Jump to content
IGNORED

Jonny Smith - SIgned for Burton Albion


Davefevs

Recommended Posts

Every young player that signs for us whether as a child to our Academy or the likes of Smith, Semenyo, Hinds or Bakinson from other clubs is ‘one for the future’. The vast majority will eventually have a future elsewhere whether in football or not. That ‘one for the future tag’ should not be used as a stick to beat the club with every time we filter young players out.

If none were making it to our first team then it could be considered to be failure.This season probably more than any other proves our success in developing young talent.

The vast majority whether forging a career at a lower level or not will have learned so much in their time with us that will help them in their lives. Some will fall through the net and become successful elsewhere. Johnny Smith may be one of those but they will be few and I would expect that we would usually insert sell-on clauses for that eventuality, otherwise we would just release them.

A young player may go through numerous loans only to be overtaken by a younger more prodigious talent and that can not be anticipated. What we have seen in recent weeks is that we have some great emerging talent but as with Bakinson against Huddersfield for example sometimes they need more experience around them until they develop more. Bringing a Lansbury in on a short term contract does not change our philosophy but merely underpins it. So please let’s not beat the club up for having such a good player development pathway. Tinnions new position underlines our commitment and is far more significant than a Lansbury/Brunt type signing in the long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Johnny Musicworks said:

Every young player that signs for us whether as a child to our Academy or the likes of Smith, Semenyo, Hinds or Bakinson from other clubs is ‘one for the future’. The vast majority will eventually have a future elsewhere whether in football or not. That ‘one for the future tag’ should not be used as a stick to beat the club with every time we filter young players out.

If none were making it to our first team then it could be considered to be failure.This season probably more than any other proves our success in developing young talent.

The vast majority whether forging a career at a lower level or not will have learned so much in their time with us that will help them in their lives. Some will fall through the net and become successful elsewhere. Johnny Smith may be one of those but they will be few and I would expect that we would usually insert sell-on clauses for that eventuality, otherwise we would just release them.

A young player may go through numerous loans only to be overtaken by a younger more prodigious talent and that can not be anticipated. What we have seen in recent weeks is that we have some great emerging talent but as with Bakinson against Huddersfield for example sometimes they need more experience around them until they develop more. Bringing a Lansbury in on a short term contract does not change our philosophy but merely underpins it. So please let’s not beat the club up for having such a good player development pathway. Tinnions new position underlines our commitment and is far more significant than a Lansbury/Brunt type signing in the long term.

Also, we have no idea what positions we will have covered by developing player, could be that there is a steady stream of players scattered across many different positions, could be that we end up with 4 rightsided midfielders, who individually might be good enough for Championship football, but if their pathway is blocked by 2 first team squad members and 2 or 3 other graduates, they won't get a chance, so you need to move them on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is his debut goal for Burton :-

https://www.skysports.com/football/burton-alb-vs-hull-city/report/431134?fbclid=IwAR1t9RLxBk7I_L9GMscNB6Q2UbPnKYmfyjP_09H_1ZY--anGM0ORZurzodQ

Exciting player who worked hard and should have been given a chance,  but never was. Proved himself on all loans he did previously. 

I would have loved him to play at Ashton Gate but sadly it did not happen and life moves on. 532 and his roles well covered left little opportunity.

Don't get me wrong we will both have a strong affinity to the team here with all the friends, forum members and players both of us have met and that will never change.

He has a point to prove and he will prove it I am convinced of that, and maybe at some future time the opportunity will arise again.

Good luck to the Team,  hope to see you in the Prem soon .... and to all the members on here... Thank you for all your messages...

Cheers

Gary ???

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Garycpos said:

Here is his debut goal for Burton :-

https://www.skysports.com/football/burton-alb-vs-hull-city/report/431134?fbclid=IwAR1t9RLxBk7I_L9GMscNB6Q2UbPnKYmfyjP_09H_1ZY--anGM0ORZurzodQ

Exciting player who worked hard and should have been given a chance,  but never was. Proved himself on all loans he did previously. 

I would have loved him to play at Ashton Gate but sadly it did not happen and life moves on. 532 and his roles well covered left little opportunity.

