Coquelin/Frimpong/Yennaris and Youths, Angha/Crowley

[Red Gunner]

Arsene's famed youth "policy" just keeps churning out the average players by the dozen!

That's a bit harsh. La Masia and La Fabrica have produced plenty of average players too. It's impossible for every graduate to be a first-class player. So we can criticise Arsenal's academy for not producing enough first-class players but not for producing average players. The latter is inevitable.

[augie]

Arsene's famed youth "policy" just keeps churning out the average players by the dozen!

That's a bit harsh. La Masia and La Fabrica have produced plenty of average players too. It's impossible for every graduate to be a first-class player. So we can criticise Arsenal's academy for not producing enough first-class players but not for producing average players. The latter is inevitable.

I think that the point is that we don't produce ANY first clas graduates anymore The last one we produced turned out to be a money grabbing mercenary chav c.unt but there hasn't been one since (wilshere might become first class but he ain't there yet)

[arseofacrow]

Arsene's famed youth "policy" just keeps churning out the average players by the dozen!

That's a bit harsh. La Masia and La Fabrica have produced plenty of average players too. It's impossible for every graduate to be a first-class player. So we can criticise Arsenal's academy for not producing enough first-class players but not for producing average players. The latter is inevitable.

I think that the point is that we don't produce ANY first clas graduates anymore The last one we produced turned out to be a money grabbing mercenary chav c.unt but there hasn't been one since (wilshere might become first class but he ain't there yet)

It's also the staggering number of foreign youth players that disappear without a trace, who only appear to be an investment for the youth project with little hope of actually playing for the first team on a regular basis. I would add that a club that has pitched itself as producing youth/bringing through youth players, must accept the according criticism when the results are so poor. Nobody would blink an eye if you're resource investment in the first team and youth team was in better proportion.

[Red Gunner]

Arsene's famed youth "policy" just keeps churning out the average players by the dozen!

That's a bit harsh. La Masia and La Fabrica have produced plenty of average players too. It's impossible for every graduate to be a first-class player. So we can criticise Arsenal's academy for not producing enough first-class players but not for producing average players. The latter is inevitable.

I think that the point is that we don't produce ANY first clas graduates anymore The last one we produced turned out to be a money grabbing mercenary chav c.unt but there hasn't been one since (wilshere might become first class but he ain't there yet)

Chesney and Gibbs are good products. You might laugh but Bendtner, Frimpong, Djourou, Sebastian Larsson and Armand Traore are all full internationals.

I just don't think our academy is that bad. Of course there is room for improvement but creating first-class players is not easy. An academy is not a factory.

[northbank123]

Unfortunately players like Sanchez Watt sum up the problem with our youth policy, and dare say it our player management in general. Not the worst player to graduate from our academy, not by a long shot. And some players impress at youth level and can't make the step up - it happens, regularly.

But it was painfully obvious years ago he was never going to make the grade. Yet he was on a senior contract with us for FIVE years - during which time he went on loan SIX times and appeared for us a grand total of 3 times (in the Beer Cup). He's now been sold to a side stayed in League One by the skin of their teeth last season, which comes as a surprise to nobody.

We need to start cutting the umbilical cord with these youth players who don't make the grade eventually (including Bendtner and Djourou) and with our squad generally.

[g88ner]

Chesney and Gibbs are good products. You might laugh but Bendtner, Frimpong, Djourou, Sebastian Larsson and Armand Traore are all full internationals.

I just don't think our academy is that bad. Of course there is room for improvement but creating first-class players is not easy. An academy is not a factory.

Just out of interest, where is the cut off from calling a player a product of our academy?

The reason I ask is that the 2 biggest names you mention above (Bendtner and Chesney) arrived at age 15/16, which is surely at the very end of their formative years. In fact, by 17 and 18, some of the brightest talents in world football are already starting to get involved in the first team of top clubs.

And what about Cesc? - he joined at 15/16 as well, yet I'd call him a product of La Masia, not Arsenal's academy! - so why don't the danish and polish academies, Bendy and Chesney came from, get the same credit? (dare I say it's easier to steal credit from unheard of academies than the prestigious La Masia or Clairefontaine?)

Not that I'm criticising OUR academy, it's just that I feel slightly uncomfortable stealing the credit for developing players when, at best, we've only acted as a finishing school for OTHER clubs' academies, haven't we?

For me, OUR academy products don't include Cesc, Bendtner, Chesney or any of the other talented 16 year old's we've lured away from other clubs, but players like Wilshere, Gibbs, Watt, Frimpong, etc. who have been through the academy and learnt their skills from a young age.

