• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Academy, NextGen, U18 & U21 Premier League and On-Loan Thread

Spaceman said:
you think the coaches and redknapp dont do their homework before sending the young players out on loan? everyone says the same thing when a loan doesnt work out, it "they played long ball" and "their style didnt suit me".

the players need to knuckle down, work hard and learn as much as they can because if they continue playing managers will come and go and change tactics etc
Click to expand...

Was meant to be sherwoods job, some on here rate him, i am not one of them.
 
jimmyb said:
Genuine question: are you in any sort of position or do you have any special inside knowledge to enable you to come to such a judgement?
Click to expand...

I remember reading in an interview on the official site that was his job to deal with the development squad and find the young players loan clubs.

Or if you mean the people at tottenham rating him, then no i have no knowledge of that other then a lot of gossip i have heard from the more decent posters on here, added to that that the club gave him a job when he did not have any coaching badges, which i guess shows quite a bit of confidence in his ability.

I remember him as a poor mans freund and i was not one of freunds fan boys. I prefered leonhardsen(i forget how you spell it, its been a few years haha)
 
I'm fairly sure the club don't have the luxury of picking and choosing which clubs the players go out on loan to. At the end of the day if we are sending out players on loan with a view to them breaking into the first team at Spurs rather than a view to a permanent transfer then clubs taking them on loan would rather stick to some sort of consistency within their side rather than having to chop and change every season once they are safe from relegation (parrett at yeovil) or too far from the playoffs (carroll) or even pushing for promotion (falque and bostock)
 
japenesegardenlover said:
I remember reading in an interview on the official site that was his job to deal with the development squad and find the young players loan clubs.

Or if you mean the people at tottenham rating him, then no i have no knowledge of that other then a lot of gossip i have heard from the more decent posters on here, added to that that the club gave him a job when he did not have any coaching badges, which i guess shows quite a bit of confidence in his ability.

I remember him as a poor mans freund and i was not one of freunds fan boys. I prefered leonhardsen(i forget how you spell it, its been a few years haha)
Click to expand...

What I meant was that you seemed to be suggesting that you do not rate him as a coach / development team manager / potential first team manager (whether for Spurs or anyone else). Just wondered whether there was anything more than gut feeling or your opinion of him as a player to support your judgement?
 
jimmyb said:
What I meant was that you seemed to be suggesting that you do not rate him as a coach / development team manager / potential first team manager (whether for Spurs or anyone else). Just wondered whether there was anything more than gut feeling or your opinion of him as a player to support your judgement?
Click to expand...

Just my views on him as a player. Of course bad footballers can make good coaches as it is often said good playerss do not make good coaches. But i never thought he had a nice game so i do not see him changing when he becomes a coach. I will be happy to be proved wrong.
 
japenesegardenlover said:
Just my views on him as a player. Of course bad footballers can make good coaches as it is often said good playerss do not make good coaches. But i never thought he had a nice game so i do not see him changing when he becomes a coach. I will be happy to be proved wrong.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
Sherwood is quite often on Al Jazeera on the panel and sounds like quite a switched on bloke. Some banter the other day where the presenter joked how Spurs brought him in from Blackburn instead of Zidane.
 
zin said:
I'm fairly sure the club don't have the luxury of picking and choosing which clubs the players go out on loan to. At the end of the day if we are sending out players on loan with a view to them breaking into the first team at Spurs rather than a view to a permanent transfer then clubs taking them on loan would rather stick to some sort of consistency within their side rather than having to chop and change every season once they are safe from relegation (parrett at yeovil) or too far from the playoffs (carroll) or even pushing for promotion (falque and bostock)
Click to expand...

It's a flawed system, in my view. We should be sending out players at around 20/21 (if needs be), after they are nearing the end of their development. Sending 18/19 year olds out to lower league clubs to play inferior football on inferior pitches with inferior players under the guidance of inferior coaches is a nonsense. WE should be controlling their development at that stage and WE should be employing the best youth and development coaches around to do so. Not Tim fudging Sherwood, but people with proven track records. Absolving responsibility for players to Football League clubs then expecting them to somehow become Premier League players is, frankly, delusional.

I haven't watched the youth team many times this season, due to a lack of time, but the decline in the level of player we are producing over the past couple of years has been utterly depressing. At one stage, we had managed to produce a youth team squad spread over a couple of year groups that had an excellent minimal level of technical ability, with balance, quality and variety of characteristic. Now, that is gone.

