Why no CBs from the Accademy?

Anyone else noticed this? It seems quite strange given the number of players who've come through and made an impact on our team, not to mention those who've left and made a name for themselves elsewhere. I can't think of one decent CB we've brought through in the last 20 years or so. There was Lancashire a couple of years ago but he was awful and ended up at Aldershot.

Maybe our scouting network is more interested in attacking players who generally seem to sell for more money.

No keepers either, just a coincidence.

It's a good point - maybe we spend too much time looking for footballers? Not meant sarcastically - but every player who has really cut it is a 'deft' footballer - Bale, Walcott, Lallana, Oxo, Shaw... None of them would stand up in a strong gale.

It's a good point - maybe we spend too much time looking for footballers? Not meant sarcastically - but every player who has really cut it is a 'deft' footballer - Bale, Walcott, Lallana, Oxo, Shaw... None of them would stand up in a strong gale.

Really? Bale is very strong and powerful, AOC fairly powerful too and Shaw able to outmuscle attackers age 17.

Matt Mills?

the only ones I can even think of are Williamson, Lancashire, and Racine. The first two we bought in AFAIK and none of them has turned out any good.

Oh yeah Mills and Cranie. Not good enough for the prem though.

Matt Mills?

Good point, forgot about him.

Williamson

Williamson joined Saints at 18 years old having already played for the Torquay first team. He didn't come through the Saints academy at all.

Regardless of what a lot of you think about the academy,the club see it as just another income stream so having a theo,bale,oxo every couple of years is the aim.......Luke shaw being the next player in line to be sold.

The academy costs a fortune to run so it has to pay for itself and exciting attacking players attract the biggest fees to cover the bills.

Regardless of what a lot of you think about the academy,the club see it as just another income stream so having a theo,bale,oxo every couple of years is the aim.......Luke shaw being the next player in line to be sold.

The academy costs a fortune to run so it has to pay for itself and exciting attacking players attract the biggest fees to cover the bills.

I'm fairly sure they also see it as a source of potential players to play in the first team. Which in itself can potentially save the club an absolute fortune. How much would it have cost to go out and buy Adam Lallana and Luke Shaw? There's cost savings to be made from running an academy too.

Regardless of what a lot of you think about the academy,the club see it as just another income stream so having a theo,bale,oxo every couple of years is the aim.......Luke shaw being the next player in line to be sold.

 

The academy costs a fortune to run so it has to pay for itself and exciting attacking players attract the biggest fees to cover the bills.

I doubt that is how Cortese sees it, he has said as much in interview.

Williamson joined Saints at 18 years old having already played for the Torquay first team. He didn't come through the Saints academy at all.

I thought at that age he might have played a couple of games for the academy. McGoldrick had already played for Notts County when we picked him up but he was part of the academy setup.

It's still to do with our youth scouting for the position.

Regardless of what a lot of you think about the academy,the club see it as just another income stream so having a theo,bale,oxo every couple of years is the aim.......Luke shaw being the next player in line to be sold.

The academy costs a fortune to run so it has to pay for itself and exciting attacking players attract the biggest fees to cover the bills.

Let's ignore the oft-quoted aim of SFC to have 50% of the first team as having come from the academy, shall we?

Makes me think there's no point anyone talking to the press because no one listens anyway. Must be why SFC are now tighter than ... (insert choice here).

With our fans? Are you really suprised. One mistake which they will make and they will be slaughtered. Reckon they are being protected from us.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Let's ignore the oft-quoted aim of SFC to have 50% of the first team as having come from the academy, shall we?

 

Makes me think there's no point anyone talking to the press because no one listens anyway. Must be why SFC are now tighter than ... (insert choice here).

It's a nice aim but the reality is it would be very unlikely that ever happens.

was Monk home-produced?

was Monk home-produced?

No we signed him from somewhere as a young player, he'd played a couple of times for their first team.

Regardless of what a lot of you think about the academy,the club see it as just another income stream so having a theo,bale,oxo every couple of years is the aim.......Luke shaw being the next player in line to be sold.

The academy costs a fortune to run so it has to pay for itself and exciting attacking players attract the biggest fees to cover the bills.

The club used to see it as an income stream under Lowe. That is no longer the case. It may be that bringing through our own future stars via the Academy into the first team will save us a considerable sum of money by not having to buy them, but if they are rated at ten million or more, then why wouldn't we want to keep them for ourselves? We have no need to sell them. Obviously if stupid amounts of money were offered by a glory team, then we'll sell, but not otherwise. The Academy is not that expensive to run in the scheme of things when compared to the cost of buying players of the quality of some of those we produce.

