"academy Is Heading For The Scrap Heap"

[Milo]

Today's Evening Post has an article by Simon Parkinson about Dave Fear raising an alarm about the future of the Academy. I've copied and pasted the article below from The Evening Post Website

It's an interesting article and the bit that caught my attention was SL's comment "At the end of the day, a youth policy is an important factor in that, whether you call it an Academy or something else." An Academy by any other name is not an Academy. I believe that a downgrading to a Centre of Excellence would be a massive retrograde step.

With the Supporters Trust looking to raise money in return for shares, do you believe it would be a good idea to campaign for the money to be put towards retaining an Academy?

MOVING THE GOALPOSTS?Bristol City's Youth Academy is heading for the scrapheap - that's the opinion of lifelong fan Dave Fear, who helped establish the ground-breaking scheme in the 1990s. In an exclusive interview with the Evening Post, City Academy governor Fear has revealed his concerns for the organisation's long- term future.

Fear contends that City directors Steve Lansdown and Keith Dawe plan to justify the closure of the Academy on financial grounds and replace it with a revamped scouting network and reduced youth coaching system.

But City chairman Lansdown today refuted suggestions that the club's Youth Academy is to be scrapped.

Rumours of the Academy's possible closure have spread since John Laycock resigned as a director of the League One club in the autumn.

But Lansdown insists there are no plans to shut the Academy and scoffs at those who question his commitment to youth.

He declared: "Closing the Academy is not on my agenda and I don't recall at any stage saying that it was. I'm a firm believer in a healthy youth policy and a supporter of the Academy."

Yet Lansdown believes the current structure to be unwieldy and makes no secret of his desire to run a tight ship financially.

City announced a pre-tax loss of £1.9 million for the previous financial year and the chairman perceives the Academy to be "expensive".

He said: "The Football Association put in place a very bureaucratic system and we've managed to chip away at that down the years. There is still room for improvement and the costs of running the Academy can be reduced further.

"That doesn't mean I'm seeking to scrap it, just make it cost-effective."

Speaking at the recent annual meeting of shareholders, Lansdown suggested the Academy was not providing the club with value for money.

He explained: "The Academy has to be judged in two main areas.

"Firstly, there is the matter of producing players and then selling them on. A look at the transfer fees we have received from other clubs in recent years suggests the Academy has done its job in that respect.

"The second area is providing players for the first team and, in that respect, we have been less successful.

"We had a crop of Academy products in the team that Danny Wilson built and yet we still failed to win promotion in 2004. Since then, we have produced very little. Players are coming through again now, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating and they still require time to prove themselves.

"I do believe in youth development, but the bottom line for any football club has to be results. Our league position says the Academy has not done its job in terms of bringing through players to help win us promotion."

In response to Fear's claims, Lansdown said: "I cannot afford to be sentimental about it. I have to look at the financial implications.

"It's easy for other people to be idealistic; I have to be realistic.

"I'm seeking progress and development and I expect people to perform. I'm not running a school, I'm running a football club.

"At the end of the day, a youth policy is an important factor in that, whether you call it an Academy or something else."

[Guest WillsbridgeRed]

The academy has NOT produced the goods, however cutting it now is a retrograde step by someone that is doing serious damage to this football club and how it is percieved.

Laying the blame at the door of the academy for not getting promotion under Wilson is a cynical cheepshot, was it not the board that refused to give the divisions most in form player a pay rise and sold him?

We've monopolised youth development in this City, yet it looks set to be thrown away by the same person that always mentions doing things in the long, rather than short term. It's no suprise that since our academy, young Rovers players in the first team have dried up, yet we see talent like Skuse, Gouldbourne and Cotteril come through.

Recently, I understood the Academy was costing the club a mere £200,000 a year, the rest being made up through other sources. If this amount is now considered to high, it is clear thew current board need to make seeling this football club to someone more able an urgent priority.

[Guest North Street]

The academy has NOT produced the goods, however cutting it now is a retrograde step by someone that is doing serious damage to this football club and how it is percieved.

Laying the blame at the door of the academy for not getting promotion under Wilson is a cynical cheepshot, was it not the board that refused to give the divisions most in form player a pay rise and sold him?

We've monopolised youth development in this City, yet it looks set to be thrown away by the same person that always mentions doing things in the long, rather than short term. It's no suprise that since our academy, young Rovers players in the first team have dried up, yet we see talent like Skuse, Gouldbourne and Cotteril come through.