[Number 5]

Take Gibbs off the list. He was at Wimbledon till he was 14/15 wasn't he?

[g88ner]

Take Gibbs off the list. He was at Wimbledon till he was 14/15 wasn't he?

I thought he left Wimbledon much earlier than that, but not sure.

edit: 14yrs old... borderline

Backs up my point really... where is the cut-off? (16 is surely too old to take credit though? )

[Number 5]

Take Gibbs off the list. He was at Wimbledon till he was 14/15 wasn't he?

I thought he left Wimbledon much earlier than that, but not sure.

edit: 14yrs old... borderline

Backs up my point really... where is the cut-off? (16 is surely too old to take credit though? )

Well, it all depends really. I've been working in youth football for the last 18 months and a lot of even the semi pro clubs won't take kids on past 8 or 9 years old.

They say kids need to get their technical ability together by 9 at the latest if they're gonna make it at the top level.

The best player in my team, and he's a fucking amazing footballer, only plays at county level for Brent. He's on various football development programs with QPR and Norwich but is being run into the ground already, training 3 times a week on top of matches on Saturdays and Sundays.

If he's got any hope of making it, he'll need to jack in my team and even cut out the school football team.

If he does end up somewhere in years to come, you best believe this mother fucker is gonna be taking the credit.

[northbank123]

Take Gibbs off the list. He was at Wimbledon till he was 14/15 wasn't he?

I thought he left Wimbledon much earlier than that, but not sure.

edit: 14yrs old... borderline

Backs up my point really... where is the cut-off? (16 is surely too old to take credit though? )

Well, it all depends really. I've been working in youth football for the last 18 months and a lot of even the semi pro clubs won't take kids on past 8 or 9 years old.

They say kids need to get their technical ability together by 9 at the latest if they're gonna make it at the top level.

The best player in my team, and he's a fucking amazing footballer, only plays at county level for Brent. He's on various football development programs with QPR and Norwich but is being run into the ground already, training 3 times a week on top of matches on Saturdays and Sundays.

If he's got any hope of making it, he'll need to jack in my team and even cut out the school football team.

If he does end up somewhere in years to come, you best believe this mother fucker is gonna be taking the credit.

I'm not saying that's not your personal experience but on a wider scale it's not representative. I know literally tens of kids who got taken on during secondary school to professional clubs from playing local junior football, and I'm sure plenty on here would echo that.

I know it sounds harsh but what is that kid going to learn by playing in your team or for the school, that would help him become a top quality footballer? The football academy system is incredibly harsh, believe me I know that, but there are good reasons for it and at the end of the day so many kids want to become footballers that it's going to be ruthless to an extent.

The big problem is the focus that academies put on physical attributes in 12-14 year old kids (which are usually wiped out by the time they're 16-18).

[Number 5]

Take Gibbs off the list. He was at Wimbledon till he was 14/15 wasn't he?

I thought he left Wimbledon much earlier than that, but not sure.

edit: 14yrs old... borderline

Backs up my point really... where is the cut-off? (16 is surely too old to take credit though? )

Well, it all depends really. I've been working in youth football for the last 18 months and a lot of even the semi pro clubs won't take kids on past 8 or 9 years old.

They say kids need to get their technical ability together by 9 at the latest if they're gonna make it at the top level.

The best player in my team, and he's a fucking amazing footballer, only plays at county level for Brent. He's on various football development programs with QPR and Norwich but is being run into the ground already, training 3 times a week on top of matches on Saturdays and Sundays.

If he's got any hope of making it, he'll need to jack in my team and even cut out the school football team.

If he does end up somewhere in years to come, you best believe this mother fucker is gonna be taking the credit.

I'm not saying that's not your personal experience but on a wider scale it's not representative. I know literally tens of kids who got taken on during secondary school to professional clubs from playing local junior football, and I'm sure plenty on here would echo that.

I know it sounds harsh but what is that kid going to learn by playing in your team or for the school, that would help him become a top quality footballer? The football academy system is incredibly harsh, believe me I know that, but there are good reasons for it and at the end of the day so many kids want to become footballers that it's going to be ruthless to an extent.

The big problem is the focus that academies put on physical attributes in 12-14 year old kids (which are usually wiped out by the time they're 16-18).

On a wider scale you know literally tens of kids who got taken on? Bit of an oxymoron that one dude.

