But How Good is our Academy ??

PeterGage

We keep hearing that one of the basic building blocks of the success strategy of Roland's "way of life" is the success of our Youth Academy. But compared with other clubs, how successful is ours?

In the last couple of years, we have developed and sold Joe Gomez (sadly injured) and Poyet (arguably gone backwards). Lookman has great potential and could command a decent fee. Going back a few more years, we can mention Shelvey and Jenkinson. That really is it (unless I have missed out somebody). I also acknowledge that (a) Solly, but for his knees, could have been a greater success and we have developed a few players who are good enough, but no better than, our current level.

So, is our Youth Academy that good. Discuss.

Leeds_Addick

Parker

PeterGage

Leeds_Addick said:

Parker

Forgot Parker, thanks.

Leeds_Addick

Defoe

Paddy Powell

Konchesky, Rufus, Fortune, Bowyer, Elliot, Randolph, Cousins

PeterGage

Parker and Defoe are going back in time. The question remains: Is the success of our academy that good that it can be an important "building block" in the overall strategy

Paddy Powell

It can be if you can keep the good ones long enough.

That's our problem in recent years. Money talks. The players want to go and earn it and we as a club need it.

DaveMehmet

Paul Bacon

Callumcafc

If the aim is to produce players good enough to play in the Championship or above, for Charlton. Then yes, I think it can do it's job.

If the regime are holding out for a Gomez or a Lookman to sell each and every summer to cover losses, it'll fail.

PeterGage

Callumcafc said:

If the aim is to produce players good enough to play in the Championship or above, for Charlton. Then yes, I think it can do it's job.

If the regime are holding out for a Gomez or a Lookman to sell each and every summer to cover losses, it'll fail.

But are we producing enough "players good enough" for it to be an important part of the overall strategy; or put another way, is our academy so much better that that of other clubs?

Leeds_Addick

Is our academy excellent and well above average? Yes.
Is our academy alone enough to build the success of the club from? No.

Henry Irving

Elliot and Randolph too as well as Wagstaff

Palmer at Chelsea is another.

There are 21 cat 1 academies.

Behind that are the cat 2 teams like us. At that level we have been the best team at U18 and U21 level for the past three or four years based on our league successes.

So, while there are more productive academies at Soton for example ours is one of best considering our size, the number of 1st team games played, the money made from sales and academy level success.

newyorkaddick

We went through a very barren patch a few years ago, but this is something of a golden age of current first team players* coming through the Academy, even if the jury is out on some.

(*ie. Solly, Cousins, Harriott, Lennon, Charles-Cook, Pope, Fox, Lookman, Ahearne-Grant, Holmes-Dennis, Kennedy, [Poyet], Muldoon, Umerah....)

DRAddick

Lookman is not really a product of our academy is he?

Michael Turner, all be it we didn't make much from him.

PeterGage

Henry Irving said:

Elliot and Randolph too as well as Wagstaff

Palmer at Chelsea is another.

There are 21 cat 1 academies.

Behind that are the cat 2 teams like us. At that level we have been the best team at U18 and U21 level for the past three or four years based on our league successes.

So, while there are more productive academies at Soton for example ours is one of best considering our size, the number of 1st team games played, the money made from sales and academy level success.

Thanks Henry. I guess I was (rather narrowly) judging success upon the number of players we have sold on to Premier League clubs and the fees we have received from such sales; which in my view, have not been a huge success.

SDAddick

I think it really depends on where you start and end the responsibility of the Academy. In reference to the above, if a player joins at or before 16, I think they should be considered part of the academy. After 18/19, there isn't much of a role the academy plays. When you look at our players who have struggled to push on after leaving, Shelvey, Poyet, and Jenkinson in particular, it was because they'd left us by 18/19.

I think the ages of 18-21 are incredibly underrated in terms of a footballer's success, but oftentimes it feels like if a player hasn't broken into the first team by 18/19, they're discarded. All three of the above struggled desperately for first team football between 18 and 21 (Poyet is still struggling). I don't think you can put that development period down to the academy, I think that is where the academy to senior team handover occurs, and it is where many clubs' youth policy is found wanting.