Don't get me wrong we will both have a strong affinity to the team here with all the friends, forum members and players both of us have met and that will never change.

He has a point to prove and he will prove it I am convinced of that, and maybe at some future time the opportunity will arise again.

Good luck to the Team,  hope to see you in the Prem soon .... and to all the members on here... Thank you for all your messages...

Cheers

Gary ???

 

 

Hit the nail on the head. Our commitment to a 5-3-2 saw Jonny gone along with any other wing option including the woefully treated Elliason - turns out that when footballers get injured (under a conditioning team that have history for a lot of injuries), we have no wide players to play when we then have to consider it as a Plan B.

If none of this makes sense then welcome to the club.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Garycpos said:

Here is his debut goal for Burton :-

https://www.skysports.com/football/burton-alb-vs-hull-city/report/431134?fbclid=IwAR1t9RLxBk7I_L9GMscNB6Q2UbPnKYmfyjP_09H_1ZY--anGM0ORZurzodQ

Exciting player who worked hard and should have been given a chance,  but never was. Proved himself on all loans he did previously. 

I would have loved him to play at Ashton Gate but sadly it did not happen and life moves on. 532 and his roles well covered left little opportunity.

Don't get me wrong we will both have a strong affinity to the team here with all the friends, forum members and players both of us have met and that will never change.

He has a point to prove and he will prove it I am convinced of that, and maybe at some future time the opportunity will arise again.

Good luck to the Team,  hope to see you in the Prem soon .... and to all the members on here... Thank you for all your messages...

Cheers

Gary ???

 

 

What a great start 

I admire his attitude and how he’s responded to each loan spell Gary , and performed for those Clubs - Cant be easy from a life or football perspective constantly adjusting to new

Personally I will follow his career with interest , as he’s one who deserves success

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/01/2021 at 09:52, BTRFTG said:

Yet another 'one for the future.....'

That's how it works. Every club takes in players, hoping they'll develop. Some do...others don't. People on OTIB make out like our record on youngsters is terrible, but it's probably comparable to most clubs' development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SecretSam said:

That's how it works. Every club takes in players, hoping they'll develop. Some do...others don't. People on OTIB make out like our record on youngsters is terrible, but it's probably comparable to most clubs' development.

Most clubs don't invest in their academies as much as City. Some clubs choose to use their monies more productively. Most clubs don't spend major monies (by which I mean £1m or more) on players who need developing. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Most clubs don't invest in their academies as much as City. Some clubs choose to use their monies more productively.

 

Sure about that? Our academy turned a nice profit on Reid, Kelly...

Do you suggest binning the academy? Back to the GJ days, overpaid, ageing journeymen filling the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, SecretSam said:

Sure about that? Our academy turned a nice profit on Reid, Kelly...

Do you suggest binning the academy? Back to the GJ days, overpaid, ageing journeymen filling the team.

I think there's a very good argument for ditching the academy, especially since the EFL signed-up to EPPP. How much does it cost per year to run (bearing mind it's been running for decades)? How many players have come through it? It's easy to pick the odd one or two of recent times but to caution that silly money pot has, I think, been exhausted.  We're not selling anybody worth much this year, or next. Under the new EPPP rules how much would a genuine 'diamond' be worth at 16 or 18? Not much is the answer. It also never worked. Julian Dicks grew up a few doors from me. When his dad took him to City as a young lad and enquired whether he'd be in the first team soon (he was that good and we weren't,) he was told, "no, we'll develop him for a few years first." When his dad took him to Ron Saunders at Brum the exact opposite was true,"..if he's that good he'll be starting next game.." guess where he signed?

There are plenty of bigger and better clubs who have dispensed with academies, preferring instead to focus on smaller, select youth teams post 16. We bang on about our academy, and localism, and youth as though it's a guaranteed badge of honour. It isn't and the localism aspect, in particular, has held us back for years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Most clubs don't invest in their academies as much as City. Some clubs choose to use their monies more productively. Most clubs don't spend major monies (by which I mean £1m or more) on players who need developing. 