Regardless of what a lot of you think about the academy,the club see it as just another income stream so having a theo,bale,oxo every couple of years is the aim.......Luke shaw being the next player in line to be sold.

The academy costs a fortune to run so it has to pay for itself and exciting attacking players attract the biggest fees to cover the bills.

Is that such a bad thing then? Seems to me to be good business....even our u9 have players from all over the regions coming in to play.

Centre halves and goalies always seem hard to find and very few in either position have come through the ranks to play League football....you have to go back a long way to find Bob Charles and Tony Godfreywho were keepers in the late 1950's/ early 60's, although Gerry Gurr (late 1960's) looked a promising candidate until his injury problem..since then we've always bought in good goalies.

Although he came to us aged 19, Tim Flowers waited a while until he was able to take up Peter Shilton's place (who on earth would want to be on the bench waiting for him to be dropped?) but he later got his England cap before moving to Blackburn's title-winning side.

Most recently Alan Blainey came as a 16 year old (together with Chris Baird)...but only got a few chances, but still managed to win Save-of-the Season (from Alan Shearer) in that 3-3 home game v. Newcastle.

Central defenders too have been few....Colin Waldron was pretty useful in the late 1970's (200+ games), as was Manny Adruszewski (100+ games) and Reuben Agboola (100) in the early 80's.

Mark Whitlock had a couple of good seasons, although John Gittens was very occasional player during his 6 year stay. Frannie Benali actually played no.5 (as it was then) for most of 94/95 season, as did Jason Dodd a bit later on, but both reverted to their famous FB roles after Claus Lundekvam arrived.

Sotonist mentioned Martin Crainie and Matt Mills earlier, and both were outstanding in their junior days, but they were thrown in too early and at a time when we were struggling, and never made it with us.

Very few others " came through the ranks " with Saints, although as some of you noted people like Mike Williamson and Ollie Lancashire left without really starting, and had to begin their careers at L1.

Ironically, there has never been a shortage of good full backs coming up from the youth sides (I could probably name a dozen in a very short time), but central defenders have never been a strength for SFC.

Rather belatedly I recalled Garry Monk, who came aged 16, but spent several years being loaned out all over the place before moving to Swansea in 2004...and has played 200+ games for them, I think.

Something extra to look for in the next Academy generation perhaps?

Bold post Davey.

Bold post Davey.

THX?. Saints Charlie.

I enjoy the history.. (and I know some others do, too)... as well as the prospect of the next match. But it's mostly my generation, as history has little interest for many of our younger fans.

It's a nice aim but the reality is it would be very unlikely that ever happens.

We woukd need to be a big team for years, its sort of possible but highly improbable.

We have a great academy but although now we will prob get good money for players, we still wont hold on to them forever.

Also, in response to Lordswood, its probably a bit of both, hold on to the top prospects as long as possible, and get a good price for those we sell.

We woukd need to be a big team for years, its sort of possible but highly improbable.

We have a great academy but although now we will prob get good money for players, we still wont hold on to them forever.

 

Also, in response to Lordswood, its probably a bit of both, hold on to the top prospects as long as possible, and get a good price for those we sell.

That's also a bit of a double-edged sword. The better a team we are, the better the academy graduates need to be to get into the team.

It is a good aim to have; but as you say highly improbable, and it shouldn't be seen as a failure not to hit such a target. Having 2 or 3 academy graduates in the team at any team is a success in itself. Expecting 5 or 6 at one time, very unlikely (unless its in a League Cup game).

How many of the famed Barca team are ACTUALLY academy graduates ? I.e actually trained there and not bought at 16-18 ?

could get worse, the FA plans to improve youth football may lead to defenders and tough mid field players being a rare commodity

THX?. Saints Charlie.

 

I enjoy the history.. (and I know some others do, too)... as well as the prospect of the next match. But it's mostly my generation, as history has little interest for many of our younger fans.

Not sure about that, the history is important for all fans.

could get worse' date=' the FA plans to improve youth football may lead to defenders and tough mid field players being a rare commodity[/quote']

 

The game has moved away from big double hard b*stards all over the pitch, decent DM's and CB's will still be produced

The game has moved away from big double hard b*stards all over the pitch, decent DM's and CB's will still be produced

hope you are right but not convinced especially about CB's.

