldn't arrange loan deals, but I guess when Real Madrid offer you a 21m contract at just 19 years of age, that's hard to turn down. Brahim Diaz couldn't say no that's for sure.
Will be interesting to see if some of our more talented juniors will be pried away by the big European clubs. They know they can't compete with the EPL financially for the biggest names, but they can offer youngsters more opportunity to get on the pitch, and at 17-18-19 that's probably just what you want.
Do you really think Sancho would have been much less an effective squad player than Mahrez for 65m?
I think in that City side Sancho would have been as good/productive as he's been for Dortmund. And he's better without the ball than Mahrez too.
Do you really think Sancho would have been much less an effective squad player than Mahrez for 65m?
I think in that City side Sancho would have been as good/productive as he's been for Dortmund. And he's better without the ball than Mahrez too.
It's a good question, I think the Bundesliga is certainly a step down from the EPL, top teams are very good but the standard falls away much faster below them than it does in the EPL. This has allowed Sancho to develop in a way I doubt he would have been able to do at City.
Mahrez gives you an EPL title winner with close to 150 EPL appearances, you can't beat experience.
Bottom line I don't think Pep could reasonably take the option to play an unproven 18 year old when he could spend 65m on very proven 26 year old. What manager would make that call?
You say 'better without the ball than Mahrez' just not sure about that, I've not seen that many full games to have a fixed idea but looking at a few of the stats sites they all say that his defensive contribution is a weakness. Let's hope he comes back to the EPL so we can get a better look.
The only thing I would question, is if he'd have got the same amount of minutes that Mahrez has been given.
No he definitely wouldn't. That's the point though. Would City have been worse off if Sancho had the minutes that Mahrez has had?
That's the rub, stay at City and he'd probably have played a few cup games against very weak sides, or go to Dortmund and play more games against weaker league opposition. Think he made the right call but will reserve judgment for that all important second season, the season when defenses know what you're all about, let's see how he does then.
I don't know whether it's irony or coincidence.Sancho definitely made the right call, just not sure City did.
I think a factor is that so many clubs in the top flight now need results quickly because as you said, league points are almost priceless. Few managers spend time developing younger players. Opting for the "safer" bet of proven talent. For every Poch, Howe and even Dyche (who's brought through a few youngsters at Burnley) there are 10 Mourinhos.I don't know whether it's irony or coincidence.
At a time when there is so much money at the very top of the game -
The top clubs have built fantastic Academy infrastructure (expensive of course) -
Resulting in some of the finest young talent in the world -
Who get very little chance to shine for their clubs' first teams -
Because League points have never been worth so much -
At a time when there is so much money at the very top of the game -
Rinse and repeat
Right now the headlines are being made by the German clubs who have jumped in to buy (relatively) unproven talent. I don't know why more clubs over here don't do likewise. Brentford seem to have that as a business model - ie NO academy. Just get a bloody good manager and pick up rough diamonds and see what happens. Theyv'e come very close to promotion to PL recently.
I'm sure someone like Eddie Howe (who still has first teamers who were kids in the old Div 1 teams) could do the same without having to buy any overseas "talent".
No he definitely wouldn't. That's the point though. Would City have been worse off if Sancho had the minutes that Mahrez has had?
Opting for the "safer" bet of proven talent.
It comes down to the "established name =/= better" paradox. There's not much age between Pulisic and Hudson-Odoi. But Pulisic has years of first team football in him so he "should be better" than their own youth prospect.But if we take the Pulisic example for Chelsea. Is he really the "safer" bet as opposed to giving Hudson-Odoi a chance?
Pulisic is 20 years old, recently this season hasn't been a regular starter. I doubt Dortmund will be investing a huge amount of time in to his development over the next 6 months. Can see him being used as a utility sub or to give Sancho a rest here and there. He'll be moving to a new country, granted for him the language is not an issue, but he'll have to get settled and used to the Premier League, which will probably take a year or two until he's hitting consistent form.