 

Money spent on academies can be written off in terms of FFP and therefore is surely up to Lansdown as to whether he wants to fund the academy? He already invests the max amount he can to covers losses each year so outside sponsoring the shirt/stadium he can't put more in and therefore isn't a case of 'do you want to fund the academy or a new transfer' or something similar its fund the academy or the money doesn't come into the club at all. Any signings the academy have made for big  money that haven't been coming off? Tyreeq rumoured to be expensive for his experience but his value now would exceed what he was signed for (rumoured £500,000), Jonny Smith was rumoured to be circa £50,000 (happy to be corrected) and probably recouped with the 'undisclosed fee' to Burton, Owura would have been a negligible fee and having made a 1st team debut plus form at Grimsby again worth more than he was signed for. So 'academy' signings for a fee don't look to be outrageous. 

2 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

I think there's a very good argument for ditching the academy, especially since the EFL signed-up to EPPP. How much does it cost per year to run (bearing mind it's been running for decades)? How many players have come through it? It's easy to pick the odd one or two of recent times but to caution that silly money pot has, I think, been exhausted.  We're not selling anybody worth much this year, or next. Under the new EPPP rules how much would a genuine 'diamond' be worth at 16 or 18? Not much is the answer. It also never worked. Julian Dicks grew up a few doors from me. When his dad took him to City as a young lad and enquired whether he'd be in the first team soon (he was that good and we weren't,) he was told, "no, we'll develop him for a few years first." When his dad took him to Ron Saunders at Brum the exact opposite was true,"..if he's that good he'll be starting next game.." guess where he signed?

There are plenty of bigger and better clubs who have dispensed with academies, preferring instead to focus on smaller, select youth teams post 16. We bang on about our academy, and localism, and youth as though it's a guaranteed badge of honour. It isn't and the localism aspect, in particular, has held us back for years.

Estimates for Cat 2 are between £1m and £2m however as previously said it can be written off and Lansdown is allowed to cover it himself so no loss to the club, in that sense it makes it a no brainer to keep as any income made by any player sales can be reinvested. How many players have come through? The academy went about a change of direction ~3-5 years ago, you don't see changes overnight or even 1 season, similarly Tinnion's prominence with loans, how many players of ours were regularly moving up to playing League 1 before then? We're seeing improvements and starting to see more players capable of championship football, the hope will be this process will continue to see an increase in the amount but naturally will take time.

How much a diamond is worth at 16-18 will depend on a number of factors. Firstly as to whether they've signed a pro deal yet, if the post is right and Benarous has signed a pro deal then EPPP doesn't apply and a club has to bid for him so we now have negotiating power. The duration the player has been in the academy is also a factor for EPPP as one of the things considered by the fee is how much time the academy has invested in the player, there is a big difference between a 16 year old being signed under EPPP who signed for the academy at 15 to one who started at 9 and we're talking 6 figures. Only the biggest academies are happy to spend 6 figures to pinch academy prospects as we've seen only Herbie Kane and Jacob Maddox being taken under EPPP. 

Who are the 'plenty' of bigger clubs who have dispensed with academies? Brentford are the highest profile side you'd consider 'bigger' than us at 1st team level who no longer run an academy in English football and that is because of the number of big academies close to them who they had to compete for players with, Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs, Fulham, Palace, QPR, Watford etc all being a higher category, so rather than compete with them for players they changed it up. Huddersfield would probably be the next club in terms of size who've gone down that route.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Money spent on academies can be written off in terms of FFP and therefore is surely up to Lansdown as to whether he wants to fund the academy? He already invests the max amount he can to covers losses each year so outside sponsoring the shirt/stadium he can't put more in and therefore isn't a case of 'do you want to fund the academy or a new transfer' or something similar its fund the academy or the money doesn't come into the club at all. Any signings the academy have made for big  money that haven't been coming off? Tyreeq rumoured to be expensive for his experience but his value now would exceed what he was signed for (rumoured £500,000), Jonny Smith was rumoured to be circa £50,000 (happy to be corrected) and probably recouped with the 'undisclosed fee' to Burton, Owura would have been a negligible fee and having made a 1st team debut plus form at Grimsby again worth more than he was signed for. So 'academy' signings for a fee don't look to be outrageous. 

