Very interesting debate here re development of children.
I have a number friends (all aged 16-33) that have genuinely wanted to become footballers. The level that these guys play/ed at varies, but it ranges from playing from pro youth teams to playing first team football at decent non-league sides.
From what i can gather, i think if someone genuinely wants to be a footballer at the highest level they possibly can, then they should play for the biggest club possible from the youngest age possible. I think the level of "proffesionalism" in football has changed so much now compared to the 90's and 80's, that it is basically impossible for someone to ever play premier league football without having at least been part of a pro youth team(receiving the top quality training that these clubs offer) during a part of their teens.
If you look at players who have “worked their way up” these days, ie. Chris Smalling, Dwight Gayle etc, they have all at one stage in their lives been part of a pro youth setup. When you look at the premier league from the 90’s, we see loads of players such as Ian wright and Stuart Pearce who never played pro youth team football during their teens. It is my opinion that if someone hasn’t played pro youth team football during their teens, no matter what their dedication and talent, playing premier league football is probably impossible due to missing top level training at a key time period in their development. That is not to say they cannot play professional football (just not at the elite level of the premier league).
What my friends also stress is that the attitude and facilities also differ greatly when you go down the football ladder. I had a friend who was at Chelsea at 15 for 6 months, who then later joined Kingstonian’s youth team (a non-league side) when released, and another friend went from Fulham to Portsmouth (and is still there at 18 now). The guy from Chelsea not only talked of the change in facilities (which was expected), but also of the change in attitude. The players at Chelsea generally want to be a pro way more than those in a non-league youth team. This is shown through their level of professionalism in terms of training-rate, diets etc. Fulham to Portsmouth wasn’t as big a change obviously. But nonetheless, a slight drop in level was noticed here too.
In short, I guess my point here is that a bigger “culture of success” exists the higher up you go, and therefore each player thrives off each other in order to maintain a certain level of excellence. Kind of like the phenomena you get in private schools compared to public schools. And generally, when a player drops in level, part of his hunger goes too, and he carries this into his new (lower) club.
On the separate issue of “improving” the standard of football in England, and ultimately the national team, I don’t think the fundamental problem is the lack of resources at grass roots. Although an increase would no doubt help.
I think the problem more lies with the “English attitude” to the game and it’s interpretation of the rules. What I mean is that English football fans want to see their players (and children) “run around” and “get stuck in”, and “let the opposition know you’re there” etc. And because we value these kind of attributes and qualities more than any other country, our interpretation of the rules has also adjusted for this. As a result, we allow more things to go than other countries, who would blow up for a foul if the same incident happened in their country.
The problem with this is that at the elite (international) level:
1) Our players are playing to a different set of rules.
2) We haven’t developed the players that suit the international game.
Fundamentally, I think that we are producing players with massive quality and natural talent. But their development as players hinders them when playing in international competition. When I look at the likes of gerrard, lampard etc, they aren’t any different to the likes of pirlo, xavi, fabregas, schweinsteiger etc in terms of ability. The problem is that our players are about dynamism and “bravado” (as Ferguson puts it in his autobiography), because these are the traits that the English game develops and praises starting from grass-roots. The foreign bunch are more about technique (and less about “running around a lot” and “getting stuck in”), because they are a product of another youth system (with its own values). When we get the likes of Joe Cole and Glenn Hoddle etc, as English football fans, we don’t appreciate their qualities perhaps as much as a foreign fan may do, and hence, at the top level, our best players are the likes of Gerrard, whilst in Spain, it may be a Xavi or an Iniesta.
Moving onto the improvement of grass-roots facilities and equipment, I think this is a bit of a red herring to be honest. There are many countries around the world that produce top players who play in a technical manner that have far worse grass roots fascilities than us. I’m sure everyone here can name handfuls of them. And that is why, I think a change in the “English” football attitude/culture is probably our best hope of producing the kind of players that are suited to an international game.
I think this change is happening. We are starting to see more players like Wheelchair now. And at a level below the likes of Wheelchair, we are starting to see players like Tom Carrol, Tom Cleverley etc. Whilst in the “old-days” our second choice midfielders may have been the likes of Dennis Wise.
