Huddersfield To Scrap Academy

[Danny]

Huddersfield, according to Daily Mail Australia, are looking into scrapping their academy and introducing a B Team.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4855532/Huddersfield-consider-shutting-academy.html#comments

[Smiley Culture]

£2m per annum sounds like peanuts to a Premier League club, even one who're experiencing their first season in the top flight in fifty-odd years. 

However, Academy produced players are more and more of a rarity in the top flight and it seems from the outside looking in, it's going a similar way in the Championship and I'm sure it's soul destroying for any side, regardless if it's Huddersfield Town, Brentford or Crawley Town when a bigger fish comes along and takes your most talented 13-14 year old's for a tiny fee, especially when you consider the amount of hours put into that child's development and the loss the club would make if he was sold as a 18-19 year old compared to at 13-14 year old. 

When you also consider that Football managers get less and less time at clubs these days compared with years gone by, managers cannot afford to risk their job by blooding youngsters over experienced heads and as sad as that is, it's how the game has evolved in this country. 

It's not a bad idea, it's something more common on the Continent and something David Wagner is probably quite familiar with too. 

[Danny]

I believe this season we'll see a lot more players feature more prominently from the B Team which I'm looking forward to, for us I'm not sure an academy will be able to offerus the calibre of players in bulk that the B Team can.

[Large]

This never seems to be truly taken into full context though when being discussed or reported on. Of the £2m reported over £500k of that comes from the Premier League [I'm sure this amount has increased now]. Suggesting that Brentford also only spend £300k a season on the ten training camps is utter tripe. The wage bill alone that they are payng the B Team players is a ridiculous amount more than was paid for what was then their U21 and U18 sides. Also the games programme they boast about has come about from a number of the players that were lost to these bigger clubs. Man City would not have been playing them last season if not for Povedo-Ocampo, or Man Utd if not for Josh Bohui. The latter by the way who is going to be a top, top player and would have remained at Brentford had the Academy Director and Senior Management Team still been there. Let's also not forget that out of the 7 debutants last season 4 were 'Academy players'.

Dan and I have had a few discussions about this in the past. Objectively looking at it, this model I think will be interesting to see how it pans out. I get ridiculously frsutrated though with this piss poor reporting from both the press and Brentford when spouting about the virtues of the B Team over the old Academy.

[Dave]

Well, we were warned about this could happen when that turnip Gareth Southgate came out with the EPPP tripe, excessively stripping football league clubs of adequate compensation opportunities for young players.

Football in this country from a home grown perspective is a mess. We've lost our coaches, our managers, and a whole generation of potential England internationals. Academies quite simply do not work any more, clubs in the football league don't perceive it to be cost effective, clubs in the premier league don't want to take the risk on young players because of the high turnover of managers. Why any footballer with potential to be a Premier league footballer doesn't want to take that risk that Callum Willock, Eric Dier and others have done by learning their trade abroad at a young age is beyond me.

In terms of a solution I think the problem needs to be tackled from a more deeper problem and that's kids being chucked obscene money by agents and clubs before they've done anything. GCSE's, puberty, women, anything. On the other end It must be soul destroying for some of these kids to have their hopes built up by a professional club only to be released whatever age.

The best solution I can think of is football from under the age of seventeen becomes regionalised again. You have your borough teams and then you have a more superior County team. You develop under the FA pyramid for these teams and cannot sign for a professional football club or an agent until you are seventeen which is a fair enough age to presume they may be ready to break in to a first team and any football club can offer you a contract at that time. Sky may ruin it and go all 'deadline day' on these kids signing contracts, and Chelsea may offer fourty contracts a season (hopefully there agents and parents will take realistic chance of playing in our consideration). But at the moment I can't see a better solution for developing players.

[Large]

The problem there though Aaron is there is little quality at grasroot level to develope young players to an elite level. There would need to be a massive change to the infrastructure there, and that's just not going to happen.

