Topic: Youth and Under 23 Thread

[PoetryInMotion]

Is Sancho an "elite talent" then in your view, Phase of Play, or is he a "sub-elite" talent? If he was an elite level talent, then the problem was is that he believed that he was not going to be treated as an elite talent and that instead he would not get enough games. If he was a sub-elite talent, then he is giving a pretty good impression of being an elite talent in the Bundesliga to the level that Premiership clubs are said to be interested in him...

This reminds me of the situation that Kevin De Bruyne faced in Chelsea...

It's plain hindsight and escapism to say that those who come through are elite and those who don't are not elite.

For every Neymar, you have a Robinho. Both of them came through at the same club.

For every Messi, you have a Pedro or Sergi Roberto. See the 5 players who came through in just 2 clubs and you can find it all diverse. Two elite players, two good to very good and one not making the cut at the top level at all.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I'm out

There's a reason I stay out of this thread in general

It's really not good for my health

[Chris~]

No, that IS the argument mate. Sorry. If you want a chance at a club that can spend 100 million on a single player if they wished, then yes, you have to be fucking legendary to break through from the Academy and hold down a starting spot. Or should they drop seasoned trophy-winning, high-wage professionals to give some kids a good feeling about themselves even if they don't have the chops to be top class players?

I'm not being an ass, I just really don't see where your coming from here with regards to the big clubs - if a player is good enough to compete with an established first teamer, then they'll play. It's as simple as that. No club is going to let a prized youth asset who is - as much as anything else, almost all profit if they are shit-hot as a player - fall behind and be held back by not being selected. If they are ambitious, they will want them on that team helping to create wins. If they are interested in revenue, they'll want that player in the shop window at the very least.

Top talents don't get "held back". Average ones or better-than-average ones will see their opportunities restricted. That's the game though, and it was ever thus, even before big money came into it.

Clubs can view it like that and I don't disagree they do, but they're wrong to. They're the ones who in England will start to miss out on a lot of really good young players who are coming through, whether it be through their academy or brought in.

Your argument was that players need to be as good as De Bruyne, Silva, Mahrez, Sterling etc. to play, I agree that's how managers view it and will, because Guardiola wants to win now, his legacy will matter if he wins now. And someone like Sancho doesn't have thousands of minutes behind him to show he could help with that. The counter to that is that players like Sterling, or really any of that City lot, at 17/18 wouldn't have been good enough to displace their 20+ year old selves, they had to go out on loan, go through the lower leagues, get game time away from worse players than the absolute elite. If your waiting around for Messi to come through your going to miss out on talented players, City have missed out on the best teenager in the world because of that already.

[PoetryInMotion]

God no. No, no, and a thousand times no.

They are what they because they have talent and work rate. Players may go off the rails once they make it (Robinho, for example), but they get their chance because they stand out from their peers, then they stand out from most of the senior professionals who don't have their talent, once the start playing against them.

I'll give you another example - Gareth Bale. 40-something games at age 18 for Southampton.

Talent will out. Professionalism will keep them there. Work ethic will make them great.

You're ignoring the counter-examples and is just focusing on the elite players who came through. Let's go Southampton.

Calum Chambers - 23 appearances at age 18 for Southampton. 36 appearances at Arsenal at age 19. Is he elite?

Wayne Bridge - 24 appearances at 17. 45 appearances at 19. Did he turn-out elite?

Theo Walcott - 23 appearances for Southampton at 16. 32 appearances for Arsenal at 17. 39 appearances at 18. Elite?

James Ward-Prowse - 39 appearances for Southampton at 18.

Just says a lot of players have come through at Southampton. That is all.

 

[KingKolo]

Ultimately, what we're debating here is whether the 'cream rises to the top'.

My feeling is that in a lot of cases where a young kid gets chucked in, it's because of injuries to more senior squad members that they get their chance. For example, if Gomez and Lovren aren't injured, Ki-Jana Hoever gets nowhere near a game against Wolves. If Clyne isn't injured, Trent doesn't make his breakthrough. If Fowler isn't injured, Owen gets less games in 97/98. If Redknapp isn't injured, Gerrard doesn't play so many games early on... and so on and so on.

BUT, there's just no way to telling whether those players would have made it through eventually. We can speculate about it, but we don't know for sure. Some will argue that they would have forced their way in somehow because they're that good, and others will suggest that the early exposure to top level football was a crucial part of their development. To some extent it depends on the individual. What's true is that they wouldn't be chucked in, even in case of injury, unless they had something that the manager saw in them.