Estimates for Cat 2 are between £1m and £2m however as previously said it can be written off and Lansdown is allowed to cover it himself so no loss to the club, in that sense it makes it a no brainer to keep as any income made by any player sales can be reinvested. How many players have come through? The academy went about a change of direction ~3-5 years ago, you don't see changes overnight or even 1 season, similarly Tinnion's prominence with loans, how many players of ours were regularly moving up to playing League 1 before then? We're seeing improvements and starting to see more players capable of championship football, the hope will be this process will continue to see an increase in the amount but naturally will take time.

How much a diamond is worth at 16-18 will depend on a number of factors. Firstly as to whether they've signed a pro deal yet, if the post is right and Benarous has signed a pro deal then EPPP doesn't apply and a club has to bid for him so we now have negotiating power. The duration the player has been in the academy is also a factor for EPPP as one of the things considered by the fee is how much time the academy has invested in the player, there is a big difference between a 16 year old being signed under EPPP who signed for the academy at 15 to one who started at 9 and we're talking 6 figures. Only the biggest academies are happy to spend 6 figures to pinch academy prospects as we've seen only Herbie Kane and Jacob Maddox being taken under EPPP. 

Who are the 'plenty' of bigger clubs who have dispensed with academies? Brentford are the highest profile side you'd consider 'bigger' than us at 1st team level who no longer run an academy in English football and that is because of the number of big academies close to them who they had to compete for players with, Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs, Fulham, Palace, QPR, Watford etc all being a higher category, so rather than compete with them for players they changed it up. Huddersfield would probably be the next club in terms of size who've gone down that route.

 

 

Forget FFP, that's a red herring. Also, since when have monies ever been written off? Our operational losses are LOSSES. It's real money. It gets added to City's debt which as of today had to be upward of £100m. 

As to the cost of running the academy, you can't ignore the infrastructure costs as were there to be no academy we wouldn't have needed to invest in the asset else could now sell it off. The costs under the old scheme years back were reported as costing in excess of £2m a year, you can reckon it's £3m plus now.

EPPP is a killer. The kids you describe will be worth nowhere near the 6 figures quoted.

Key point: in the 55 years I've been watching how many decent kids have we produced? Very, very few.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Forget FFP, that's a red herring. Also, since when have monies ever been written off? Our operational losses are LOSSES. It's real money. It gets added to City's debt which as of today had to be upward of £100m. 

As to the cost of running the academy, you can't ignore the infrastructure costs as were there to be no academy we wouldn't have needed to invest in the asset else could now sell it off. The costs under the old scheme years back were reported as costing in excess of £2m a year, you can reckon it's £3m plus now.

EPPP is a killer. The kids you describe will be worth nowhere near the 6 figures quoted.

Key point: in the 55 years I've been watching how many decent kids have we produced? Very, very few.

 

So in a club that's losing more than £13m a year you take particular objection to the £1m - £2m thats spent on the academy which has a chance of earning the club back money? The sales of Reid, Bryan and Kelly in a sense would cover the academy for over 10 years, if they weren't already part of the losses Lansdown is able to cover. 

Interesting price you quote as the EPPP report itself classed the range of spending at different levels of academy, Cat 1 - low spending academies ~ £2.3m and high spending = ~£4.9m, Cat 2 low spending = ~£1m and high spending ~£1.8m, this was 2011, costs may have gone up but City are by no means the biggest spenders on academies at our level so its hard to think our costs have doubled. For reference Cat 3 £315,000 - £535,000. All as per picture below.

I agree EPPP doesn't help smaller clubs, however as said when a Cat 1 club wants to pinch a player its based on written rules around how much the fee costs, as said each year the player is at the club the price increases as its reflecting value of time put into developing the player, this is amongst other factors. The headlines of players being pinched for £10,000 etc are for players who've only been at the academy for 1 season like Jadon Sancho at Watford before being taken by Man City. Once they've been at your club for several seasons it does add up to over 6 figures. £3000 per year u9-u11 and then £25,000 per year for u12-u16 (as per image, BBC Sport article describing how its made up). So they are valued at that potential 6 figure fee by the EPPP system. 