[Danny]

12 hours ago, Large said:

This never seems to be truly taken into full context though when being discussed or reported on. Of the £2m reported over £500k of that comes from the Premier League [I'm sure this amount has increased now]. Suggesting that Brentford also only spend £300k a season on the ten training camps is utter tripe. The wage bill alone that they are payng the B Team players is a ridiculous amount more than was paid for what was then their U21 and U18 sides. Also the games programme they boast about has come about from a number of the players that were lost to these bigger clubs. Man City would not have been playing them last season if not for Povedo-Ocampo, or Man Utd if not for Josh Bohui. The latter by the way who is going to be a top, top player and would have remained at Brentford had the Academy Director and Senior Management Team still been there. Let's also not forget that out of the 7 debutants last season 4 were 'Academy players'.

Dan and I have had a few discussions about this in the past. Objectively looking at it, this model I think will be interesting to see how it pans out. I get ridiculously frsutrated though with this piss poor reporting from both the press and Brentford when spouting about the virtues of the B Team over the old Academy.

Considering it was our first year using the B team there's little surprise a number of ex-academy players made the jump.

Already this season we've seen Theo Archibald, Chatzitheodoridis and Justin Shaibu make appearances which is what the programme is about.

Obviously we lost a couple of academy players before but I think this is more about being able to get a bigger fee consistently for our B team than we could have got out of our academy. The clubs entire model is based on selling to compete so it'll be interesting to see how these players get on.

 

[Large]

Sorry Dan but not having that. The two main reasons the Academy was scrapped is that the Ankerson and Giles believed that the Academy was/would not produce 1st team players [not enough anyway] and that the Academy would lose their best players to bigger clubs. Four debutants in a season is pretty good going in my opinion, so that instantly makes a nonsense of issue 1. First season or not for the B Team, if those boys aren't good enough they are not getting debuts. Yet out of all the players in that team, the ones that came through the Academy have generally outshone those that the club have paid money for to bring in. Regarding issue 2, again I refer to context. Ovedo-Ocampo and Bohui were not your regular top players. These two boys are considered to be of exceptional potential. The very top echelon of ability. Almost all clubs outside the top 6 in the Prem will probably lose those type of player to the clubs with money if they want them. But these two were the catalyst for the club's claims that there was no point to the Academy if it could not keep its best players, and only receive peanuts for them as well when losing them.

[Danny]

32 minutes ago, Large said:

Sorry Dan but not having that. The two main reasons the Academy was scrapped is that the Ankerson and Giles believed that the Academy was/would not produce 1st team players [not enough anyway] and that the Academy would lose their best players to bigger clubs. Four debutants in a season is pretty good going in my opinion, so that instantly makes a nonsense of issue 1. First season or not for the B Team, if those boys aren't good enough they are not getting debuts. Yet out of all the players in that team, the ones that came through the Academy have generally outshone those that the club have paid money for to bring in. Regarding issue 2, again I refer to context. Ovedo-Ocampo and Bohui were not your regular top players. These two boys are considered to be of exceptional potential. The very top echelon of ability. Almost all clubs outside the top 6 in the Prem will probably lose those type of player to the clubs with money if they want them. But these two were the catalyst for the club's claims that there was no point to the Academy if it could not keep its best players, and only receive peanuts for them as well when losing them.

Our philosophy is about selling our players for as much as we can and then replacing them for players with better potential. Josh Clarke for example is the biggest break through from the academy/B Team, however he's not currently looking like he'll score 10-15 goals a season as a winger. He's a good squad player and fits in perfectly in a rotation but at 22/23 is he going to see an improvement that will see him go for millions? Maybe, but it's as likely as us selling him for a low but fair value too. The problem with the two players you mention is that we didn't get a chance to improve their value, I won't argue the ins and outs as to why they left with you because you obviously have an inside knowledge that I don't (the GPG isn't always a source of absolute knowledge 😂)but in terms of player value for me the idea is to try and attract a better calibre of player than say Josh Clarke, or at least someone who can have a better peak.

Justin Shaibu for example, he's obviously got his problems with injuries but say in the second half of the season he does a Hogan and bangs a load away, causes interest and then a panicking relegation club come in with a load of money, we've just had a player who's scored however many and now have a good fee for a championship striker who we signed for little in comparison. We don't need to attract a Josh Bohui but I don't think it's beyond us to attract an Andre Gray or Scott Hogan.

And I believe the above goes hand in hand with the reasons given to scrap the academy.

[Dan+]

EPPP is the worst idea I've ever heard. It actually amazes me how clueless about football the people who introduce such rubbish are.

