Marcos Lopes

[BigOscar]

I think Chelsea is the example of what happens with young players. Once they get to about 19, they go out on loan, if they do well they get a loan to a better club, then when they do well at a good club, once they get to about 21, they either make it into the actual first team or ask to leave as they know they are capable of playing week in week out at a good level. I think we will be far more encouraging of our young players than Chelsea, so if we had De Bruyne's and Lukaku's, they'd be in the first team squad instead of sold, but the principle is the same.

This is actually what I'm afraid of. Chelsea haven't brought through a young player into their first team for absolutely ages; John Terry was the last consistent player for their first team and that was 20 years ago.

We should research into whatever Chelsea are doing then do the exact opposite of that here because their youth development system, for all of their lovely Academy and training ground, is a total failure when it comes to producing players for them

I didn't mean do it just like Chelsea, as the players that I mentioned from Chelsea were all bought for about £10m a piece, were already established players for their beglian teams etc. But the principle of what age and level the players are at before they feel the time is right for them to force a move is more the point I was making De Bruyne and Lukaku were both much more advanced, much more experienced and much more established when they decided they had to leave, Courtois was the same when he made the "play me or let me go" ultimatum.

With Lopes, he could easily have been kept at the club this year, as he would of taken up no space at all due to his age and HG status. But we thought it would be better for his long term development for him to play consistently for Lille than only get scraps here. We could of used him instead of Scott Sinclair, but what good does it do him to play about 20 minutes a month? The same goes for Denayer with regards to Boyata, he could of done that job, but it's better for him in the long term to play more often. He could of helped us this year, but we sacrificed that for his long term gain. Depending on him sorting this injury out, I'd be very surprised if he isn't in our squad next year, same for one of Denayer or Rekik.

For me, it's once they've had a couple of years on loan that the question of whether it's time to leave or not becomes relevant. Rekik is probably at that point, much more so than Lopes.

 

[Ray78]

I am not suggesting we should stockpile players but with Chelsea they still make a profit on the younger players who don't have the overall quality to make it into their first team. That helps paying for the overall costs of running of the academy.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

I think we're showing that flexibility by keeping the likes of Pozo on the books but letting the likes of Lopes go off on loan.

 

[Neville Kneville]

I think Chelsea is the example of what happens with young players. Once they get to about 19, they go out on loan, if they do well they get a loan to a better club, then when they do well at a good club, once they get to about 21, they either make it into the actual first team or ask to leave as they know they are capable of playing week in week out at a good level. I think we will be far more encouraging of our young players than Chelsea, so if we had De Bruyne's and Lukaku's, they'd be in the first team squad instead of sold, but the principle is the same.

This is actually what I'm afraid of. Chelsea haven't brought through a young player into their first team for absolutely ages; John Terry was the last consistent player for their first team and that was 20 years ago.

We should research into whatever Chelsea are doing then do the exact opposite of that here because their youth development system, for all of their lovely Academy and training ground, is a total failure when it comes to producing players for them

I didn't mean do it just like Chelsea, as the players that I mentioned from Chelsea were all bought for about £10m a piece, were already established players for their beglian teams etc. But the principle of what age and level the players are at before they feel the time is right for them to force a move is more the point I was making De Bruyne and Lukaku were both much more advanced, much more experienced and much more established when they decided they had to leave, Courtois was the same when he made the "play me or let me go" ultimatum.

With Lopes, he could easily have been kept at the club this year, as he would of taken up no space at all due to his age and HG status. But we thought it would be better for his long term development for him to play consistently for Lille than only get scraps here. We could of used him instead of Scott Sinclair, but what good does it do him to play about 20 minutes a month? The same goes for Denayer with regards to Boyata, he could of done that job, but it's better for him in the long term to play more often. He could of helped us this year, but we sacrificed that for his long term gain. Depending on him sorting this injury out, I'd be very surprised if he isn't in our squad next year, same for one of Denayer or Rekik.

For me, it's once they've had a couple of years on loan that the question of whether it's time to leave or not becomes relevant. Rekik is probably at that point, much more so than Lopes.

If we have a player on contract, & they are playing at a level they are happy with for their development, then I don't see what the problem is. Lopes was delighted to go to Lille, Denayer was delighted to go to Celtic. They are our best two prospects out of that earlier EDS group & apart from the injuries, are coming on exactly as we would have hoped. Both have a chance of getting in our squad next season. If not. they will get another year playing regularly at a high standard.

Rusnak has been fixed up to start a career in Holland.

Rekik wanted to go back to PSV rather than be in the background at City, & he is there, at the top of the league, at 20 years old. We have done no harm to his career & both he & the club can decide if he signs a new deal with us or moves on. I imagine we are releasing him. But he is a good advert for our system, as is Guidetti who would have been given a chance at City barring injury but is now playing for Celtic. Huws got a move to Wigan.

Several others are out, getting the chance to impress both us, & the scouts from other clubs.

I imagine Pozo may have gone on loan if he hadn't been injured but he will either be loaned out or used by us next season, depending on how he finishes this one.

There hasn't been one single player who has left City since the takeover, who we would expect to be playing in the squad now, not one. I very much doubt Chelsea have any regrets about the players they released while we are mentioning it.

Both clubs now have some genuine prospects. City will eventually end up with a group of home grown players who make it into the squad, there are too many good ones for them all to fail, & Chelsea may possibly do the same.

