CFG | Academy | EDS in & out season 2024/25

Good bit of money. Even though he's going to a struggling championship side, suggesting thats his current level, they'll still be those that insist we should have thrown him in the deep end for us when the team was at its lowest against top class premier league opposition.
 
Last edited:
ninjamonkey said:
Good bit of money. Even though he's going to a struggling championship side, suggesting thats his current level, they'll still be those that insist we should have been thrown in the deep end for us when the team was at its lowest against top class premier league opposition.
Click to expand...
I don't think any of the EDS starting team are going to be good enough for us (though Nico has a chance).

The U18s is a different story.
 
Otamendi's Beard said:
I don't think any of the EDS starting team are going to be good enough for us (though Nico has a chance).

The U18s is a different story.
Click to expand...
Ive seen nothing from any of those who have had limited experience with the first team this season to dispute that. That's pretty much standard though. For a team expected to compete for all trophies like us, you're not really expecting any academy graduates to make the grade. You're content if a few can plug gaps over the season and then earn money for the club with their sales. If any break through it's a big bonus against the norm.
 
HaalandEffect said:
Click to expand...

I think he’s looked really impressive when given a chance.

It’s disappointing seeing pretty much all of our academy being sold off. Of course being realistic they have to have huge potential and most won’t get a chance.

Some of the biggest teams in Europe do give academy players a chance though and we have had some top level players in the last few years - foden, palmer, rogers for example
 
ninjamonkey said:
Ive seen nothing from any of those who have had limited experience with the first team this season to dispute that. That's pretty much standard though. For a team expected to compete for all trophies like us, you're not really expecting any academy graduates to make the grade. You're content if a few can plug gaps over the season and then earn money for the club with their sales. If any break through it's a big bonus against the norm.
Click to expand...
If we aren’t expecting any academy players to make it, is it just there for profit?

in my opinion over the last few years, we have had players who are good enough, but it seems we prefer to pay huge money for other teams youngsters.
 
Cheadle_hulmeBlue said:
I think he’s looked really impressive when given a chance.

It’s disappointing seeing pretty much all of our academy being sold off. Of course being realistic they have to have huge potential and most won’t get a chance.

Some of the biggest teams in Europe do give academy players a chance though and we have had some top level players in the last few years - foden, palmer, rogers for example
Click to expand...
A cost of the price and pressure of success I suppose.

There are PL rules for developing and promoting home grown talents.

I wonder if these might be tightened up by the PL given that all clubs do this with their academies?

I'm conflicted in this tbh.
One one hand, I'm not arsed about the origins of players on the pitch but am arsed when I see a 20 year old new boy start in his first week above a queue of CFG products sat on the bench.
 
Mr Grumpy said:
A cost of the price and pressure of success I suppose.

There are PL rules for developing and promoting home grown talents.

I wonder if these might be tightened up by the PL given that all clubs do this with their academies?

I'm conflicted in this tbh.
One one hand, I'm not arsed about the origins of players on the pitch but am arsed when I see a 20 year old new boy start in his first week above a queue of CFG products sat on the bench.
Click to expand...
In some ways it is, however there are other teams who are competing for success who manage to do it more than us. Our record with younger players is really poor in my opinion.

I agree on your last point and I’m also conflicted about it. We’re signing unproven 20 year olds and giving them a proper chance straight away, but we don’t do that for our own academy players.
 
Cheadle_hulmeBlue said:
If we aren’t expecting any academy players to make it, is it just there for profit?

in my opinion over the last few years, we have had players who are good enough, but it seems we prefer to pay huge money for other teams youngsters.
Click to expand...
Everybody hopes for players to make it and thats the dream jackpot scenario but you have to be realistic, the money it brings in is the bread and butter.

the better the team, the slimmer the chances of producing a graduate for the first team. Before this season nobody would argue we are one of the top 3 best teams on the planet, how many players between say 17-19 year old are good enough to play for one of the best 3 sides on the planet? I think it is fair to say you'd probably be hard pressed to name double figures. So the odds on one of those players at that level coming from our academy is very slim as it is, something we've achieved already with foden, let another in palmer slip through and have bobb, Lewis and mcatee potentially capable, that's way more than we should expect already, to have a continuous stream of them is just not realistic.

Players who have gone away and improved is a different thing entirely, I think it's actually an area we need to substantially improve in but it's not a unique problem for us, any consistent trophy chasing team cannot afford to bed in youngsters that aren't ready, look at how many Madrid sell for example.

You simply cannot have both, you have the odd kid that is ready mixed with established stars and compete and hopefully win things or you have a breeding ground and sacrifice trophies. Show me a side that's ever had both.
 
Cheadle_hulmeBlue said:
I think he’s looked really impressive when given a chance.

It’s disappointing seeing pretty much all of our academy being sold off. Of course being realistic they have to have huge potential and most won’t get a chance.

Some of the biggest teams in Europe do give academy players a chance though and we have had some top level players in the last few years - foden, palmer, rogers for example
Click to expand...
Rogers looked anything but top level when he played for us or (I think) any of his 3 loans before selling him.
 
Cheadle_hulmeBlue said:
If we aren’t expecting any academy players to make it, is it just there for profit?

in my opinion over the last few years, we have had players who are good enough, but it seems we prefer to pay huge money for other teams youngsters.
Click to expand...
And with the benefit of hindsight, who are these had players who are good enough that we had? Palmer is probably the only one you're going to come up with, and he would be arguable.
 
Centurions said:
And with the benefit of hindsight, who are these had players who are good enough that we had? Palmer is probably the only one you're going to come up with, and he would be arguable.
Click to expand...
Transfermarkt rate Palmer as the 4th best attacking midfielder in the world, with Rogers at 16th: https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/spi...pieler/marktwertetop/mw/spielerposition_id/10

Paqueta who we have been linked with is 17th, KDB is currently ranked as 22nd, Claudio Echeverri is 47th.
 
Last edited:
Plain Speaking said:
Transfermarkt rate Palmer as the 4th best attacking midfielder in the world, with Rodgers at 16th: https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/spi...pieler/marktwertetop/mw/spielerposition_id/10

Paqueta who we have been linked with is 17th, KDB is currently ranked as 22nd.
Click to expand...
His name is Rogers BTW and how does that list equate to him being good enough or not when he was at City? Not that I put any faith in a random list based on "market value". I presume you think we should buy Mason Mount as he's at number 25? 25th best attacking player in the world?
 
Centurions said:
And with the benefit of hindsight, who are these had players who are good enough that we had? Palmer is probably the only one you're going to come up with, and he would be arguable.
Click to expand...
I’d argue Palmer, Roger’s and lavia. Obviously they needed game time to develop and it might not have worked at city if they’d have stayed. I’m not saying they would have necessarily been starters either, but talent wise they are more than good enough to make a difference

If your talking about the current squad, I don’t see why Oriely couldn’t have played in midfield or come off the bench more when we were losing all of those games or Mcatee starting a few more.

I think our academy players are so underrated by our own fans.
 
Centurions said:
Rogers looked anything but top level when he played for us or (I think) any of his 3 loans before selling him.
Click to expand...
Of course. And it was obvious he needed more game time to develop. A bit like the unproven centre backs we’ve just signed.

We seem to be able to spot talent, but we then struggle to actually develop the players
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top