What has changed during that period? The period that produced the likes of Townsend, Caulker, Carroll, Mason and Smith (note: proper homegrown players at the club pre-16, not hyped talents shipped in from other clubs - real youth development). Well, we have lost an overall technical director in Comolli, lost an excellent pre-16 youth skills coach in Ricardo Moniz, abolished the reserve team leaving young players that can't secure loans with meaningless (even more so that reserve games, before anyone says it) training ground matches and appointed a manager who (for all his supposed West Ham youth 'credentials') actually has very little interest in development of young players.

The whole system needs reworking, otherwise we will skip a whole generation again and be back to Barnards rather than Caulkers, and it's not going to happen under Redknapp and Sherwood's watch, that's for sure.
 
bankrupt said:
It's a flawed system, in my view. We should be sending out players at around 20/21 (if needs be), after they are nearing the end of their development. Sending 18/19 year olds out to lower league clubs to play inferior football on inferior pitches with inferior players under the guidance of inferior coaches is a nonsense. WE should be controlling their development at that stage and WE should be employing the best youth and development coaches around to do so. Not Tim fudging Sherwood, but people with proven track records. Absolving responsibility for players to Football League clubs then expecting them to somehow become Premier League players is, frankly, delusional.

I haven't watched the youth team many times this season, due to a lack of time, but the decline in the level of player we are producing over the past couple of years has been utterly depressing. At one stage, we had managed to produce a youth team squad spread over a couple of year groups that had an excellent minimal level of technical ability, with balance, quality and variety of characteristic. Now, that is gone.

What has changed during that period? The period that produced the likes of Townsend, Caulker, Carroll, Mason and Smith (note: proper homegrown players at the club pre-16, not hyped talents shipped in from other clubs - real youth development). Well, we have lost an overall technical director in Comolli, lost an excellent pre-16 youth skills coach in Ricardo Moniz, abolished the reserve team leaving young players that can't secure loans with meaningless (even more so that reserve games, before anyone says it) training ground matches and appointed a manager who (for all his supposed West Ham youth 'credentials') actually has very little interest in development of young players.

The whole system needs reworking, otherwise we will skip a whole generation again and be back to Barnards rather than Caulkers, and it's not going to happen under Redknapp and Sherwood's watch, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter anyway. Very few talented players come through the ranks at top clubs and those that do tend to be of the immensely gifted regardless of coaching. Still nice to make some profit on the youth players though, so for that reason alone it's worth the investment.

The best way to get youth is great youth scouts. At Premiership level raw talent shines through, and I often think in England we over coach the players at a young age anyway when we should just be letting them develop naturally up until 16 and then try and instill some basic ideas into them.
 
bankrupt said:
It's a flawed system, in my view. We should be sending out players at around 20/21 (if needs be), after they are nearing the end of their development. Sending 18/19 year olds out to lower league clubs to play inferior football on inferior pitches with inferior players under the guidance of inferior coaches is a nonsense. WE should be controlling their development at that stage and WE should be employing the best youth and development coaches around to do so. Not Tim fudging Sherwood, but people with proven track records. Absolving responsibility for players to Football League clubs then expecting them to somehow become Premier League players is, frankly, delusional.

I haven't watched the youth team many times this season, due to a lack of time, but the decline in the level of player we are producing over the past couple of years has been utterly depressing. At one stage, we had managed to produce a youth team squad spread over a couple of year groups that had an excellent minimal level of technical ability, with balance, quality and variety of characteristic. Now, that is gone.

What has changed during that period? The period that produced the likes of Townsend, Caulker, Carroll, Mason and Smith (note: proper homegrown players at the club pre-16, not hyped talents shipped in from other clubs - real youth development). Well, we have lost an overall technical director in Comolli, lost an excellent pre-16 youth skills coach in Ricardo Moniz, abolished the reserve team leaving young players that can't secure loans with meaningless (even more so that reserve games, before anyone says it) training ground matches and appointed a manager who (for all his supposed West Ham youth 'credentials') actually has very little interest in development of young players.

The whole system needs reworking, otherwise we will skip a whole generation again and be back to Barnards rather than Caulkers, and it's not going to happen under Redknapp and Sherwood's watch, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of that especailly about the age at which our young players go out on loan, was always suprised we never replaced Moniz.
 