Recently, I understood the Academy was costing the club a mere £200,000 a year, the rest being made up through other sources. If this amount is now considered to high, it is clear thew current board need to make seeling this football club to someone more able an urgent priority.

If the acedemy costs £200,000 per year that to me still equates to value even if it fails to produce a player for the first team every season. It is over looked but BCFC would not have been allowed access to Lita at the end of season trials if the club did not have an acedemy.We are now staring to see players come through but it does take time and i do not want to see BCFC return to the days when any any half decent player from these parts Newman aside went to the likes of Southampton and Norwhich who looked to this area for young talent.

[RedM]

Has this come because of Laycock stepping down as I think the academy was largely his 'baby', or after GJ has done his top to toe review of the club?

Maybe GJ doesn't see the need of our academy as he has placed his brother as a scout and prefers to work with scouts around the country rather than the academy system? Although when he first was appointed I thought he mentioned the academy as a plus and a factor in his decision?

No doubt this news has made AshtonYates Christmas though!

[purple_monkey_dishwasher]

Am I missing something? This article mentions an exclusive interview with David Fear, yet not a single quote from him is given. Is there another article containing this interview?

[Guest WillsbridgeRed]

Am I missing something? This article mentions an exclusive interview with David Fear, yet not a single quote from him is given. Is there another article containing this interview?

Pages 48 49

[Milo]

I don't think you can expect to sell your best young talent and then point to the current squad and ask "where's the talent gone?".

Would the following players get in our first team?:

Liam Rosenior (sold for c.£55K), played 8 games in the Premiership this season

Danny Coles (sold for c.£200K), played 9 games in the Championship this season

Matt Hill (sold for c.£100K), played 16 games in the Championship this season

Tommy Doherty (sold for c.£100K), played 15 games in the Championship this season

Joe Anyinsah (sold for c.£100K), played 3 games in the Championship this season

Kevin Amankwaah (sold for c.£20K), played 28 games in League One this season

Leroy Lita (sold for c.£1M), played 18 games in the Championship this season

TOTAL RECEIVED IN LAST TWO YEARS = c.£1.6M

And similarly, what value would you place on current academy players in the First Team Squad - Dave Cotterill, Craig Woodman, Louis Carey, Steve Phillips, Scott Golbourne, Clayton Fortune and Cole Skuse?

At £200K a year I firmly believe that the academy offers value for money. As the academy is now so heavily subsidised, I can't help feeling that a Centre of Excellence will provide inferior quality at a similar cost.

[purple_monkey_dishwasher]

Pages 48 49

Cheers, hasn't appeared online yet. So just what are David Fear's fears? It's difficult to tell from this article as the Lansdown quotes seem totally contradictory and bear little resemblance to what the Evening Post is trying to make us think he's actually said.

[Guest The Mother Of All Haddocks]

Maybe SL is AshtonYate in disguise!!!

[StapleHillPhil]

At £200K a year I firmly believe that the academy offers value for money. As the academy is now so heavily subsidised, I can't help feeling that a Centre of Excellence will provide inferior quality at a similar cost.

Will costs of running the academy remain at £200k and will the subsidies continue to be available?

If the answer to the above questions are yes then I agree that it seems an odd decision to downgrade it.

Perhaps the FA are planning even stricter rules on academies that will come with significant future costs for the club?

[purple_monkey_dishwasher]

Maybe SL is AshtonYate in disguise!!!

Again, am I missing something? I can't imagine Ashtonyate saying "Closing the Academy is not on my agenda and I don't recall at any stage saying that it was. I'm a firm believer in a healthy youth policy and a supporter of the Academy."

It must be Wednesday. I never did get the hang of Wednesdays...

[Guest WillsbridgeRed]

Cheers, hasn't appeared online yet. So just what are David Fear's fears? It's difficult to tell from this article as the Lansdown quotes seem totally contradictory and bear little resemblance to what the Evening Post is trying to make us think he's actually said.

It is a rather large peice by Evil post standards, and indicates the threat of losing the acadmey was why John Laycock resigned, that the "worst day in the clubs history" (Keith Dawe) was with a team containing several academy players (ref Cardiff play off final) ect.

Actually worth buying the paper to read

[Guest The Mother Of All Haddocks]

Again, am I missing something? I can't imagine Ashtonyate saying "Closing the Academy is not on my agenda and I don't recall at any stage saying that it was. I'm a firm believer in a healthy youth policy and a supporter of the Academy."