Real football clubs these days are looking for technical ability first and foremost. The FA are pushing it on all the coaching badges now. Bit late but never mind. However the kids are still being run into the ground too often which is where they are failing. Football development is all about the ball at your feet, physical attributes are taking a back seat to that and its about time too.

[Red Gunner]

Chesney and Gibbs are good products. You might laugh but Bendtner, Frimpong, Djourou, Sebastian Larsson and Armand Traore are all full internationals.

I just don't think our academy is that bad. Of course there is room for improvement but creating first-class players is not easy. An academy is not a factory.

Just out of interest, where is the cut off from calling a player a product of our academy?

The reason I ask is that the 2 biggest names you mention above (Bendtner and Chesney) arrived at age 15/16, which is surely at the very end of their formative years. In fact, by 17 and 18, some of the brightest talents in world football are already starting to get involved in the first team of top clubs.

And what about Cesc? - he joined at 15/16 as well, yet I'd call him a product of La Masia, not Arsenal's academy! - so why don't the danish and polish academies, Bendy and Chesney came from, get the same credit? (dare I say it's easier to steal credit from unheard of academies than the prestigious La Masia or Clairefontaine?)

Not that I'm criticising OUR academy, it's just that I feel slightly uncomfortable stealing the credit for developing players when, at best, we've only acted as a finishing school for OTHER clubs' academies, haven't we?

For me, OUR academy products don't include Cesc, Bendtner, Chesney or any of the other talented 16 year old's we've lured away from other clubs, but players like Wilshere, Gibbs, Watt, Frimpong, etc. who have been through the academy and learnt their skills from a young age.

If a player spends some time in our youth system and/or makes his first professional appearance for us, he is our youth product. That's what UEFA and Wikipedia say, I know it's a very liberal definition but I agree with it.

[northbank123]

Take Gibbs off the list. He was at Wimbledon till he was 14/15 wasn't he?

I thought he left Wimbledon much earlier than that, but not sure.

edit: 14yrs old... borderline

Backs up my point really... where is the cut-off? (16 is surely too old to take credit though? )

Well, it all depends really. I've been working in youth football for the last 18 months and a lot of even the semi pro clubs won't take kids on past 8 or 9 years old.

They say kids need to get their technical ability together by 9 at the latest if they're gonna make it at the top level.

The best player in my team, and he's a fucking amazing footballer, only plays at county level for Brent. He's on various football development programs with QPR and Norwich but is being run into the ground already, training 3 times a week on top of matches on Saturdays and Sundays.

If he's got any hope of making it, he'll need to jack in my team and even cut out the school football team.

If he does end up somewhere in years to come, you best believe this mother fucker is gonna be taking the credit.

I'm not saying that's not your personal experience but on a wider scale it's not representative. I know literally tens of kids who got taken on during secondary school to professional clubs from playing local junior football, and I'm sure plenty on here would echo that.

I know it sounds harsh but what is that kid going to learn by playing in your team or for the school, that would help him become a top quality footballer? The football academy system is incredibly harsh, believe me I know that, but there are good reasons for it and at the end of the day so many kids want to become footballers that it's going to be ruthless to an extent.

The big problem is the focus that academies put on physical attributes in 12-14 year old kids (which are usually wiped out by the time they're 16-18).

On a wider scale you know literally tens of kids who got taken on? Bit of an oxymoron that one dude.

Real football clubs these days are looking for technical ability first and foremost. The FA are pushing it on all the coaching badges now. Bit late but never mind. However the kids are still being run into the ground too often which is where they are failing. Football development is all about the ball at your feet, physical attributes are taking a back seat to that and its about time too.

Well okay, if you take two different parts of the post and delete a few choice words in between then it's oxymoronic. What I was getting at was that professional teams' academies at U16 and U18 level feature plenty of kids that weren't picked up until secondary school - so your suggestion that if a kid doesn't make it by 8 or 9 then they never will isn't really the case.

The definition of 'semi-pro' also tickles me. I don't know if in England you roughly designate certain leagues/levels as semi-pro but I know plenty of blokes playing in the 4th tier of Welsh football (and 8th or 9th best league in the country) who describe themselves as 'semi-pro' because they get paid ten or fifteen quid a game. Generally speaking it's not a bad standard but suggesting it deserves prized status is like a sick joke.

[Number 5]

Well, it all depends really. I've been working in youth football for the last 18 months and a lot of even the semi pro clubs won't take kids on past 8 or 9 years old.

They say kids need to get their technical ability together by 9 at the latest if they're gonna make it at the top level.