I can't agree with all of that bankrupt. Can't believe for a moment that Caulker going to Yeovil and Bristol City didn't aid his development better than reserve games spread out so randomly that you wouldn't play for months at a time. Surely playing 30-40 games in league competition to 15 reserve ones is better no?

Also the nexgen series and various tournament the youth team goes on must be beneficial, our nextgen team reached the semis so can't be all bad?
 
Sorry, just to add. At one point we had something like 22 players out on loan, 2 reserve squads so we couldn't get everyone in a reserve game. Byrne and Smith vying with Corluka and Naughton for game time? What about Archer, Ranieri, Button and Jansson? Which one would get ahead of Alnwick for the reserves?

Also my understanding is some of the young ones out at the lower leagues still come back and train with Spurs. Archer got injured in a training session with us just this Friday. Fairly sure I remember reading Bostock or Parrett were training midweek with the first team at some point.
 
Spaceman said:
that group of townsend etc were always good and won loads of youth tournaments around the world
Click to expand...

Yeah they were good. I said either in here or another thread that i wish we were still entering those tournaments, im sure the was one we entered every year in swizterland. Surely it is now time for the next age group to go off and play these things.
 
bankrupt said:
It's a flawed system, in my view. We should be sending out players at around 20/21 (if needs be), after they are nearing the end of their development. Sending 18/19 year olds out to lower league clubs to play inferior football on inferior pitches with inferior players under the guidance of inferior coaches is a nonsense. WE should be controlling their development at that stage and WE should be employing the best youth and development coaches around to do so. Not Tim fudging Sherwood, but people with proven track records. Absolving responsibility for players to Football League clubs then expecting them to somehow become Premier League players is, frankly, delusional.

I haven't watched the youth team many times this season, due to a lack of time, but the decline in the level of player we are producing over the past couple of years has been utterly depressing. At one stage, we had managed to produce a youth team squad spread over a couple of year groups that had an excellent minimal level of technical ability, with balance, quality and variety of characteristic. Now, that is gone.

What has changed during that period? The period that produced the likes of Townsend, Caulker, Carroll, Mason and Smith (note: proper homegrown players at the club pre-16, not hyped talents shipped in from other clubs - real youth development). Well, we have lost an overall technical director in Comolli, lost an excellent pre-16 youth skills coach in Ricardo Moniz, abolished the reserve team leaving young players that can't secure loans with meaningless (even more so that reserve games, before anyone says it) training ground matches and appointed a manager who (for all his supposed West Ham youth 'credentials') actually has very little interest in development of young players.

The whole system needs reworking, otherwise we will skip a whole generation again and be back to Barnards rather than Caulkers, and it's not going to happen under Redknapp and Sherwood's watch, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

Way too early to judge the current system based on results! What youth players did the previous setup bring through to the first team in the last 5-10 years? Jamie O'Hara, and?

Both Caulker and Walker seem to have benefited greatly from their loans and have improved well.

We're still in the U18 league, right? So I don't understand why you're having a go at the pre-16 group in this context. Up to the age of 17-18 I can't see how much has changed really, and we have entered the NextGen tournament, seems like a good move. It's all about bringing those 18-19 year old talented players through to being first team players. And the results with Walker and Caulker most certainly haven't been any worse than what we saw earlier.
 
braineclipse said:
Way too early to judge the current system based on results! What youth players did the previous setup bring through to the first team in the last 5-10 years? Jamie O'Hara, and?

Both Caulker and Walker seem to have benefited greatly from their loans and have improved well.

We're still in the U18 league, right? So I don't understand why you're having a go at the pre-16 group in this context. Up to the age of 17-18 I can't see how much has changed really, and we have entered the NextGen tournament, seems like a good move. It's all about bringing those 18-19 year old talented players through to being first team players. And the results with Walker and Caulker most certainly haven't been any worse than what we saw earlier.
Click to expand...

Yeah that is a good point about the NextGen tournament i had forgotten about it.
 
Don't forget the quality of our current team when talking about loack of players coming through these days.
Yes the Campbell, Barmby, King, Caulkers type of talent will always breakthrough.
But I seriously doubt Clemence, Jackson, Marney etc. would get close to first team football if they were youth players now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back