Why not give that time to Hudson-Odoi instead, and if it works out you've saved yourself 60 million and have a player who is potentially at the same level. I know it's all speculation etc. but 60 million is a big gamble. The only rationale I can see behind this move, is that Chelsea are looking to boost their standing in the US market by signing Pulisic, and they believe that 60 million is a small investment, for the benefits that they could reap.
I don't know whether it's irony or coincidence.
At a time when there is so much money at the very top of the game -
The top clubs have built fantastic Academy infrastructure (expensive of course) -
Resulting in some of the finest young talent in the world -
Who get very little chance to shine for their clubs' first teams -
Because League points have never been worth so much -
At a time when there is so much money at the very top of the game -
Rinse and repeat
Right now the headlines are being made by the German clubs who have jumped in to buy (relatively) unproven talent. I don't know why more clubs over here don't do likewise. Brentford seem to have that as a business model - ie NO academy. Just get a bloody good manager and pick up rough diamonds and see what happens. Theyv'e come very close to promotion to PL recently.
I'm sure someone like Eddie Howe (who still has first teamers who were kids in the old Div 1 teams) could do the same without having to buy any overseas "talent".
For the last couple of years I've thought it possible to emulate Celtic 1967 Lisbon Lions. Famously won European Cup (easier in those days granted); 10 of the 11 grew up around the corner from Celtic Park. 11th 30 miles away.This is the thing, and she merging I actually wrote a piece about in the blog, to a degree, you can rationalise it with the likes of Chelsea and ManC (even if you still disagree with it) but for any club from about 6/7th PL downwards through championship and lower, there’s massive footballing and financial incentives (as the German clubs realise) for developing young players. They need to wise up.
And players are starting to wise up.
For the last couple of years I've thought it possible to emulate Celtic 1967 Lisbon Lions. Famously won European Cup (easier in those days granted); 10 of the 11 grew up around the corner from Celtic Park. 11th 30 miles away.
Not saying it's easy, but I reckon if you do EVERYTHING right on the Academy side, with the odd bit of poaching from others', if you've got the best of breed elsewhere - coaching, managing, infrastructure, ownership - I think you can win titles that way.
Probably never get the chance to see it happen, but I think its possible
But if we take the Pulisic example for Chelsea. Is he really the "safer" bet as opposed to giving Hudson-Odoi a chance?
Pulisic is 20 years old, recently this season hasn't been a regular starter. I doubt Dortmund will be investing a huge amount of time in to his development over the next 6 months. Can see him being used as a utility sub or to give Sancho a rest here and there. He'll be moving to a new country, granted for him the language is not an issue, but he'll have to get settled and used to the Premier League, which will probably take a year or two until he's hitting consistent form.
Why not give that time to Hudson-Odoi instead, and if it works out you've saved yourself 60 million and have a player who is potentially at the same level. I know it's all speculation etc. but 60 million is a big gamble. The only rationale I can see behind this move, is that Chelsea are looking to boost their standing in the US market by signing Pulisic, and they believe that 60 million is a small investment, for the benefits that they could reap.
The irony with Pulsic is that he's no longer a regular starter at Dortmund - pushed to the sidelines by Sancho, who of course jumped ship from ManCity because he couldn't get any game time over the ManCity established stars especially with them having bought Mahrez
So Chelsea buy Pulisic rather than give Hudson-Odoi a chance - even though he's been with Chelsea for years and they know him inside out and he looks a very good player.
The only advantage Pulsic gives Chelsea is exposure in the US market, but a big price to pay !
Athletic Bilbao would be an interesting case study. I know that they went away from that model a little, where now in order to qualify, you just need to have a Basque Granny.
But despite that, they are still a good side (ok, just checked the La Liga table and this season they aren't doing too well) - I think their problem is that they need to sell their top players in order to keep the process up. Maybe in the Premier League, with the additional income that provides they wouldn't be as reliant on selling.
****
Bilbao has always been a 'Basque' only club, so its catchment 'area' is necessarily fairly small (and why they want Llorente back), and with the relatively few established Basque players the only way forward is to take them in at a young age and develop them.