It must be Wednesday. I never did get the hang of Wednesdays...

Ahhh, but you are missing the point! Of course Ashtonyate wouldn't say such things, but SL is using this name to sow the seeds of doubt into our minds. When he finally anounces that he is closing the acadamy, he will use Ashtonyates examples as the reason. Mark my words PMD, all users are not who they seem! Take that Willsbridge fellow, I have it on good authority that he is Bristol's No 1 pimp and is using this site to recruit. Lock up your wife! Also that Faustas bloke has been sent from the devil. Be afraid, be very afraid!

[RedUn]

"The second area is providing players for the first team and, in that respect, we have been less successful.

"We had a crop of Academy products in the team that Danny Wilson built and yet we still failed to win promotion in 2004. Since then, we have produced very little. Players are coming through again now, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating and they still require time to prove themselves.

"I do believe in youth development, but the bottom line for any football club has to be results. Our league position says the Academy has not done its job in terms of bringing through players to help win us promotion."

This is the bit I can't understand. It is totally contradicted by the fact that six of that season's squad moved on to Championship clubs and all of them were products of the academy (or the scheme that went before anybody had academies); yet only one journeyman (Miller) moved to a higher league - that tells me the academy had produced the quality and that the transfer market had not.

[cheshire_red]

This is the bit I can't understand. It is totally contradicted by the fact that six of that season's squad moved on to Championship clubs and all of them were products of the academy (or the scheme that went before anybody had academies); yet only one journeyman (Miller) moved to a higher league - that tells me the academy had produced the quality and that the transfer market had not.

Excellent point and I would add to that that the majority of us take great pride in the number of players who have come up through the system especially as they are in the main 'local lads'.

[Milo]

This is the bit I can't understand. It is totally contradicted by the fact that six of that season's squad moved on to Championship clubs and all of them were products of the academy (or the scheme that went before anybody had academies); yet only one journeyman (Miller) moved to a higher league - that tells me the academy had produced the quality and that the transfer market had not.

That's a good point.

Since the 00/01 season (Wilson's first season), total proceeds of sales from non-Academy players;

Roberts £20K

Miller £225K

Heff £125K

Murray £650K

TOTAL IN: c.£1M

Total Transfer money spent;

Brooker £150K

Miller £300K

Wilkshire £250K

Murray c.£400K?

Goodfellow £50K

Heff £125K

Peacock £600K

Matthews £100K

TOTAL OUT: c.£2M

That certainly leads me to conclude that value for money is with the academy not the transfer market. It's also worthwhile comparing the quality of players bought in with the list of academy players sold (see one of my earlier posts).

Surely the players bought in should take as much (if not more) blame than the Academy players for not being promoted?

[Guest ashtonyate]

Stop taking my name in vain what I have said in the past I still stand by but we should have shut it down in the first couple of years when it was costing over 1 million a year to run. I think at 200k it should be affordable if that is the true cost I still don't belive it is.

I also still say it has not done the job it should have done in the past apart from a few players the rest have been sub standard and scouting should not have been cut because of the Academy given the choice I think I would have a good scouting system over an academy

[Nibor]

Stop taking my name in vain what I have said in the past I still stand by but we should have shut it down in the first couple of years when it was costing over 1 million a year to run. I think at 200k it should be affordable if that is the true cost I still don't belive it is.

I also still say it has not done the job it should have done in the past apart from a few players the rest have been sub standard and scouting should not have been cut because of the Academy given the choice I think I would have a good scouting system over an academy

Scouting was never cut due to the academy, it died a long long time ago and no manager up until Johnson could be arsed to set it back up.

Nibor

[BCFC_Dan]

Surely the players bought in should take as much (if not more) blame than the Academy players for not being promoted?

I'd be inclined to assign them a large proportion of the blame, along with the blame for creating the problematic culture we have at the club now. What kind of example to the Academy players did guys like Peacock and Matthews set?

The culture at City recently has not been one that rewards hard work and enthusiasm - think how much hard work players like Matt Hill put in over the 4 years of Wilson's tenure only to be let down by the likes of Peacock, Matthews and others playing when they felt like it, treating their own fitness as optional and generally not taking things seriously. I'd certainly have left that Summer and it's no surprise that so many others did.