[Large]

On ‎9‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 0:32 AM, Danny said:

Our philosophy is about selling our players for as much as we can and then replacing them for players with better potential. Josh Clarke for example is the biggest break through from the academy/B Team, however he's not currently looking like he'll score 10-15 goals a season as a winger. He's a good squad player and fits in perfectly in a rotation but at 22/23 is he going to see an improvement that will see him go for millions? Maybe, but it's as likely as us selling him for a low but fair value too. The problem with the two players you mention is that we didn't get a chance to improve their value, I won't argue the ins and outs as to why they left with you because you obviously have an inside knowledge that I don't (the GPG isn't always a source of absolute knowledge 😂)but in terms of player value for me the idea is to try and attract a better calibre of player than say Josh Clarke, or at least someone who can have a better peak.

That's my point though Dan. In my opinion for those two players mentioned it would be extremely unlikely for any club outside of the considered top clubs, not just Brentford, to have kept hold of them and therefore improve their value. But these players are an exception. There were many promising players in the Academy that professionals far more knowledgeable than I considered to be just as good if not better that your 'Justin Shaibus' and/or 'Josh Clarkes'. So if that's the level then the Academy was producing it and then some. I agree entirely though about the level of player the club needs to be trying to get, I just don't agree that it wasn't available through the Academy.

Justin Shaibu for example, he's obviously got his problems with injuries but say in the second half of the season he does a Hogan and bangs a load away, causes interest and then a panicking relegation club come in with a load of money, we've just had a player who's scored however many and now have a good fee for a championship striker who we signed for little in comparison. We don't need to attract a Josh Bohui but I don't think it's beyond us to attract an Andre Gray or Scott Hogan.

I completely agree with you regarding your comment that the club "don't need to attract a Josh Bohui", but the reality is that they had one. A once in a blue moon top class player who would have stayed with the club had the Academy still been there. The club may have only got a little out of him before moving on, but it would have been a lot more than they had to settle for when he did leave. And now the Academy has gone the possibility of the club ever getting another player of that ability is even more remote than it was before.

And I believe the above goes hand in hand with the reasons given to scrap the academy.

In the end mate it's irrelevant now what the reasons were. The Academy's closed and the B Team is the club's way forward now. I do though get narked when listening to/reading the reports about the B Team that are either completely inaccurate or portray facts in a light to make the B Team project look like it is doing well whilst extolling the virtues of the decision to close the Academy. The club's decision to close the Academy let down a lot of players, parents, great staff, and in my opinion the future of the club. The B Team may be a great success. Only time will tell.

 

[Dave]

On 11/09/2017 at 8:16 PM, Dan said:

EPPP is the worst idea I've ever heard. It actually amazes me how clueless about football the people who introduce such rubbish are.

One of them being the current English Manager.

[Large]

On ‎9‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 8:16 PM, Dan said:

EPPP is the worst idea I've ever heard. It actually amazes me how clueless about football the people who introduce such rubbish are.

The thing is Dan they aren't clueless. In fact they are extremely clever. They are self serving though and have introduced the EP3 to benefit the big clubs, not to improve elite youth development.

[Smiley Culture]

7 minutes ago, Large said:

The thing is Dan they aren't clueless. In fact they are extremely clever. They are self serving though and have introduced the EP3 to benefit the big clubs, not to improve elite youth development.

The rich are getting richer while the rest of us fight it out for their scraps. 

[Dan+]

2 hours ago, Large said:

The thing is Dan they aren't clueless. In fact they are extremely clever. They are self serving though and have introduced the EP3 to benefit the big clubs, not to improve elite youth development.

And in doing so are harming the very place a lot of those youngsters actually came from, in turn making them less likely to produce said players in future. A completely silly concept that has more losers than winners.

[Large]

26 minutes ago, Dan said:

And in doing so are harming the very place a lot of those youngsters actually came from, in turn making them less likely to produce said players in future. A completely silly concept that has more losers than winners.

Not completely. Although put in place to generally protect the interests of the bigger/richer clubs, the EP3 has not been all bad. There are a number of really good things to come from it. But doesn't change the fact that it was primarily implemented to look after the needs of the few that really don't need looking after.