Released List - U23s

[Davefevs]

10 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Not keen on the concept as although you're blocking them entering the football league it could then just result in a bottle neck of academy sides at the top of the national league, or what happens if the entire division became academy sides? Promote National South and North winners straight to the football league? 

My suggestion would be a revamp of u23's football, keep categories as they help with the structuring academies with how much they spend/staff size etc. But I would reconstruct the academy system to reflect that of the actual football pyramid, 4 divisions with promotion and relegation, start with PL 1 division and top of PL 2 division to make up the new top division, bottom of PL2 and best Cat 2 teams for 2nd division etc to construct the 4 tier system. This adds an advantage to the currently established higher category academies.

One of the flaws of academy football is that there are no consequences for finishing bottom of your division and losing games, adding the prospect of promotion and the risk of relegation also helps with the criticism of academy football about it being about playing styles over results. Over time struggling Cat 1 academies could drop down the system and mean they could choose to refocus their attentions on their academy. Better performing Cat 2, 3 and 4 academies such as City this season, Preston, Exeter, Peterborough, Bournemouth etc could rise up the system to reflect their good performances rather than being limited by their category as they are now.

This change would focus on the competitiveness of the divisions and the importance of winning matches. It could lead to more teams retaining players in their u23's teams thus raising the standard of the football played.

Side note, I also think it'd be great if u23's football were given more coverage, whether streamed on things like youtube, ifollow on a regular basis or heck perhaps even a game on sky sports to see what the viewing figures would be like, the cost would be low to put games on as there would be no bidding process with minimal interest in competition. Potentially semi popular to watch as well from general interest, plus academy games are often different times to that of live first team games so channel would be free.

Plus fix the loan system.

[BTRFTG]

6 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Think it is interesting & possibly illustrative that Robbie Cundy, who arrived here at an older age is one of very few who seems to have taken that physicality element in his stride.

Outstanding at Cambridge in a L2 side that was flying & now playing regularly just one level down from us, which is something neither Pring or Morton have managed.

Tinnion compared him to Aden Flint recently, he certainly won’t score as many goals but that should be seen as a real compliment.

Tinnion is the problem.

Unless I'm mistaken both Collier & Merrick debuted at 17/18.

Next month Cundy turns 24. By that stage Merrick had captained us for two seasons.

Cundy the 'youngster' (sic) my arse, his career is half over.

[SBB]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

 

Spot on Mr Jones. Our Trig knows all about that grind, as well. 

[spudski]

8 hours ago, Lrrr said:

Not keen on the concept as although you're blocking them entering the football league it could then just result in a bottle neck of academy sides at the top of the national league, or what happens if the entire division became academy sides? Promote National South and North winners straight to the football league? 

My suggestion would be a revamp of u23's football, keep categories as they help with the structuring academies with how much they spend/staff size etc. But I would reconstruct the academy system to reflect that of the actual football pyramid, 4 divisions with promotion and relegation, start with PL 1 division and top of PL 2 division to make up the new top division, bottom of PL2 and best Cat 2 teams for 2nd division etc to construct the 4 tier system. This adds an advantage to the currently established higher category academies.

One of the flaws of academy football is that there are no consequences for finishing bottom of your division and losing games, adding the prospect of promotion and the risk of relegation also helps with the criticism of academy football about it being about playing styles over results. Over time struggling Cat 1 academies could drop down the system and mean they could choose to refocus their attentions on their academy. Better performing Cat 2, 3 and 4 academies such as City this season, Preston, Exeter, Peterborough, Bournemouth etc could rise up the system to reflect their good performances rather than being limited by their category as they are now.

This change would focus on the competitiveness of the divisions and the importance of winning matches. It could lead to more teams retaining players in their u23's teams thus raising the standard of the football played.

Side note, I also think it'd be great if u23's football were given more coverage, whether streamed on things like youtube, ifollow on a regular basis or heck perhaps even a game on sky sports to see what the viewing figures would be like, the cost would be low to put games on as there would be no bidding process with minimal interest in competition. Potentially semi popular to watch as well from general interest, plus academy games are often different times to that of live first team games so channel would be free.

Interesting ideas...that would fix the competitive side of things...but not so much the physical side.

I don't think the level would have to be National League. Could be lower...hence my comments re Yate and Mangos. When I've watched our academy products play at this level, they meet their match, because the physicality levels it out.