It's a nice aim but the reality is it would be very unlikely that ever happens.

Really? Our cup games are already close to that target. Lallana, Shaw, Ward Prowse, Hoskins, Reeves and Stephens are all academy stars. Chambers too. Which brings me back to the original question about centre backs. Stephens will be one of our first choice centre backs in due course. Watching the U21s the other week I was hugely impressed by Turnbull too. Matt Young and Matt Targett good full backs too. Great promise for the future - and that's just in defence.

Centre halves and goalies always seem hard to find and very few in either position have come through the ranks to play League football....you have to go back a long way to find Bob Charles and Tony Godfreywho were keepers in the late 1950's/ early 60's, although Gerry Gurr (late 1960's) looked a promising candidate until his injury problem..since then we've always bought in good goalies.

Although he came to us aged 19, Tim Flowers waited a while until he was able to take up Peter Shilton's place (who on earth would want to be on the bench waiting for him to be dropped?) but he later got his England cap before moving to Blackburn's title-winning side.

Most recently Alan Blainey came as a 16 year old (together with Chris Baird)...but only got a few chances, but still managed to win Save-of-the Season (from Alan Shearer) in that 3-3 home game v. Newcastle.

 

Central defenders too have been few....Colin Waldron was pretty useful in the late 1970's (200+ games), as was Manny Adruszewski (100+ games) and Reuben Agboola (100) in the early 80's.

Mark Whitlock had a couple of good seasons, although John Gittens was very occasional player during his 6 year stay. Frannie Benali actually played no.5 (as it was then) for most of 94/95 season, as did Jason Dodd a bit later on, but both reverted to their famous FB roles after Claus Lundekvam arrived.

 

Sotonist mentioned Martin Crainie and Matt Mills earlier, and both were outstanding in their junior days, but they were thrown in too early and at a time when we were struggling, and never made it with us.

Very few others " came through the ranks " with Saints, although as some of you noted people like Mike Williamson and Ollie Lancashire left without really starting, and had to begin their careers at L1.

 

Ironically, there has never been a shortage of good full backs coming up from the youth sides (I could probably name a dozen in a very short time), but central defenders have never been a strength for SFC.

 

Rather belatedly I recalled Garry Monk, who came aged 16, but spent several years being loaned out all over the place before moving to Swansea in 2004...and has played 200+ games for them, I think.

 

Something extra to look for in the next Academy generation perhaps?

Good post, except for one thing - and I hate to go all MLG on you, but - it was Malcolm Waldron. He was one of my favourite players in the late 70's.

The higher up the football pyramid you go, the greater the need seems to be to have experience and strength in the heart of the defence, which are obviously two assets a player coming through the youth system is unlikely to possess at that time. Teams feel they can "get away with" (probably the wrong choice of words) blooding a youngster at full-back, on the wing or up front because raw ability and a good temperament can help bridge the gap, and in those positions they're not likely to cost a team goals or points.

There are clearly some decent young defenders coming through the system, but I'd be amazed if any of them were given league experience in our first team at this level. Other than the odd outing in the League Cup, they're more likely to have to rely on loan spells in lower leagues in order to get the experience and strengthening they require.

Really? Bale is very strong and powerful, AOC fairly powerful too and Shaw able to outmuscle attackers age 17.

Not 6,2" Martin Keown, Tony Adams types though are they?

Although maybe those players simply don't exist any more.

I have seen so much bad defending this year - and not just by us...!

Really? Our cup games are already close to that target. Lallana, Shaw, Ward Prowse, Hoskins, Reeves and Stephens are all academy stars. Chambers too. Which brings me back to the original question about centre backs. Stephens will be one of our first choice centre backs in due course. Watching the U21s the other week I was hugely impressed by Turnbull too. Matt Young and Matt Targett good full backs too. Great promise for the future - and that's just in defence.

For a start Stephens isn't home grown, we signed him from Plymouth 2 years ago.

There have also been bold claims made by the club that we want to get into th champions league. If we are to do this we are going do it with half of them being academy players we need to develop and retain 9 players out of the matchday 18 who are top 4 standard. 9 Walcott, Chamberlain and Bales if you will, all of which stay with us l not be tempted by a Man U, Arsenal or Liverpool dangling £70k a week contracts under their noses. So let's just confirm this, for us to achieve the champions league aims of the club and also our academy making up 50% of the team, that is 9 academy players of top international standard, all happy to ignore the overtures of bigger clubs to stay with Saints. How many clubs have ever achieved this?

we've got a few decent players in the youth side, Reeves, Stephens, Sinclair etc, but it's one thing to look decent in a run out in a cup game against a lower league side, or playing for what is effectivly a youth team, its quite another to establish yourself as a first team player in a premier league side. History is littered with players who've played a few first team games, looked okay or be youth team starts but never established themselves as top flight players.