If I were Steve Lansdown I would be more in favour of a complete transfer embargo than closing down the Academy, although both are really too extreme. All that is needed is a much better scouting system and stricter checks on those players we do sign. Luckily the indications are that Johnson has the same ideas. All Lansdown has to do is sit tight and back his man for a couple of seasons.

[Guest ashtonyate]

[i'd be inclined to assign them a large proportion of the blame, along with the blame for creating the problematic culture we have at the club now. What kind of example to the Academy players did guys like Peacock and Matthews set?

The culture at City recently has not been one that rewards hard work and enthusiasm - think how much hard work players like Matt Hill put in over the 4 years of Wilson's tenure only to be let down by the likes of Peacock, Matthews and others playing when they felt like it, treating their own fitness as optional and generally not taking things seriously. I'd certainly have left that Summer and it's no surprise that so many others did.

If I were Steve Lansdown I would be more in favour of a complete transfer embargo than closing down the Academy, although both are really too extreme. All that is needed is a much better scouting system and stricter checks on those players we do sign. Luckily the indications are that Johnson has the same ideas. All Lansdown has to do is sit tight and back his man for a couple of seasons.]

Peacock was ok at first he lacked a ball winning centre foward had he had one i think he would have done better here.

Matthews had a problem over his fitness when he came here and should never been signed.Has for Hill setting an example the only example he set was how to sort out his contract up, till the last 18 months he played for us he was a libility

Thank god you arn't Lansdown if you would put a transfer embargo on as we would never get promoted

[RedM]

Peacock was ok at first he lacked a ball winning centre foward had he had one i think he would have done better here.

Matthews had a problem over his fitness when he came here and should never been signed.Has for Hill setting an example the only example he set was how to sort out his contract up, till the last 18 months he played for us he was a libility

Thank god you arn't Lansdown if you would put a transfer embargo on as we would never get promoted

I think you are being way too harsh on Matt Hill, but that's your opinion. I think Matt was very clever looking after himself. From Bristol City's point of view I didn't want him to leave but when I thought about it he did the right thing for himself. Why should his career be held back just because some of his team-mates were happy in the comfort zone. He did what you have to do in life, took his chance and looked after himself and his family.

I think GJ and SL are very similar in the fact that they believe hard work and effort is the way forward, it's just taken the some playersand fans a little while to appreciate this.

[Guest ashtonyate]

I think you are being way too harsh on Matt Hill, but that's your opinion. I think Matt was very clever looking after himself. From Bristol City's point of view I didn't want him to leave but when I thought about it he did the right thing for himself. Why should his career be held back just because some of his team-mates were happy in the comfort zone. He did what you have to do in life, took his chance and looked after himself and his family.

I think GJ and SL are very similar in the fact that they believe hard work and effort is the way forward, it's just taken the some playersand fans a little while to appreciate this.

I agree that Matt had too look after his self its a job to him, it just the system that we City gave him the chance to become a footballer and never got his worth in transfer fees.

Thats what worries me about Cotterell,Goldbourne and Skuse,will we get pay back at the end of the day which we must do as we are not a rich club.

[bh red]

jesus christ..........not this thread again!

looking at the article nothing new is being said, it is just somes view, obviously Evening post are struggling for real news

[BCFC_Dan]

I agree that Matt had too look after his self its a job to him, it just the system that we City gave him the chance to become a footballer and never got his worth in transfer fees.

Thats what worries me about Cotterell,Goldbourne and Skuse,will we get pay back at the end of the day which we must do as we are not a rich club.

The system at City gave him the chance to bust a gut for four years for absolutely no reward because other players at the club (almost all of whom were transferred in) couldn't take things seriously enough to win promotion.

If you think Matt was a liability then you must have some ridiculously high standards because he's doing just fine in the Championship without us.

[richieb]

Interesting in the fact that Dave Fear took this to the press.

Not like me to put a conspiracy theory forward, but Laycock was the big cheese behind the Academy & Dave Fear was very much in favour of the Academy & a big Laycock buddy.

So with Laycock pulling out, does Dave Fear believe that SL will pull the plug on the Academy - Is Laycock loading the gun??

Ain't far out again.

[Guest mrmatdavidge21]

Today's Evening Post has an article by Simon Parkinson about Dave Fear raising an alarm about the future of the Academy. I've copied and pasted the article below from The Evening Post Website

It's an interesting article and the bit that caught my attention was SL's comment "At the end of the day, a youth policy is an important factor in that, whether you call it an Academy or something else." An Academy by any other name is not an Academy. I believe that a downgrading to a Centre of Excellence would be a massive retrograde step.