All-in-all, I think we have a very good academy, and I think we're going to see RCC and Konsa break through next year, potentially amongst others. Yao and Lapslie at U18 look like they could well have the requisite skill level to make the step up into our senior team at some point.

Oggy Red

DRAddick said:

Lookman is not really a product of our academy is he?

Depends how you look at it:

Is at a kid that moved through the levels since he was 9?
Then signed up on schoolboy terms - but most never progress to a professional contract.

Then there are youngsters who join at 16 or 17, often released from other clubs' academies or non-League clubs (notable examples. Lookman, Pope).
But they play at U18 and U21 levels, which is part of the academy.

SantaClaus

SDAddick said:

I think it really depends on where you start and end the responsibility of the Academy. In reference to the above, if a player joins at or before 16, I think they should be considered part of the academy. After 18/19, there isn't much of a role the academy plays. When you look at our players who have struggled to push on after leaving, Shelvey, Poyet, and Jenkinson in particular, it was because they'd left us by 18/19.

I think the ages of 18-21 are incredibly underrated in terms of a footballer's success, but oftentimes it feels like if a player hasn't broken into the first team by 18/19, they're discarded. All three of the above struggled desperately for first team football between 18 and 21 (Poyet is still struggling). I don't think you can put that development period down to the academy, I think that is where the academy to senior team handover occurs, and it is where many clubs' youth policy is found wanting.

All-in-all, I think we have a very good academy, and I think we're going to see RCC and Konsa break through next year, potentially amongst others. Yao and Lapslie at U18 look like they could well have the requisite skill level to make the step up into our senior team at some point.

I agree with you about discarding young players too quickly. Parker is a good example of a player who didn't kick on until his early 20's.

addickfanatic

I think there's a good chance that we will know how good our academy come August, with our recruitment policy and Roland's wallet there's a good chance our first eleven and bench may consist of a number of them

Athletico Charlton

Shelvey, Jenkinson, Solly, Cousins, Poyet, Palmer, Elliot, Randolph, Gomez, Huddart all look like they could go on to have PL careers (except Solly because of his knees the poor bugger). That is a fantastic return in my book r league one/Championship club over 5 or so years. Add Lookman and Pope as two more who played U21 and it must rank up there with the best.

The issue is how much have we benefitted, despite all these players we are still in League One, seen most of them rarely or never and probably only realised about £8M tops for the players, so, say £1.33M over 5 years. Then factor in running costs of keeping it open....

It is not the golden egg RD seems to think it is at this level. Had we been top Champ/PL it could have been a different story.

CyrilDavies

Jay Lloyd-Samuel

harveys_gardener

Given that the Prem only gives max £350k for out of contract players, unless you can sign on pro contracts or create an auction, returns can be limited. Brentford have already abandoned theirs. May become an Academy 1 luxury with likes of us picking up their cast offs.

killerandflash

There are an extraordinary number of former Man U academy players, who made a success elsewhere after hardly playing for Man U and being released or sold for small fees, e.g. Tom Heaton, Danny Drinkwater, Jonny and Cory Evans, James Chester, Craig Cathcart, Danny Simpson, Danny Higginbotham etc (plus the likes of Robbie Savage earlier)

It slightly begs the question, is it better to develop players from the age of 9, especially as they may be poached if any good, or just rely on the cast offs from the giants?

SDAddick

^Add Ryan Shawcross to the above. To be fair, Jonny Evans played a good amount for United.

We've done some of what you allude to @killerandflash. RCC was an Arsenal cast-off, as was Zak Ansah. We've seem to have the scouting and developmental tools in place that these are the exceptions, rather than the rules. I think it's always best to be self-reliant, as that's really the point of having an academy. The ability to pick up players who haven't quite made it at the top clubs will always be there, but it takes a lot of work (and admittedly investment) to develop your own players.

I seem to recall reading a while back that the average spend on a player who comes through an academy and into the first team is 2m over the course of his career (up to that point). It's probably safe to say that many of the former United players cost less than that, at least up front, but we're dealing with very crude maths here. Am curious if anyone has any better numbers on this--particularly what it costs per player in an academy.

DOC64

Charlton' s Academy is very well renowned.