Id be keen for B teams to be regional. Not every club would take up the opportunity.

The only other way is if Clubs took over other clubs....say for example City took over Yate Town. Use all academy players and appoint coach, but play under the name of Yate as an example.

It happened in the past to a degree in junior football.

[Bristol Rob]

7 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Tinnion is the problem.

Unless I'm mistaken both Collier & Merrick debuted at 17/18.

Next month Cundy turns 24. By that stage Merrick had captained us for two seasons.

Cundy the 'youngster' (sic) my arse, his career is half over.

Tinnion isn't the problem.

If players are good enough to be in a first team Championship squad, they'll be there. If they aren't then they won't.

Far more useful to have younger players getting league experience than being with the first team, with no experience and hoping they go from 4th choice left back to 3rd choice and their only chance of a game being injuries and suspensions for the players in front of them.

[Davefevs]

8 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Tinnion is the problem.

Unless I'm mistaken both Collier & Merrick debuted at 17/18.

Next month Cundy turns 24. By that stage Merrick had captained us for two seasons.

Cundy the 'youngster' (sic) my arse, his career is half over.

Believe it or not Tinnion doesn’t pick the team....I know you know that.  Why do you see Tinnion as the problem?

FWIW Tinnion is a very big advocate of playing the youngsters.  Unfortunately the people who pick the first team haven’t been and therefore he’s gone about sorting loans to get them experience and help their development.  He’d much rather them gain that playing time in the first team.

49 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Tinnion isn't the problem.

If players are good enough to be in a first team Championship squad, they'll be there. If they aren't then they won't.

Far more useful to have younger players getting league experience than being with the first team, with no experience and hoping they go from 4th choice left back to 3rd choice and their only chance of a game being injuries and suspensions for the players in front of them.

[And Its Smith]

8 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Tinnion is the problem.

Unless I'm mistaken both Collier & Merrick debuted at 17/18.

Next month Cundy turns 24. By that stage Merrick had captained us for two seasons.

Cundy the 'youngster' (sic) my arse, his career is half over.

You’ve said he’s the problem but explained zero reasons why. 

[PHILINFRANCE]

14 hours ago, downendcity said:

We would all like to see Sam Bell give a virtuoso performance so perhaps Pearson can get a tune out of him - a symphony in red and white.

Sam won't want to be playing second fiddle for too long otherwise he might look to orchestrate a move away, although that's not how we want our players to conduct themselves.

Hopefully he will know the score.

 

Well Done, very clever .

[alexukhc]

Tinnion came from a youth team that some went to make professionally Gazza, Ian Bogie. They won an FA youth cup, he’s old school. Did any youngsters make debuts under him as manager? Sends the good ones out on loan to get the experience and by all accounts looks after them very well

why he the problem?

[Silvio Dante]

8 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Tinnion is the problem.

Unless I'm mistaken both Collier & Merrick debuted at 17/18.

Next month Cundy turns 24. By that stage Merrick had captained us for two seasons.

Cundy the 'youngster' (sic) my arse, his career is half over.

You do know Robbie Cundy signed for us at the age of 22 in summer 2019, and had not played league football?

You do know that when he signed, we had a certain Adam Webster and Tomas Kalas on the books in his position? (Plus Baker, Vyner, Moore etc)

So. Your example of Tinnion doing a bad job is that he’s overseen the progression of a player who hadn’t played league football on signing, and didn’t have a hope in hell of getting in the team, to the point where next season he’ll either be sold for a good profit or in the first team squad.

Just so I’m clear, that’s your argument???

[BTRFTG]

30 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Believe it or not Tinnion doesn’t pick the team....I know you know that.  Why do you see Tinnion as the problem?

Because he perpetuates the myth that he and the Academy produce an end product. Ever talking up players in vast numbers, excusing results and issuing, with the usual perfunctory, placatory messaging, goodbyes when the kids (not so young) are finally released. Tinnion's modus operandi is to spend years informing how good 'X' or 'Y' is, what bright futures they have, how great they'll be, how shipping them out to nowhereland will bolster their careers, how they're all 'one for the future. All, that is, until they aren't, get cut and end up in obscurity. And within days of him no longer mentioning their names supporters quickly revert to: "Who?"

So why does he get it wrong so consistently? If the players were never up to it why didn't he recognise that earlier? If they are good enough and later show ability elsewhere (has that ever happened?), why didn't he and the Academy's vast entourage better develop them?