So far, the players produced haven't been good enough. These are better. Some will make it, some won't, & one or two will get poached or released by us & then make it elsewhere. Unavoidable. We will also probably pinch one or two, from others.

 

[callumcity]

I am not suggesting we should stockpile players but with Chelsea they still make a profit on the younger players who don't have the overall quality to make it into their first team. That helps paying for the overall costs of running of the academy.

Not very ethical though is it. Signing young players who haven't a chance of breaking into the first team. Tying them down to long contracts and making money from loan fees and an eventual transfer fee to various clubs is a bit dodgy. Stunting and in cases ruining a young players career because you want to make a few million is wrong and I hope city don't go down that route.

 

[LoveCity]

Not very ethical though is it. Signing young players who haven't a chance of breaking into the first team. Tying them down to long contracts and making money from loan fees and an eventual transfer fee to various clubs is a bit dodgy.

No less ethical and dodgy than FFP, a rule-set designed to stop clubs without pre-existing revenue streams. Any way around it is fair game, IMO. Chelsea have been very smart using this strategy and that's a big reason why they've been able to rebuild their squad with lots of money in the FFP era despite smaller revenues than us from everything but player sales and matchday.

 

[Pubteam Lomas]

I am not suggesting we should stockpile players but with Chelsea they still make a profit on the younger players who don't have the overall quality to make it into their first team. That helps paying for the overall costs of running of the academy.

Not very ethical though is it. Signing young players who haven't a chance of breaking into the first team. Tying them down to long contracts and making money from loan fees and an eventual transfer fee to various clubs is a bit dodgy. Stunting and in cases ruining a young players career because you want to make a few million is wrong and I hope city don't go down that route.

I know someone whose son joined our academy. When his lad got the chance he was keen to let him join because he knew he'd get the best coaching available. (Dad is a massive red)
He actually said his lad wasn't good enough to make it, but it was an amazing opportunity for him to learn his trade before hopefully making a career in the lower leagues.
So basically it works both ways.
Get 15 lads, make between £5-10m every few years selling them (eg, Guidetti and I suspect Rekik plus money from others who will fetch £100-500k) and hopefully get one top player coming through! Pozo? Lopes? It's all part of the business.
Callumcity you are right, but T**tini and the clubs that voted for FFP have sadly encouraged this behaviour.
We are being used just as we are using youngsters.

 

[Neville Kneville]

I am not suggesting we should stockpile players but with Chelsea they still make a profit on the younger players who don't have the overall quality to make it into their first team. That helps paying for the overall costs of running of the academy.

Not very ethical though is it. Signing young players who haven't a chance of breaking into the first team. Tying them down to long contracts and making money from loan fees and an eventual transfer fee to various clubs is a bit dodgy. Stunting and in cases ruining a young players career because you want to make a few million is wrong and I hope city don't go down that route.

I know someone whose son joined our academy. When his lad got the chance he was keen to let him join because he knew he'd get the best coaching available. (Dad is a massive red)
He actually said his lad wasn't good enough to make it, but it was an amazing opportunity for him to learn his trade before hopefully making a career in the lower leagues.
So basically it works both ways.
Get 15 lads, make between £5-10m every few years selling them (eg, Guidetti and I suspect Rekik plus money from others who will fetch £100-500k) and hopefully get one top player coming through! Pozo? Lopes? It's all part of the business.
Callumcity you are right, but T**tini and the clubs that voted for FFP have sadly encouraged this behaviour.
We are being used just as we are using youngsters.

That's the point. As long as we are doing something positive & doing our best to teach kids the right things & get them jobs in football, then we are a good thing for football.

Most kids won't make it at City but if they leave the club having bettered themselves, we have done our bit. There is nothing wrong with it.

 

[BigOscar]

Still not back in the squad, even after the winter break. It looks like it really did a number on him rushing him back from his injury the first time. Can't say I'd want to loan Girard any more of our players anytime soon. Between his hideously negative tactics and his treatment of Rony's injury, he's ruined what should of been an excellent loan for the lad. Hopefully he's back soon and gets a proper run of games.

 

[SamTheGuru]

Lopes could return to City in the summer and find his path is blocked by new signings.

If he is good enough, he will play for City. If he is close to good enough but not quite good enough for City, he is good enough to play for most teams in the Premier League, in Italy, Spain or Germany on loan. He would be able to get in our Champions League squad if he decided to fight for his place instead. If none of those options are good enough, he can fuck off.

What a short sighted attitude to have.

So a player must worship at the altar of City rather than have an eye on what his best for his long term football development or fuck off? If Lopes is good enough to get a place in our squad, and he is considering Scott Sinclair is in our squad as is Dedryck Boyata, and he doesn't get a place in our squad but yet again gets turfed out to France so we can dither for another year then he absolutely SHOULD leave the club.

There's no proof at all that out youth development goals are anything but hot air and throwing money around at the moment, and the idea that he should just wait around working his bollocks off so we can splash some money on Reus and he can be another peg down is daft. Why should he? It's not like he grew up with pictures of Peter Reid and Steve Daley on his wall, he's a young kid with a burning desire and professional ambition who understands that he needs to play football.

I won't accept any idea that United can give James Wilson games when they have Di Maria, Mata, Rooney, Falcao and Van Persie but we can't find a squad place for Lopes because he might not be good enough.

I would much rather our Youth team players were playing regularly out on loan than making the odd substitute appearance once every 2 months. I don't see how that is development.

James Wilson will be out on loan next season surely?