Perhaps this is the wrong time to criticise the quality of academy players in the squad then on the basis of having produced very few decent kids in the past as you've said. We're averaging over 3 academy player appearances per game (the highest its been in a LONG time) in a team that is 10th in the league, we're starting to produce championship standard players with more regularity, the question now is whether they're capable of pushing for top 6, but a club who previously as you put it not producing players good enough for the team we're seeing an improvement.

EPPP.PNG

EPPP cost.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

Forget FFP, that's a red herring. Also, since when have monies ever been written off? Our operational losses are LOSSES. It's real money. It gets added to City's debt which as of today had to be upward of £100m. 

As to the cost of running the academy, you can't ignore the infrastructure costs as were there to be no academy we wouldn't have needed to invest in the asset else could now sell it off. The costs under the old scheme years back were reported as costing in excess of £2m a year, you can reckon it's £3m plus now.

EPPP is a killer. The kids you describe will be worth nowhere near the 6 figures quoted.

Key point: in the 55 years I've been watching how many decent kids have we produced? Very, very few.

 

Ignoring the recent examples of, e.g. Kelly, Reid and Bryan, would we also be allowed to include Gow, Tom Ritchie, Merreck, Tainton, Collier etc. from our wonderful 1970s youth team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Ignoring the recent examples of, e.g. Kelly, Reid and Bryan, would we also be allowed to include Gow, Tom Ritchie, Merreck, Tainton, Collier etc. from our wonderful 1970s youth team?

That Phil, would be from an 'academy' (sic) that consisted of a very small group of players who often trained in Greville Smyth park and cost diddly squat to run. Of course in those days they are the 'youth team' , barely enough lads to put a dude out. Lads who weren't seriously looked at until they were 15 or so. But the point stands, from the few that did make it there were hundreds that never did it never would. Even from that era we had the likes of Spiring (who looked a real star but faded,) and shortly afterwards had the 'superstars' of English youth forward play in Penny & Brown the Younger.  You'll recall, they played upfront in just about every England representative team from 12's upward, both of whom at 18 couldn't hut a cow's arse with a banjo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lrrr said:

So in a club that's losing more than £13m a year you take particular objection to the £1m - £2m thats spent on the academy which has a chance of earning the club back money? The sales of Reid, Bryan and Kelly in a sense would cover the academy for over 10 years, if they weren't already part of the losses Lansdown is able to cover. 

Interesting price you quote as the EPPP report itself classed the range of spending at different levels of academy, Cat 1 - low spending academies ~ £2.3m and high spending = ~£4.9m, Cat 2 low spending = ~£1m and high spending ~£1.8m, this was 2011, costs may have gone up but City are by no means the biggest spenders on academies at our level so its hard to think our costs have doubled. For reference Cat 3 £315,000 - £535,000. All as per picture below.

I agree EPPP doesn't help smaller clubs, however as said when a Cat 1 club wants to pinch a player its based on written rules around how much the fee costs, as said each year the player is at the club the price increases as its reflecting value of time put into developing the player, this is amongst other factors. The headlines of players being pinched for £10,000 etc are for players who've only been at the academy for 1 season like Jadon Sancho at Watford before being taken by Man City. Once they've been at your club for several seasons it does add up to over 6 figures. £3000 per year u9-u11 and then £25,000 per year for u12-u16 (as per image, BBC Sport article describing how its made up). So they are valued at that potential 6 figure fee by the EPPP system. 

Perhaps this is the wrong time to criticise the quality of academy players in the squad then on the basis of having produced very few decent kids in the past as you've said. We're averaging over 3 academy player appearances per game (the highest its been in a LONG time) in a team that is 10th in the league, we're starting to produce championship standard players with more regularity, the question now is whether they're capable of pushing for top 6, but a club who previously as you put it not producing players good enough for the team we're seeing an improvement.

EPPP.PNG

EPPP cost.PNG

The first and most important figure you continue to ignore is we don't lose £13m a year, we lose over £30m a year (unless that is it can be mitigated by player sales.) So whilst for a couple of years we did well with Premier panic money (drying up,) where's that coming from this season, or next, or the one after that. Fully expect the results to be published next year for this to show losses of £30 - £40m. 