For a start Stephens isn't home grown, we signed him from Plymouth 2 years ago.

 

There have also been bold claims made by the club that we want to get into th champions league. If we are to do this we are going do it with half of them being academy players we need to develop and retain 9 players out of the matchday 18 who are top 4 standard. 9 Walcott, Chamberlain and Bales if you will, all of which stay with us l not be tempted by a Man U, Arsenal or Liverpool dangling £70k a week contracts under their noses. So let's just confirm this, for us to achieve the champions league aims of the club and also our academy making up 50% of the team, that is 9 academy players of top international standard, all happy to ignore the overtures of bigger clubs to stay with Saints. How many clubs have ever achieved this?

 

we've got a few decent players in the youth side, Reeves, Stephens, Sinclair etc, but it's one thing to look decent in a run out in a cup game against a lower league side, or playing for what is effectivly a youth team, its quite another to establish yourself as a first team player in a premier league side. History is littered with players who've played a few first team games, looked okay or be youth team starts but never established themselves as top flight players.

All true, but these are aspirations. There's nothing wrong with setting aspirational targets. I don't know, but there is a lot of noise about having a clear pathway for youth players through to the first team, so I wouldn't be surprised if a certain number of the match day squads have to be Academy products.

For a start Stephens isn't home grown, we signed him from Plymouth 2 years ago.

 

He's both. The original question was about first teamers comnig from the academy. Stephens was signed for the development squad. He was promoted from the academy to the first team at the start of this season.

All true, but these are aspirations. There's nothing wrong with setting aspirational targets. I don't know, but there is a lot of noise about having a clear pathway for youth players through to the first team, so I wouldn't be surprised if a certain number of the match day squads have to be Academy products.

Nothing wrong with it at all, its admirable in fact. If more clubs did it instead of buying in foreigner players then it'd be great for English football. we just shouldn't delude ourselves Into thinking its a given and because a few players show a bit of promise they are automatically going to become first team players, the realty it its much more likely they don't.

Not sure about that, the history is important for all fans.

Glad to hear you say it, (Charlie) though there have been some caustic comments on here from time to time.

Good post, except for one thing - and I hate to go all MLG on you, but - it was Malcolm Waldron. He was one of my favourite players in the late 70's.

YES of course it was, I stand corrected.

I was recalling the former Burnley player Colin W...and then, of course (our) Malcolm W. moved there in the mid 1980's.... a bit of brain-fade there......but thanks

How many of the famed Barca team are ACTUALLY academy graduates ? I.e actually trained there and not bought at 16-18 ?

Reading a book at the moment about this. Valdez, piqué, iniesta, messi, fabregas and I think Xavi. Piqué and fabregas both left as teenagers and then were signed back having played in the same academy team as messi. So its possoble to split hairs on whether they came through the ranks or not. In Guardiola's time he blooded 19 players from their Academy system. Not sure what that has risen too since he left if it has at all.

Reading a book at the moment about this. Valdez, piqué, iniesta, messi, fabregas and I think Xavi. Piqué and fabregas both left as teenagers and then were signed back having played in the same academy team as messi. So its possoble to split hairs on whether they came through the ranks or not. In Guardiola's time he blooded 19 players from their Academy system. Not sure what that has risen too since he left if it has at all.

Sorry, I should have added Sergio busquets to that list too.

could get worse' date=' the FA plans to improve youth football may lead to defenders and tough mid field players being a rare commodity[/quote']

 

The big, tough kids will still be big and tough. The ones that aren't very good at football just won't play it professionally. It's no bad thing, honestly. They're trying to encourage technique and effective movement, not spiking their lucozade with oestrogen.

the only ones I can even think of are Williamson, Lancashire, and Racine. The first two we bought in AFAIK and none of them has turned out any good.

Williamson not turned out any good? Well he may not be the best but seems well able to cut it in the PL for Newcastle, even if not really their first choice, and still only just 29. I would suggest he has another 3 years in him at this level. In any case he was not really Academy, having joined us at the age of 18. Lancashire and Mills were both thrown in too early (in my opinion) when we were struggling and their confidence was destroyed as a result, but both make a decent living as lower league pros. Gary Monk joined us when he was 17, also from Torquay, so can be considered an Academy product (like McGoldrick etc). Over 200 apps for Swansea, he has proved he is a decent CB, though not too many of his games have been in the PL.