Equally, it's a complete unknown which players that didn't make it might have done in other circumstances. We can point at players like San Jose, Paletta, Suso and Alberto who have gone onto do really well in different countries, but I can't think of any examples of players that have been let go early at Liverpool and have then gone onto make us really wish we'd kept them. Then again... I can only think of two players we've produced to elite level since Academies came in, Trent and Sterling. Two is hardly a pattern.

We just don't know how many more would reach an elite level of performance given the chance. If those players are out there, having failed to reach their potential, it's very hard for anyone to say definitively who they are. The margins between success and failure are so slim in elite sport, the slightest difference at a crucial stage can make a huge difference to the eventual outcome.

[PoetryInMotion]

^^
Agree with everything said.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Sorry, lads/lasses. But having been involved in player development for nigh on 20 years, having worked with youth players who went on to be professionals and internationals in a few cases, I can say with a good measure of certainty, that most here have a really idealised and incorrect view of elite youth development. Truly top class players aren't held back. They are, in fact, promoted quite readily. The sad truth is that most players in the academy level will only ever have good and steady careers. Some will have great careers but will be "water-carriers" for the teams they end up playing for (not unskilled, but not the standout player in a top team, either). And then a small percentage will become all-time greats. And a further percentage will drop out of the game altogether, or become coaches instead of players.

But for anyone to sit here and say that just because youth academy players aren't getting their chance at City, or Chelsea, or whoever, that they are not ever going to reach their full potential, and that we won't know a Messi unless they are given a run of games, is naive at best. We ALWAYS know that player. They ALWAYS stand out. Whether they become a great is largely up to their professionalism and dedication and ability to turn talent into consistency (see the aforementioned Robinho, but also Balotelli for a more polar extreme example). But they were never "hidden" behind 2 or 3 inferior, but senior, players at their clubs. They were obvious talents. Barca didn't sign Messi up on a napkin in Argentina on the flip of a coin. They saw what he could become with the right guidance. They didn't take all of his youth team-mates as well, just in case it was the coaching that made Messi great at that age. They took Messi. Here is a good article about Barca signing Messi. When you see that player, you know. You don't know how far they'll go, but you know that they have the tools to go far if they apply themselves: https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/oct/15/lionel-messi-barcelona-decade

It's all relative. Academy players in general stand out from their local peers, and that's why they become Academy players. Then in the Academy, they stand out from their team-mates, so they get to play up an age when allowed. Then they stand out from their select peers who get to play up an age, and they train with the first team squad. Then they stand out from the squad players, so they get put on the bench. Then they stand out from the bench players, so they get a start. Then they stand out from the starters, so they get a run. Then they stand out from the league, and they become a transfer target. Then they stand out from the opposition, and they become a great.

Everyone's progress is measured on that ladder just there, and everyone has an upper limit. It's not like players go home and do nothing from game to game, and then just turn up an hour before kick-off and the manager has to guess who is capable of what. They are constantly being informed by their staff of the progress of the Academy players in training, and if anyone stands out, they will be urged to have a look at them, and if they like what they see, they have them work with the first team, and if they stand out in first team training, they get minutes. That's the process. No manager is going to come across a top class Academy player, watch them turn the starters inside out (or mark them out of a training game), and then say "You know what? I don't need that player. Keep him with the other kids". My mind boggles that anyone would think it was different than that.

[RayPhilAlan]

Sorry, lads/lasses. But having been involved in player development for nigh on 20 years, having worked with youth players who went on to be professionals and internationals in a few cases, I can say with a good measure of certainty, that most here have a really idealised and incorrect view of elite youth development. Truly top class players aren't held back. They are, in fact, promoted quite readily.

snip


 No manager is going to come across a top class Academy player, watch them turn the starters inside out (or mark them out of a training game), and then say "You know what? I don't need that player. Keep him with the other kids". My mind boggles that anyone would think it was different than that.

Really interesting debate - thanks for that to all of you contributing for your insights.

POP - everything you say makes sense in most cases and most clubs. I think where others are disagreeing with you is that at a few clubs it just becomes a greater level of difficulty for that top class Academy player to come through. It's an extra challenge for the player at Man City, for instance, beyond what they'd have at Southampton. We know Pep Guardiola doesn't mind bringing through youth players when they're good enough - Pedro was cited above. But would Pedro have got a chance as a teenager if he was competing with the 20-25 year old versions of Sterling, Sane, Mahrez, the Silva brothers and Kevin de Bruyne? He might be considered such a good player that the club wouldn't want to release him, but he's not going to get a start in an important match.

Same with Harry Wilson, to bring it back to Liverpool. A lot of us think he's the best attacker we've produced in some time. But is he going to get games ahead of Salah or Mane?