Matters not Tinnion wants to field young blood if the kids he's producing aren't good enough. How many kids have left and gone on to bigger and better things? Despite the huge investment over the years in its Academy City are routinely turned over by sides with less resource but far superior scouting and coaching set-ups. Teams who spend small sums obtaining unknown 17/18 year olds from the lower reaches of the pyramid.

The reason City fail to progress is because for some inexplicable reason they appear to love retaining ex-players for no other reason than they're ex-players. We need to get away from the stupid culture of 'he's one of our own', recruit winners and achieve something. We need to drop the folly that the Academy is a production line of 'talent'. At Championship level, it isn't.

[BTRFTG]

10 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

You do know Robbie Cundy signed for us at the age of 22 in summer 2019, and had not played league football?

You do know that when he signed, we had a certain Adam Webster and Tomas Kalas on the books in his position? (Plus Baker, Vyner, Moore etc)

So. Your example of Tinnion doing a bad job is that he’s overseen the progression of a player who hadn’t played league football on signing, and didn’t have a hope in hell of getting in the team, to the point where next season he’ll either be sold for a good profit or in the first team squad.

Just so I’m clear, that’s your argument???

If Cundy is that good why, when we didn't have a walking centre half on the books, whilst we were signing expensive blokes without knees and third-rate premier also-rans, or playing players out of position simply because they were less crocked than the rest, couldn't he get a game? If Cundy's that good how come he didn't play league football before he was 22? By age 22 just how is Tinnion to improve him? 

So now he's days away from being 24 and never played at our level. 24 and an Academy player, really?

[spudski]

BT is far from the problem...in fact the Club have done the right thing in recognising that the academy system is flawed.

They've realised that players need to play against physically stronger players, hence youngsters being moved up groups.

They also realise players get to a stage where they need competitive league football to progress further, hence the loaning out and BT given the job to oversee that and support and watch closely.

The Academy is doing better than it has for years.

What is the acceptable percentage of academy products to make it to the first team.

To run an academy...you need players. You need a load of them to make squads up. They know the majority won't make it...but you still need those players to make up a team to a certain level. 

The problem you have, is you are dealing with kids. Put yourself back to how impressionable we all were as teenagers. You become an academy player, with all the kit, training facilities, swagger, girls, peers....it's easy to lose the hunger and drive. Some fall by the wayside not because of ability...but drive to get better, as some of them think they've already made it. Stick a tracksuit on, a Gucci washbag under your arm...and the girls come flocking. So many distractions. 

 

[Taz]

17 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

If Cundy is that good why, when we didn't have a walking centre half on the books, whilst we were signing expensive blokes without knees and third-rate premier also-rans, or playing players out of position simply because they were less crocked than the rest, couldn't he get a game? If Cundy's that good how come he didn't play league football before he was 22? By age 22 just how is Tinnion to improve him? 

So now he's days away from being 24 and never played at our level. 24 and an Academy player, really?

Flint never signed for Swindon until 2011 - 10 years ago. He's currently 31.

Vardy never signed for Leicester until 2012. He's 34.

So is your point that unless you've played league football by 22 you may as well not bother? You do realise that different players peak at different ages? Some don't even get spotted until they're in their 20's.

Would you rather we throw Cundy in at the 2nd highest level in the English Football pyramid, make stupid mistakes and cost us points, or try lower down and come up if/when ready?

He has jumped a few levels already, in a very quick period. If he's not good enough for the first team, then fair enough. He'll end up being sold to a league 1 club probably, for a decent enough fee with a big sell on just in case.

He has been picked up by us, trained at the academy - probably even when he was on loan at Bath. So yes he is an Academy player, just like Semenyo was until recently. 

I don't get your issue here. We're picking up players, training them, loaning them, and selling if not good enough for the first team. That's something we haven't done properly until recently, and we were hugely critical of the club as a fan base for not doing this before!

[BTRFTG]

10 minutes ago, spudski said:

To run an academy...you need players

That's the problem. Signing hundreds of kids to justify the existence of the Academy. No academy, no need for all the kids.

Suppose we do as we did when we were most successful, or as Brentford and others now demonstrate. That we run a youth team; team singular. That we employ quality scouts all over the shop to identify talent, not lackeys, cronies, ex-players and relatives as City has done these past two decades. That we don't obsess about Bristol. That we take a small group of 16/17/18 year olds and play them?