With the Supporters Trust looking to raise money in return for shares, do you believe it would be a good idea to campaign for the money to be put towards retaining an Academy?

MOVING THE GOALPOSTS?Bristol City's Youth Academy is heading for the scrapheap - that's the opinion of lifelong fan Dave Fear, who helped establish the ground-breaking scheme in the 1990s. In an exclusive interview with the Evening Post, City Academy governor Fear has revealed his concerns for the organisation's long- term future.

Fear contends that City directors Steve Lansdown and Keith Dawe plan to justify the closure of the Academy on financial grounds and replace it with a revamped scouting network and reduced youth coaching system.

But City chairman Lansdown today refuted suggestions that the club's Youth Academy is to be scrapped.

Rumours of the Academy's possible closure have spread since John Laycock resigned as a director of the League One club in the autumn.

But Lansdown insists there are no plans to shut the Academy and scoffs at those who question his commitment to youth.

He declared: "Closing the Academy is not on my agenda and I don't recall at any stage saying that it was. I'm a firm believer in a healthy youth policy and a supporter of the Academy."

Yet Lansdown believes the current structure to be unwieldy and makes no secret of his desire to run a tight ship financially.

City announced a pre-tax loss of £1.9 million for the previous financial year and the chairman perceives the Academy to be "expensive".

He said: "The Football Association put in place a very bureaucratic system and we've managed to chip away at that down the years. There is still room for improvement and the costs of running the Academy can be reduced further.

"That doesn't mean I'm seeking to scrap it, just make it cost-effective."

Speaking at the recent annual meeting of shareholders, Lansdown suggested the Academy was not providing the club with value for money.

He explained: "The Academy has to be judged in two main areas.

"Firstly, there is the matter of producing players and then selling them on. A look at the transfer fees we have received from other clubs in recent years suggests the Academy has done its job in that respect.

"The second area is providing players for the first team and, in that respect, we have been less successful.

"We had a crop of Academy products in the team that Danny Wilson built and yet we still failed to win promotion in 2004. Since then, we have produced very little. Players are coming through again now, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating and they still require time to prove themselves.

"I do believe in youth development, but the bottom line for any football club has to be results. Our league position says the Academy has not done its job in terms of bringing through players to help win us promotion."

In response to Fear's claims, Lansdown said: "I cannot afford to be sentimental about it. I have to look at the financial implications.

"It's easy for other people to be idealistic; I have to be realistic.

"I'm seeking progress and development and I expect people to perform. I'm not running a school, I'm running a football club.

"At the end of the day, a youth policy is an important factor in that, whether you call it an Academy or something else."

hes not saying that but you no your self its allready produced some good plyers so good in fact theres a hadfull playing in the championship. look what rovers produced in the 80s we need to keep it togather agreed

[Will Rollason]

i cant believe your actually taking a "news item" by the evil post seriously.

since when have they done anything but seek to undermine the city at any opportunity and this half baked " story" is another pop.

See S.L 's reply and don't believe what a bunch of sag hacks tell you.

you reds!

[Guest WillsbridgeRed]

i cant believe your actually taking a "news item" by the evil post seriously.

since when have they done anything but seek to undermine the city at any opportunity and this half baked " story" is another pop.

See S.L 's reply and don't believe what a bunch of sag hacks tell you.

you reds!

Sorry, I think in this instance the EP has got it right. When a senior figure at the club feels the need to speak out, it means something is seriously amiss.

I see no official denial from the club, although to be fair I expect they're covering some real news, like your chance to bet on the under 5's snail race in Lower Wello Wello

[Milo]

i cant believe your actually taking a "news item" by the evil post seriously.

since when have they done anything but seek to undermine the city at any opportunity and this half baked " story" is another pop.

See S.L 's reply and don't believe what a bunch of sag hacks tell you.

you reds!

I don't agree with your conspiracy theory that this is Rovers supporting journalists trying to undermine City. The story is based on an interview held with Dave Fear who has shown great personal and financial commitment to City over the years. Having met with Dave Fear last week I know first-hand how seriously concerned he is and I'm sure that his decision to speak to the Press was made with the best intentions.

However I agree with you that SL's reply is reassuring.

[Thornbury Red]

I see no official denial from the club, although to be fair I expect they're covering some real news, like your chance to bet on the under 5's snail race in Lower Wello Wello

What times the off - whos favourite to set the pace?