Six Youngsters Who Could Break Through This Season

[Cicero]

Just now, Marc said:

 

unsurprisingly you resort to calling me stupid and an idiot. Name calling when you're losing a debate, oh dear. A common trait on this forum.

Anyway, Great, just clicked on that link...

'the club generated a profit of £69.2m from transfer business, due largely to the sale of Oscar to Shanghai SIPG for around £60m'

I'm not saying you have to rely on youth, i'm saying give them a chance. Then maybe you won't sell the likes of KDB, Lukaku, Matic. 

 

I believe if Reuben Loftus-Cheek would've stayed at chelski he would've got the drinkwater minutes then made the place his own. Chelsea have been successful but could've been more successful had they integrated some of the 'academy' player into the team down the years (KDB, Lukaku etc). Man United have had a similar level of success over the decade but have bought through academy players.

I will also emphasis you have the best academy in the country by a mile so it is difficult to compare you to everyone else. I will also repeat you are the only chelski fan i've spoken to that is happy with how the clubs academy works and the lack of integration into the first team.

You called my post rubbish and initially insinuated I was stupid. Are you for real?   

Ake, Traore, Cuadrado, Atsu, Chalobah, Djilioboji, = £80 million in transfer sales. 

So I reiterate, (in spite your attempt to misguide the interpretation) that our transfer/loan policy helped create a profit. 

Your assessment on Reuben Loftus-Cheek is nothing but a hypothetical. He's only showed moments of brilliance at Palace, at a club where he plays regularly. How can you possibly state that if he got Drinkwater's minutes, he'd have developed better? He isn't even good enough to start now and is a massive risk to rely on him and Barkley. 

What evidence do you have to suggest we would have been more successful had we integrated youth? KDB is a fair shout, given he is Mourinho's fuck up not the club's, but Lukaku is a poor one. Sorry, but if we were to continue on with Lukaku up top instead of getting Diego Costa when we did, fairly certain we wouldn't have won those two league titles. 

Don't twist my words. I would love to have youth make it here, but I am one who reads into facts, and the facts show that our success under Roman was based on the model it has now. Andreas Christensen is now good enough to be a regular starter. Odoi and Ampadu are good enough to be back ups. Reuben Loftus-Cheek is good enough to be a rotation player. Mason Mount also looks like he could very well be good enough for us next season. 

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

2 hours ago, Marc said:

What a load of rubbish, from start to finish that post is just shit. Every other club wins less youth trophies than chelski but brings through more youth players and loads of other clubs bring through players without having to loan them out a million times. 

I've met lots of stupid chelsea fans, but all the rest are still honest enough to be critical about the clubs youth/loan/academy player system. You seem to think it's working just fine then?

 

1 hour ago, Marc said:

unsurprisingly you resort to calling me stupid and an idiot. Name calling when you're losing a debate, oh dear. A common trait on this forum..

Hahahahaha

[Marc]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

 

Hahahahaha

Oh dear gonzo. Explain please.

 

Called anyone a spastic today?

[Stan]

@Marc what's your game here ?

[Dr. Gonzo]

Just now, Marc said:

Oh dear gonzo. Explain please.

 

Called anyone a spastic today?

Not yet, but I can definitely see why you get all touchy about certain words now. Probably tired of hearing regularly all the time. 

Also here's the explanation for you: maybe if you didn't start off disagreeing with @Cicero by disregarding everything he said as total shit and then call him the stupidest Chelsea fan if you're going to get immediately touchy about being called stupid in his response to you. Don't forget, you brought the discourse in the thread to that level - you now can't act like you're above it. Because you're not - the evidence is there in that post I quoted.

I hope that sufficiently explains rofl emoji response to that.

[Marc]

1 minute ago, Stan said:

@Marc what's your game here ?

You'll have to elaborate, Stan.

[Marc]

1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Not yet, but I can definitely see why you get all touchy about certain words now. Probably tired of hearing regularly all the time. 