 

[Davefevs]

23 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Because he perpetuates the myth that he and the Academy produce an end product. Ever talking up players in vast numbers, excusing results and issuing, with the usual perfunctory, placatory messaging, goodbyes when the kids (not so young) are finally released. Tinnion's modus operandi is to spend years informing how good 'X' or 'Y' is, what bright futures they have, how great they'll be, how shipping them out to nowhereland will bolster their careers, how they're all 'one for the future. All, that is, until they aren't, get cut and end up in obscurity. And within days of him no longer mentioning their names supporters quickly revert to: "Who?"

So why does he get it wrong so consistently? If the players were never up to it why didn't he recognise that earlier? If they are good enough and later show ability elsewhere (has that ever happened?), why didn't he and the Academy's vast entourage better develop them?

Matters not Tinnion wants to field young blood if the kids he's producing aren't good enough. How many kids have left and gone on to bigger and better things? Despite the huge investment over the years in its Academy City are routinely turned over by sides with less resource but far superior scouting and coaching set-ups. Teams who spend small sums obtaining unknown 17/18 year olds from the lower reaches of the pyramid.

The reason City fail to progress is because for some inexplicable reason they appear to love retaining ex-players for no other reason than they're ex-players. We need to get away from the stupid culture of 'he's one of our own', recruit winners and achieve something. We need to drop the folly that the Academy is a production line of 'talent'. At Championship level, it isn't.

BT: Hi Mr and Mrs Random and Johnny Random

Random Family: Hi Tinman

BT: if you can just sign here Johnny

Mr R: before you do Johnny what’s my son’s chances of making it into the PL?

BT: statistically 0.012% according to Michael Calvin (No hunger in paradise)

Mrs R: that’s not very good is it?

BT: no, pet, it’s not, but at Bristol City we are 100%

Johnny: give me the pen dad.

Mr R: hang on, how do you get 100%?  What’s so special about City?

BT: well, we only take on 9 year olds that are definitely gonna make it.

Mrs R: ok, that’s great.  How many intakes are there this year?

BT: just the one pet, your lad Johnny.

Mr R: what?

BT: yep, nobody else we think will make it

Johnny: who will I train with?

BT: you’ll have 4 coaches all to yourself, so you’ll be fantastically coached.

Mr R: what about matches

BT: Ah, well, that’s a problem......

 

For info, again I know you know this....Brian Tinnion isn’t in charge of the Academy, he is Pathway Manager.

[BTRFTG]

4 minutes ago, Taz said:

Flint never signed for Swindon until 2011 - 10 years ago. He's currently 31.

Vardy never signed for Leicester until 2012. He's 34.

So is your point that unless you've played league football by 22 you may as well not bother? You do realise that different players peak at different ages? Some don't even get spotted until they're in their 20's.

Would you rather we throw Cundy in at the 2nd highest level in the English Football pyramid, make stupid mistakes and cost us points, or try lower down and come up if/when ready?

He has jumped a few levels already, in a very quick period. If he's not good enough for the first team, then fair enough. He'll end up being sold to a league 1 club probably, for a decent enough fee with a big sell on just in case.

He has been picked up by us, trained at the academy - probably even when he was on loan at Bath. So yes he is an Academy player, just like Semenyo was until recently. 

I don't get your issue here. We're picking up players, training them, loaning them, and selling if not good enough for the first team. That's something we haven't done properly until recently, and we were hugely critical of the club as a fan base for not doing this before!

No, my point is if signing a 22 year old sign one who's proven or part proven, not one for development. All those players you mention were proven at decent non-league standard prior to entering the league. They didn't go into development, they went straight into their respective sides.

I also don't buy Cundy might have cost us and more points than we were shipping at the time. If he can't get into a struggling side when will he get a chance? City persisted with Semenyo and to what end? Game after game with no end product (not that's exclusive to youth as most of our older players didn't merit a place in the squad.)

It's also folly to talk of the players sold and income received. Other than two seasons where we were lucky to get stupid Premier money for (mostly) Championship talent (recall the best was a short term flip and not a developed player,) what did we get for the dozens and dozens of players released? Indebted is the answer.

 

[Taz]

2 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

No, my point is if signing a 22 year old sign one who's proven or part proven, not one for development. All those players you mention were proven at decent non-league standard prior to entering the league. They didn't go into development, they went straight into their respective sides.