From your EPPP calculations suppose we do produce the likes of Bryan & Reid every year, how much does that offset our losses? We'd need to ship out 100+ to recoup the £20-£30m we'd need EACH year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

The first and most important figure you continue to ignore is we don't lose £13m a year, we lose over £30m a year (unless that is it can be mitigated by player sales.) So whilst for a couple of years we did well with Premier panic money (drying up,) where's that coming from this season, or next, or the one after that. Fully expect the results to be published next year for this to show losses of £30 - £40m. 

From your EPPP calculations suppose we do produce the likes of Bryan & Reid every year, how much does that offset our losses? We'd need to ship out 100+ to recoup the £20-£30m we'd need EACH year.

I’m not ignoring how much we lose, I said more than £13m, all clubs lose money outside the premier league pretty much unless you can regularly sell players to offset this (ala Brentford). However here you’re shifting the posts as the debate was on academies, the likeliest source for player sales is players bought into the club as more come in than promoted academy players at 95% of clubs. 
 

second point you’re deliberately missing on and shifting goal posts again, you said our lads wouldn’t be valued at 6 figures and I’ve showed you will be, however this requires clubs to be signing them under EPPP to apply and many don’t by the time they’re 16 due to the costs involved. And as said if we can get them (like Benarous) signing pro contracts then we hold the ability to negotiate. Even if we can produce more league 1 players (and we’re seeing more reach loans at that level) then it’s more we can sell, more who’ll have sell on clauses, so over time if we continue developing it’s a potential revenue source again even if it’s a couple of hundred thousand here and there over the course of a season. You then hope to develop a couple of players every few to 5 years who could be sold for bigger money coupled with smart recruitment. No club will stay profitable until something is done about wage caps and limiting expenditure to under 100% of turnover but again not an academy topic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

That Phil, would be from an 'academy' (sic) that consisted of a very small group of players who often trained in Greville Smyth park and cost diddly squat to run. Of course in those days they are the 'youth team' , barely enough lads to put a dude out. Lads who weren't seriously looked at until they were 15 or so. But the point stands, from the few that did make it there were hundreds that never did it never would. Even from that era we had the likes of Spiring (who looked a real star but faded,) and shortly afterwards had the 'superstars' of English youth forward play in Penny & Brown the Younger.  You'll recall, they played upfront in just about every England representative team from 12's upward, both of whom at 18 couldn't hut a cow's arse with a banjo.

You are, of course, correct and, as I am sure you were aware, I was being somewhat facetious, especially concerning our Scottish youth, who were clearly not raised in our ‘academy’.

You did mention one aspect, though, and this brought back some wonderful memories; the team used to train in Greville Park.

When I was a very young schoolboy, I had a lovely uncle who lived in Durnford Avenue, just around the corner from Ashton Gate, and he would often take me to the park to watch the players train - he would point out the ‘stars’ and promising youth players, although, of course, I was too young to appreciate it (or them).

Nevertheless, I did recognise the players and, together with my late father, we followed that wonderful youth team all through that season until they lost to Tottenham in the 1970s youth cup semifinal.

Ridiculous, of course, but I felt a really strong attachment to that team, my team, as I had supported them from the beginning, and I was so proud when they finally got promoted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Lrrr said:

I’m not ignoring how much we lose, I said more than £13m, all clubs lose money outside the premier league pretty much unless you can regularly sell players to offset this (ala Brentford). However here you’re shifting the posts as the debate was on academies, the likeliest source for player sales is players bought into the club as more come in than promoted academy players at 95% of clubs. 
 

second point you’re deliberately missing on and shifting goal posts again, you said our lads wouldn’t be valued at 6 figures and I’ve showed you will be, however this requires clubs to be signing them under EPPP to apply and many don’t by the time they’re 16 due to the costs involved. And as said if we can get them (like Benarous) signing pro contracts then we hold the ability to negotiate. Even if we can produce more league 1 players (and we’re seeing more reach loans at that level) then it’s more we can sell, more who’ll have sell on clauses, so over time if we continue developing it’s a potential revenue source again even if it’s a couple of hundred thousand here and there over the course of a season. You then hope to develop a couple of players every few to 5 years who could be sold for bigger money coupled with smart recruitment. No club will stay profitable until something is done about wage caps and limiting expenditure to under 100% of turnover but again not an academy topic. 