Also here's the explanation for you: maybe if you didn't start off disagreeing with @Cicero by disregarding everything he said as total shit and then call him the stupidest Chelsea fan if you're going to get immediately touchy about being called stupid in his response to you. Don't forget, you brought the discourse in the thread to that level - you now can't act like you're above it. Because you're not - the evidence is there in that post I quoted.

I hope that sufficiently explains rofl emoji response to that.

I said 'i've met lots of stupid chelsea fans.' and said what he posted was shit (it was). No name calling though, you're right i'm above that.

I think it shows your morals when you think it's acceptable to call people spastics, it's 2018. Then again when we've got Balon calling people retards it's hardly surprising that it rubs off on others.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Just now, Marc said:

I said 'i've met lots of stupid chelsea fans.' and said what he posted was shit (it was). No name calling though, you're right i'm above that.

I think it shows your morals when you think it's acceptable to call people spastics, it's 2018. Then again when we've got Balon calling people retards it's hardly surprising that it rubs off on others.

The only ones rubbing off on each other are you and Teso, you colossal weirdo.

[Cicero]

Imagine calling an argument shit, when you fail to even counter it. 

The forever walking fallacy continues 

[The Palace Fan]

3 hours ago, Cicero said:

You are a bit naive if you think the players involved in those recent 5 FA Youth Cups should jump straight into the first team. For a club competing all on fronts and the way we operate, we don't take the risk of breaking through young players who have never played a single minute of top flight football. We have no idea if they can make the step up. That is the whole purpose of our loan system. If they are good enough, they will play. Andreas Christensen being the prime example. The likes of Odoi and Ampadu in particular, already show a vast amount of confidence none of our youth players recently have shown. 

It is one of the very reasons we have averaged a trophy every season under Roman's reign. Our whole loan system has also helped us become self sufficient.

 

 

It's an odd situation at Chelsea. Last season a lot of the players I felt that Conte should have given a chance too really let themselves down. Abraham, Zouma, Chalobah (guess was unfortunate), Brown and Musonda should have really pushed on. Reuben Loftus-Cheek was the anomolee but it took a very good last third to change all perceptions.

At the same time, I refuse to believe that an academy that has such an engrained history of being successful just has all these great kids that can't compete with grown ups time after time. There has to be a fundamental flaw in the middle stage of progression that the club are missing out on.

[Cicero]

2 minutes ago, The Palace Fan said:

It's an odd situation at Chelsea. Last season a lot of the players I felt that Conte should have given a chance too really let themselves down. Abraham, Zouma, Chalobah (guess was unfortunate), Brown and Musonda should have really pushed on. Reuben Loftus-Cheek was the anomolee but it took a very good last third to change all perceptions.

At the same time, I refuse to believe that an academy that has such an engrained history of being successful just has all these great kids that can't compete with grown ups time after time. There has to be a fundamental flaw in the middle stage of progression that the club are missing out on.

Fairly certain if clubs have figured that out, everyone would be pushing for youth. 

Truth be told, the jump up from youth to professional is massive. Today, in modern football especially, clubs competing on all fronts can't invest in the risk to bring these young players through and rely on them vs buying a seasoned professional. (You can see Barca, a club that was rich in bringing youth through, are now abandoning their philosophy just to compete with Real). 

I think our loan system is helping the club long term. Already positive signs given the profit it is making us and the players that I've mentioned who already look able to be a part of the first team. 

[LFCMadLad]

12 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Fairly certain if clubs have figured that out, everyone would be pushing for youth. 

Truth be told, the jump up from youth to professional is massive. Today, in modern football especially, clubs competing on all fronts can't invest in the risk to bring these young players through and rely on them vs buying a seasoned professional. (You can see Barca, a club that was rich in bringing youth through, are now abandoning their philosophy just to compete with Real). 

I think our loan system is helping the club long term. Already positive signs given the profit it is making us and the players that I've mentioned who already look able to be a part of the first team. 