I also don't buy Cundy might have cost us and more points than we were shipping at the time. If he can't get into a struggling side when will he get a chance? City persisted with Semenyo and to what end? Game after game with no end product (not that's exclusive to youth as most of our older players didn't merit a place in the squad.)

It's also folly to talk of the players sold and income received. Other than two seasons where we were lucky to get stupid Premier money for (mostly) Championship talent (recall the best was a short term flip and not a developed player,) what did we get for the dozens and dozens of players released? Indebted is the answer.

 

So are we not developing him then by sending him to League 2, recalling then sending back out to League 1 straight away?

If he's nowhere near the first team, and has no chance of getting anywhere near by this time next season, then sell him on. 

We need to be self sustainable as a club. If that means taking a gamble on lower league players, flipping them and then making a profit of some kind, in the hope that for every 6 or 7, 1 may get through to the first team and then generate  big money, then that's what we need to do. A lower league Chelsea model.

You've seen/heard some of the abuse supporters give players even when they're established ones. Throw them in too early, crucify them, and you'll never see them again. Look at Kelly before he left - still made mistakes, and on occasions took a lot of flack for it.

Development is there for a reason, and there is no age limit on it. You develop them until they're either ready for the first team, or you can't develop them anymore.

[Bristol Rob]

15 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

No, my point is if signing a 22 year old sign one who's proven or part proven, not one for development. All those players you mention were proven at decent non-league standard prior to entering the league. They didn't go into development, they went straight into their respective sides.

I also don't buy Cundy might have cost us and more points than we were shipping at the time. If he can't get into a struggling side when will he get a chance? City persisted with Semenyo and to what end? Game after game with no end product (not that's exclusive to youth as most of our older players didn't merit a place in the squad.)

It's also folly to talk of the players sold and income received. Other than two seasons where we were lucky to get stupid Premier money for (mostly) Championship talent (recall the best was a short term flip and not a developed player,) what did we get for the dozens and dozens of players released? Indebted is the answer.

 

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.

We could sign players with non league or lower league club experience or we could do something very similar and send our players off to these divisions to get the experience and then get them back when they are more equipped.

[spudski]

43 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

That's the problem. Signing hundreds of kids to justify the existence of the Academy. No academy, no need for all the kids.

Suppose we do as we did when we were most successful, or as Brentford and others now demonstrate. That we run a youth team; team singular. That we employ quality scouts all over the shop to identify talent, not lackeys, cronies, ex-players and relatives as City has done these past two decades. That we don't obsess about Bristol. That we take a small group of 16/17/18 year olds and play them?

 

You make some valid points... And yes we have been a job for the boys club in the past. A lot of it boils down to trust. I think the likes of BT and Murray are good for the club. Some in the past, not so.

Brentford are a very forward thinking team...they had to do something different, especially being in London.

I agree our Scouting could be better, and that all sources are used. SoD had, and BT have a good connection with some of the scouts on here for as an example. 

Being open to all sources is a must. So many head scouts and recruiting teams only like to work with certain sources and agents...that closes a lot of avenues.

Thousands are spent on analytics, yet peanuts is spent on analysists and scouts. You know what you get when you pay peanuts...

Football in many ways us stuck in its ways. Money being thrown at old methods with technology thrown in.

It needs to change to develop a better product imo.

Let's face it...regardless of development, you aren't going to get many players that can step out from an academy set up and be top Championship/Prem level.

[BTRFTG]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

BT: Hi Mr and Mrs Random and Johnny Random

Random Family: Hi Tinman

BT: if you can just sign here Johnny

Mr R: before you do Johnny what’s my son’s chances of making it into the PL?

BT: statistically 0.012% according to Michael Calvin (No hunger in paradise)

Mrs R: that’s not very good is it?

BT: no, pet, it’s not, but at Bristol City we are 100%

Johnny: give me the pen dad.

Mr R: hang on, how do you get 100%?  What’s so special about City?

BT: well, we only take on 9 year olds that are definitely gonna make it.

Mrs R: ok, that’s great.  How many intakes are there this year?

BT: just the one pet, your lad Johnny.

Mr R: what?

BT: yep, nobody else we think will make it

Johnny: who will I train with?

BT: you’ll have 4 coaches all to yourself, so you’ll be fantastically coached.