Economical with the truth, eh? Firstly not all clubs lose money, a few well run outfits turn a couple of bob and though most clubs do operate losses few are at City's level.

EPPP was wholly designed to benefit Premier elite clubs, those who can afford to run Category 1 academies. It's also important to remind that EPPP is a framework. Transfers , training compensation & appearances compensation remain by mutual consent (as the Law demands,)  though where not agreed by both parties maximum liabilities are prescribed by an agreed formula when signing up to the framework (as if there was a choice.) This isn't what you are guaranteed to receive from every deal, invariably it will be considerably less. Its also worth highlighting the disbenefit of not being a Cat 1 academy in respect of the travel regulations for younger players. The superstar on our doorstep, well there's sod all now to prevent them bring whisked away where once we did have a degree of protection.

So in our case a superstar lad we do entice onto our books from 9 through 16 who moves to a Premier club and makes 100 first team appearances for them (in the Premier) will be worth a guaranteed maximum £1.409m. But they'll be rocking-horse in number. Any kid falling into that category will be poached much earlier and post 16 loaned out to ensure experience and compensation is reduced. Should that be a player in the Championship or appearances in the Championship it's max £359k. Lower leagues are chump change. 

If you map out the 'academy' players we've lost over the past few years very few of them would have netted 6 figures under EPPP, which is why we usually let them go for much less.

So what do we do with all kids we take in? At 16 the kid who's been on our books since 9 and we release as they're not up to much, does he get picked up by the likes of The Gas? Will they cough up £109k for such a kid? Like hell will they. We'll either release for much less else the kid drifts out of the game.

That's why clubs are going the Cat 4 root. Concentrate on over 16s who by that age are already largely pre-selecting and where compensations due to lower league feeder clubs with good track histories, the likes of Crewe, will be minimal. It mirrors the minimal youth teams we ran in the 70's where the likes of Morton served us well.

Transfers are transfers and the top down monies are drying up. Of course any additional add-ons are only guaranteed for a short period under EPPP and could be removed altogether where the original move is mutual (as powerful clubs demand them to be.) In this latter respect there's already evidence to show what's happening. Clubs taking players are offering small amounts as 'take it or leave it' to 'buy out' such constraints, not shy in highlighting it'll be fully within their control as and when the player gets played or subsequently transferred. Most of those 5%s are removed for £30k or less.

I'm not saying ditch the academy, but it's nowhere near the golden goose many claim and I think it could do with bring trimmed heavily in favour of older youths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

You are, of course, correct and, as I am sure you were aware, I was being somewhat facetious, especially concerning our Scottish youth, who were clearly not raised in our ‘academy’.

You did mention one aspect, though, and this brought back some wonderful memories; the team used to train in Greville Park.

When I was a very young schoolboy, I had a lovely uncle who lived in Durnford Avenue, just around the corner from Ashton Gate, and he would often take me to the park to watch the players train - he would point out the ‘stars’ and promising youth players, although, of course, I was too young to appreciate it (or them).

Nevertheless, I did recognise the players and, together with my late father, we followed that wonderful youth team all through that season until they lost to Tottenham in the 1970s youth cup semifinal.

Ridiculous, of course, but I felt a really strong attachment to that team, my team, as I had supported them from the beginning, and I was so proud when they finally got promoted.

Likewise. My great, great grandfather built and gifted most of Bath St to his family, thus I spent much of my youth watching players train in the park or hanging around the ground. Stockwood / Failand came later. One uncle in particular knew everybody at AG, via GS Bowls (the finest quality green around those parts,) the Rising Sun (best bagatelle table in Bristol,) & Caddies The Bookies. Off Season I'd also see some players training (running) around Highridge Common. I believe Harry Dolman owned/ leased a number of houses in (Elsbert Drive?) that City players could use at a discount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/02/2021 at 02:05, Sheltons Army said:

What a great start 

I admire his attitude and how he’s responded to each loan spell Gary , and performed for those Clubs - Cant be easy from a life or football perspective constantly adjusting to new

Personally I will follow his career with interest , as he’s one who deserves success

Took his chance very well I thought. Good luck to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...