I agree to a certain extent with what you're saying but sometimes you've just got to throw the kids in there and make them swim.

Good coaching and a manager that is good at motivating and who can give confidence to a player can pay dividends. 

Look at TAA for example. He was only given a chance because Clyne suffered a season long injury. 9 months later and he's broke into the England set up and has probably nailed down the RB spot with us for the next 10 years or so. He's been excellent the lad, so much so that Klopp is even considering letting Clyne go if the right offer comes in. 

Rashford is another example under LVG. Injuries meant that he got a chance and as they say, the rest is history. Only Mourinho the dinosaur has stunted his development otherwise who knows how much better he'd be now. 

[Cicero]

Just now, LFCMadLad said:

I agree to a certain extent with what you're saying but sometimes you've just got to throw the kids in there and make them swim.

Good coaching and a manager that is good at motivating and who can give confidence to a player can pay dividends. 

Look at TAA for example. He was only given a chance because Clyne suffered a season long injury. 9 months later and he's broke into the England set up and has probably nailed down the RB spot for the next 10 years or so. He's been excellent the lad, so much so that Klopp is even considering letting Clyne go if the right offer comes in. 

Rashford is another example under LVG. Injuries meant that he got a chance and as they say, the rest is history. Only Mourinho the dinosaur has stunted his development otherwise who knows how much better he'd be now. 

It's for that very reason I have my hopes for Odoi this season. He just took the piss out of Bellerin last night, and he is 17. 

Sarri already looks keen on him and wants him in the squad. Hazard becomes injured or Sarri wants to play with a more mobile forward, shifting Hazard at striker, who knows if Odoi will be on the left and make his mark permanently. 

[LFCMadLad]

6 minutes ago, Cicero said:

It's for that very reason I have my hopes for Odoi this season. He just took the piss out of Bellerin last night, and he is 17. 

Sarri already looks keen on him and wants him in the squad. Hazard becomes injured or Sarri wants to play with a more mobile forward, shifting Hazard at striker, who knows if Odoi will be on the left and make his mark permanently. 

I always find it a much better feeling when it's a local lad coming in and nailing down a place in the side instead of filing the position with someone not associated with the club. TAA being a Scouser is terrific, saves the club a bob or two as well. 

[RandoEFC+]

I can still see both sides of this debate. I'm not convinced sending players out on loan is always or even usually better for their development than playing under 23 football at their parent club. It depends a lot on the style and quality of coaching at the parent club and at the destination club.

Seamus Coleman had a terrific loan spell at Blackpool and came back to Everton ready to become one of the first names on the team sheet for years to come.

Then you've got Barkley who went on loan to Sheffield Wednesday and sat on the bench there but eventually broke into our team anyway.

But then you've got the majority of players who get repeatedly loaned out until they're 23 and eventually stop developing when they find their level in the Championship or below. For us that includes a ton of players we thought could make the first team (though plenty of them were probably never that good and were instead just hyped up by the post-Rooney Everton academy factor), just a few off the top of my head Bidwell, Lundstram, Galloway, Garbutt, Browning, Pennington, Hope.

I just wonder, when a Premier League club loans out ten players and nine of them never see a Premier League fixture, is it because the loan doesn't work or because the player just didn't have the potential that was hoped for? More loans nowadays seem to end in a player finding their level lower down rather than developing throughout the spell and showing that they're destined for bigger things. When you're Chelsea or another top six club obviously the level is higher so the failed players make more money when they're sold and the good ones are very few and far between.

The lack of first team opportunities given to Chelsea youngsters is a fair criticism to make but actually look at the rest of the top six. Tottenham have Kane who is a special case. After that across the top six you have Lingard, Rashford, Alexander-Arnold, Winks, and after that I'm struggling though I've probably missed a couple of sitters, it's late. Chelsea aren't the only ones with a poor hit rate here.