Mr R: what about matches

BT: Ah, well, that’s a problem......

 

For info, again I know you know this....Brian Tinnion isn’t in charge of the Academy, he is Pathway Manager.

Fantasy.

To start with the conversation would cease at (I'll assume your figure to be true though would have thought it lower) "maybe only 0.012% of kids worldwide make the Premier but with City that's reduced zero given save for one season and despite squandering shed loads of resource, you've never come close to reaching that height. So why would I consider sending my kid here?"

More importantly why, as a professional football club, are we even bothering coaching kids that young? We all know, deep down,  it's self-promotion. Why not let local clubs develop youth as they used to? The four kids I grew up and played with who went on to sign professional all came via youth clubs, going to pro clubs at 17.

And if it's the case that Tinnion is Pathway only, does that have to be an ex-player and if he's only looking after pastoral care and not coaching, why is he the face City always used to relate how great these kids are and will be from a footballing perspective? Shouldn't the coaches do that and therefore be held to account?

[Major Isewater]

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

Because he perpetuates the myth that he and the Academy produce an end product. Ever talking up players in vast numbers, excusing results and issuing, with the usual perfunctory, placatory messaging, goodbyes when the kids (not so young) are finally released. Tinnion's modus operandi is to spend years informing how good 'X' or 'Y' is, what bright futures they have, how great they'll be, how shipping them out to nowhereland will bolster their careers, how they're all 'one for the future. All, that is, until they aren't, get cut and end up in obscurity. And within days of him no longer mentioning their names supporters quickly revert to: "Who?"

So why does he get it wrong so consistently? If the players were never up to it why didn't he recognise that earlier? If they are good enough and later show ability elsewhere (has that ever happened?), why didn't he and the Academy's vast entourage better develop them?

Matters not Tinnion wants to field young blood if the kids he's producing aren't good enough. How many kids have left and gone on to bigger and better things? Despite the huge investment over the years in its Academy City are routinely turned over by sides with less resource but far superior scouting and coaching set-ups. Teams who spend small sums obtaining unknown 17/18 year olds from the lower reaches of the pyramid.

The reason City fail to progress is because for some inexplicable reason they appear to love retaining ex-players for no other reason than they're ex-players. We need to get away from the stupid culture of 'he's one of our own', recruit winners and achieve something. We need to drop the folly that the Academy is a production line of 'talent'. At Championship level, it isn't.

It takes a certain time for the overall level of players to improve from when we were in the third division to where we are now.

You don’t ditch all your academy products because of promotion but you have to increase the quality which is harder the higher up the food chain you are. 
 

I agree, in part , that relying on ex-players , who for the most part didn’t achieve very much in their careers, may have held us back. 
 

 

[Davefevs]

24 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Fantasy.

you started it

To start with the conversation would cease at (I'll assume your figure to be true though would have thought it lower) "maybe only 0.012% of kids worldwide make the Premier but with City that's reduced zero given save for one season and despite squandering shed loads of resource, you've never come close to reaching that height. So why would I consider sending my kid here?"

From the book I quoted, based on 180 players of the 1.5m playing youth football at any one point.

I don’t disagree Academy has been poor over a number of years, but we are getting more through into the first team.  The fact that 3 have gone onto play PL (Bryan, Reid, Kelly) is proof it’s heading in the right direction.  But standards need to keep improving.

You also have to factor in poaching.  We aren’t getting first dibs on many players.  Likes of Kane and Maddox went elsewhere.

More importantly why, as a professional football club, are we even bothering coaching kids that young?

That’s another question.  I’m not hugely in favour either, but pros and cons....and egos too.

We all know, deep down,  it's self-promotion. Why not let local clubs develop youth as they used to? The four kids I grew up and played with who went on to sign professional all came via youth clubs, going to pro clubs at 17.

Guessing your age, so likely 50 years between what happened then and what happens now.  Some is for the best, some not.

And if it's the case that Tinnion is Pathway only, does that have to be an ex-player and if he's only looking after pastoral care and not coaching, why is he the face City always used to relate how great these kids are and will be from a footballing perspective? Shouldn't the coaches do that and therefore be held to account?

Of course it doesn’t have to be an ex-player, but also worth giving Tinnion some credit that at least he’d been working with youth in Spain, so wasn’t purely, “let’s give him a job out of sympathy”.