On the question of keepers, Michael Poke and Scott Bevan were both products of the Academy and both seem to have found their level in L2, at Torquay and Bristol Rovers respectively, both having played for both clubs recently. Our connections with Torquay seem to be many and various.

Problem with CBs and keepers, is that they both depend on maturity/experience and it helps in both cases if they are physically suited to the job (i.e. tall and built strongly). Very hard, if not impossible to spot this in young teenagers that would be right for the Academy. Its one reason why the Academy system does not work for everyone, it would be better if they allowed slightly older players to be part of the Academy system for these 2 positions (you could possibly make an argument for centre forward types as well).

Williamson not turned out any good? Well he may not be the best but seems well able to cut it in the PL for Newcastle, even if not really their first choice, and still only just 29. I would suggest he has another 3 years in him at this level. In any case he was not really Academy, having joined us at the age of 18. Lancashire and Mills were both thrown in too early (in my opinion) when we were struggling and their confidence was destroyed as a result, but both make a decent living as lower league pros. Gary Monk joined us when he was 17, also from Torquay, so can be considered an Academy product (like McGoldrick etc). Over 200 apps for Swansea, he has proved he is a decent CB, though not too many of his games have been in the PL.

 

On the question of keepers, Michael Poke and Scott Bevan were both products of the Academy and both seem to have found their level in L2, at Torquay and Bristol Rovers respectively, both having played for both clubs recently. Our connections with Torquay seem to be many and various.

 

Problem with CBs and keepers, is that they both depend on maturity/experience and it helps in both cases if they are physically suited to the job (i.e. tall and built strongly). Very hard, if not impossible to spot this in young teenagers that would be right for the Academy. Its one reason why the Academy system does not work for everyone, it would be better if they allowed slightly older players to be part of the Academy system for these 2 positions (you could possibly make an argument for centre forward types as well).

Our problem is that we do not give many young players their chance, haven't for donkey's years. Williamson ands Mills wandered off because they weren't getting any action because we had filled our defence with Scandinavian no hopers.

I dunno, I think it's just a coincidence. Baird or Willimason didn't turn out too badly, and I don't think Matt Mills is too bad a player either.

But the DNA machine at Staplewood seems to be programmed for small, blonde, pacey players at the moment. Until that's changed, I can't see any new CB's on the horizon...!

I dunno, I think it's just a coincidence. Baird or Willimason didn't turn out too badly, and I don't think Matt Mills is too bad a player either.

 

But the DNA machine at Staplewood seems to be programmed for small, blonde, pacey players at the moment. Until that's changed, I can't see any new CB's on the horizon...!

Having watched a few academy games lately its still the same - all technically very gifted, good ball players and comfortable but struggle against the London teams

that have bigger black , strong and pacey lads.

I think it has to do with the style of play of the teams in the academy. A lot of emphasis is placed on getting the lads to play in an attacking, high-tempo passing style, especially through the wide areas (passing out wide, coming inside, getting crosses in etc.), which means that it's mostly about getting good left and right defenders who can run miles and more importantly wingers who are pacey and can really break defenders apart.

If we changed to a less open, more direct, cautious style of play through the ranks, we would see more CBs and holding midfielders coming through, and tall, bulky poachers upfront. Playing like this would also mean that players would have to show a considerable level of mental toughness sooner and in a more regular basis, which would help bringing good keepers up the ranks as well (possibly the only position on the pitch where mental preparation is as crucial as the technical abilities)

It's all about how you nurture the players. I think we've chosen a good way of doing it. Truth is you can't do it all.

Having watched a few academy games lately its still the same - all technically very gifted, good ball players and comfortable but struggle against the London teams

that have bigger black , strong and pacey lads.

Id beg to differ, our record over say the last 10 years at reserve an academy levels will show we have always regulary beat the likes of arsenal,chelsea,spurs and other london clubs

Having watched a few academy games lately its still the same - all technically very gifted, good ball players and comfortable but struggle against the London teams

that have bigger black , strong and pacey lads.

And thats what so dire about our national game, big pacey strong lads? Nevermind technique or skill just athletes, we breed workhorses nothing more, I sure Messi would **** himself at facing such future Gold cup winners.............