The boys are first signed at 8 and most are those not selected by the bigger clubs. In the early years the boys can take a drubbing (not so for some squads).
Through the years, the boys develop and strengthen assisted by some boys released by the biggerr clubs.

By Under 12/13's the boys tend to compete with the best of them.

The Academy doesn't necessarily look at results, it tends to look at individuals, mainly the top 3 or 4 in each age group. It is those 3 or 4 that tend to have a chance of 'making it'.

I know this because my son was with the Academy for six years. We moved to Scotland last Summer and he is very much in demand having just agreed to sign for Rangers. The fact that he was at Charlton is very much liked and respected by any enquiring club.

killerandflash

SDAddick said:

^Add Ryan Shawcross to the above. To be fair, Jonny Evans played a good amount for United.

We've done some of what you allude to @killerandflash. RCC was an Arsenal cast-off, as was Zak Ansah. We've seem to have the scouting and developmental tools in place that these are the exceptions, rather than the rules. I think it's always best to be self-reliant, as that's really the point of having an academy. The ability to pick up players who haven't quite made it at the top clubs will always be there, but it takes a lot of work (and admittedly investment) to develop your own players.

I seem to recall reading a while back that the average spend on a player who comes through an academy and into the first team is 2m over the course of his career (up to that point). It's probably safe to say that many of the former United players cost less than that, at least up front, but we're dealing with very crude maths here. Am curious if anyone has any better numbers on this--particularly what it costs per player in an academy.

Spotting talent amongst rejected 16-19 year old players is a very specific talent, you're scouting the person as well as the player, does he have the drive to fight his way back to the top.

Lookman wasn't a rejected player, but snapping him up is far more "cost effective" than 10 years of training to produce a Pigott or Sho-Silva. It's something we haven't been that successful at recently, signing the talented teenagers that other clubs let go. Most of our signings in this category have failed to make the grade with us,

Lincsaddick

The 'big' clubs scout worldwide for promising youngsters, some still in nappies it seems.
We are competing with mega money and paradoxically are therefore unable to compete for anywhere near the very best potential.
We will still stock the academy with decent young players but they will essentially be those that the rich clubs don't want.
The question is will the unearthing and eventual sale every now and then of a diamond young player offset the costs of the youth programmes. Unfortunate questions and conclusions, but true neverthelesss

Pedro45

It depends what you call success or "good". If it's the Harry Arter's of the game, then we developed him but saw little (in fact, no) return. If it's the Jermain Defoe's then we got paid quite handsomely. Neither played much or any game time for the 1st XI, but have gone on to become internationals. Is Joe Pigott a success? Or Jamal Campbell-Ryce? Yes, they have had league careers, which is more than most of us can say. With RD in charge, running depleted senior squads is the norm, so more youngsters get a game these days. That is good in some ways, for the players, but not necessarily so for the Club. What is impossible is to churn out a Gomez, Defoe, Bowyer, Rufus, Cousins, Konchesky or Parker every year, for evermore. If you could do that, you would end up keeping them and would make the EPL!

East_Stand_Loopy

Robert Lee, the sale of whom kept the club going.

LargeAddick

If Lookman came through our academy then Defoe came through West Ham's.

killerandflash

Pedro45 said:

It depends what you call success or "good". If it's the Harry Arter's of the game, then we developed him but saw little (in fact, no) return. If it's the Jermain Defoe's then we got paid quite handsomely. Neither played much or any game time for the 1st XI, but have gone on to become internationals. Is Joe Pigott a success? Or Jamal Campbell-Ryce? Yes, they have had league careers, which is more than most of us can say. With RD in charge, running depleted senior squads is the norm, so more youngsters get a game these days. That is good in some ways, for the players, but not necessarily so for the Club. What is impossible is to churn out a Gomez, Defoe, Bowyer, Rufus, Cousins, Konchesky or Parker every year, for evermore. If you could do that, you would end up keeping them and would make the EPL!

Success for me comes down to a combination of
a) games for us
b) transfer fee earned

Thus is Solly was to leave on a free, he'd still be a success due to the game she played for us, while with Gomez it's the fee

We could produce the next Messi, but if he gets poached by Chelsea at 16 for a minimal compensation fee, that's not success for us ultimately