The best player in my team, and he's a fucking amazing footballer, only plays at county level for Brent. He's on various football development programs with QPR and Norwich but is being run into the ground already, training 3 times a week on top of matches on Saturdays and Sundays.

If he's got any hope of making it, he'll need to jack in my team and even cut out the school football team.

If he does end up somewhere in years to come, you best believe this mother fucker is gonna be taking the credit.

I'm not saying that's not your personal experience but on a wider scale it's not representative. I know literally tens of kids who got taken on during secondary school to professional clubs from playing local junior football, and I'm sure plenty on here would echo that.

I know it sounds harsh but what is that kid going to learn by playing in your team or for the school, that would help him become a top quality footballer? The football academy system is incredibly harsh, believe me I know that, but there are good reasons for it and at the end of the day so many kids want to become footballers that it's going to be ruthless to an extent.

The big problem is the focus that academies put on physical attributes in 12-14 year old kids (which are usually wiped out by the time they're 16-18).

On a wider scale you know literally tens of kids who got taken on? Bit of an oxymoron that one dude.

Real football clubs these days are looking for technical ability first and foremost. The FA are pushing it on all the coaching badges now. Bit late but never mind. However the kids are still being run into the ground too often which is where they are failing. Football development is all about the ball at your feet, physical attributes are taking a back seat to that and its about time too.

Well okay, if you take two different parts of the post and delete a few choice words in between then it's oxymoronic. What I was getting at was that professional teams' academies at U16 and U18 level feature plenty of kids that weren't picked up until secondary school - so your suggestion that if a kid doesn't make it by 8 or 9 then they never will isn't really the case.

The definition of 'semi-pro' also tickles me. I don't know if in England you roughly designate certain leagues/levels as semi-pro but I know plenty of blokes playing in the 4th tier of Welsh football (and 8th or 9th best league in the country) who describe themselves as 'semi-pro' because they get paid ten or fifteen quid a game. Generally speaking it's not a bad standard but suggesting it deserves prized status is like a sick joke.

Ok, lets take the example of the best player in my team. He isn't signed to an academy right now. And hasn't been since he first started kicking a ball.

In September he starts secondary school. Should he get signed in the next year or two, by your definition he will have been picked up late. But in reality he has been on the radar of the professional football teams for many years. Scouts at all the football tournaments we enter don't come to watch the 12-15 year olds as they are already aware of the ones who have promise. They come to see the 7-10 year olds and what promise they have. And if they can be developed. Yeah you'll get the odd player who slips through and hasn't been spotted until into his mid teens. But I know that is fucking rare. I'd say at least 80% of the English kids that go onto professional football academies were spotted before they hit double digits in age.

The club I work with are FA Charter Standard and recognised one step further as a development club. No where near what I would term to be semi-pro. The club I would term to be semi pro, as they have a mens team in god knows what lower league level, hold trials for new players every year. For under 7's, under 8's and under 9's. Only.

[g88ner]

Chesney and Gibbs are good products. You might laugh but Bendtner, Frimpong, Djourou, Sebastian Larsson and Armand Traore are all full internationals.

I just don't think our academy is that bad. Of course there is room for improvement but creating first-class players is not easy. An academy is not a factory.

Just out of interest, where is the cut off from calling a player a product of our academy?

The reason I ask is that the 2 biggest names you mention above (Bendtner and Chesney) arrived at age 15/16, which is surely at the very end of their formative years. In fact, by 17 and 18, some of the brightest talents in world football are already starting to get involved in the first team of top clubs.

And what about Cesc? - he joined at 15/16 as well, yet I'd call him a product of La Masia, not Arsenal's academy! - so why don't the danish and polish academies, Bendy and Chesney came from, get the same credit? (dare I say it's easier to steal credit from unheard of academies than the prestigious La Masia or Clairefontaine?)

Not that I'm criticising OUR academy, it's just that I feel slightly uncomfortable stealing the credit for developing players when, at best, we've only acted as a finishing school for OTHER clubs' academies, haven't we?

For me, OUR academy products don't include Cesc, Bendtner, Chesney or any of the other talented 16 year old's we've lured away from other clubs, but players like Wilshere, Gibbs, Watt, Frimpong, etc. who have been through the academy and learnt their skills from a young age.

If a player spends some time in our youth system and/or makes his first professional appearance for us, he is our youth product. That's what UEFA and Wikipedia say, I know it's a very liberal definition but I agree with it.

Do the cleaners count as well?