You've said that players come through if they have the talent and the determination required (not an exact quote from you, excuse the paraphrase). Surely, though, it weakens the determination if they're not getting games and they can see little prospect of getting games because, good as the Academy player is, they're not as good as the guy getting the starts?

So Jadon Sancho has the determination, and decided he would do something about it. Another player might not. It will be interesting to see what happens what happens with Phil Foden. Will it ever happen that Pep, coming to Anfield, will say "Foden or de Bruyne/Silva today? Hmm, think I'll go with Foden."

[Nessy76]

I think the idea is that playing first team football will improve the player. So you don't know the full picture until he has had a run in the side.
Personally, I don't think that is realistic. The manager only has one job, to win games. He has to pick the best squad at his disposal. For an Academy player, it's the same as anyone else. Prove that you're worth it. Show the boss what you can do. If you are good enough, better than other options, then you will play.
I don't think we want to see a load of kids thrown in at the expense of the team. We try it in the cups and it rarely works.

People talk about Owen, but what about Lee Jones? He was around at the same time, and scored goals for fun for the reserves but he wasn't good enough and he never broke through, even with the exact same opportunities and the exact same coaches and management. Whatever Owen had, he didn't. And nor did Pacheco, or Mellor, or Morgan or any of the other dozens of strikers we have seen tear it up at youth level. If they had, they would have been used.

I remember the outcry when we let Jay Spearing go. And Guthrie. Anyone want them back?

The sad truth is that only a very small number of players is ever going to break through here and have a career here. But that's because we have one of the best squads on the planet, which is, after all, the most important thing here.

[stevo7]

Sorry, lads/lasses. But having been involved in player development for nigh on 20 years, having worked with youth players who went on to be professionals and internationals in a few cases, I can say with a good measure of certainty, that most here have a really idealised and incorrect view of elite youth development. Truly top class players aren't held back. They are, in fact, promoted quite readily. The sad truth is that most players in the academy level will only ever have good and steady careers. Some will have great careers but will be "water-carriers" for the teams they end up playing for (not unskilled, but not the standout player in a top team, either). And then a small percentage will become all-time greats. And a further percentage will drop out of the game altogether, or become coaches instead of players.

My Nephew has been at an Academy for 9 years. My brother turned down Man City, Man Utd & Liverpool for different reasons who wanted him at the time.
He plays for his country in European competition.
He may make it, He may not - I'm not a coach, so haven't a clue. But it's great to see his development & he enjoy's playing.

[BrandoLFC]

Really interesting debate - thanks for that to all of you contributing for your insights.

POP - everything you say makes sense in most cases and most clubs. I think where others are disagreeing with you is that at a few clubs it just becomes a greater level of difficulty for that top class Academy player to come through. It's an extra challenge for the player at Man City, for instance, beyond what they'd have at Southampton. We know Pep Guardiola doesn't mind bringing through youth players when they're good enough - Pedro was cited above. But would Pedro have got a chance as a teenager if he was competing with the 20-25 year old versions of Sterling, Sane, Mahrez, the Silva brothers and Kevin de Bruyne? He might be considered such a good player that the club wouldn't want to release him, but he's not going to get a start in an important match.

Same with Harry Wilson, to bring it back to Liverpool. A lot of us think he's the best attacker we've produced in some time. But is he going to get games ahead of Salah or Mane?

You've said that players come through if they have the talent and the determination required (not an exact quote from you, excuse the paraphrase). Surely, though, it weakens the determination if they're not getting games and they can see little prospect of getting games because, good as the Academy player is, they're not as good as the guy getting the starts?

So Jadon Sancho has the determination, and decided he would do something about it. Another player might not. It will be interesting to see what happens what happens with Phil Foden. Will it ever happen that Pep, coming to Anfield, will say "Foden or de Bruyne/Silva today? Hmm, think I'll go with Foden."

I don't really understand what you're arguing here.  Wilson should get games over Mane and Salah just because he's from the Academy?  Foden should play when he's not better than De Bruyne or Silva?  The clubs see these players train for years yet we here know better?

Sancho is a great, and also extreme, example in that would anybody actually take him over Sterling or Sane?  So he moved on to a club where he could play regularly and it benefited all involved.  Happens every day to every player that can't play at the top level, there's nothing wrong with that.

I don't even know what to make of your Pedro example.  Pep played a 21 year old Messi and Pique while Busquets was 19 in a season in which they won La Liga and the CL.

[PhaseOfPlay]

My Nephew has been at an Academy for 9 years. My brother turned down Man City, Man Utd & Liverpool for different reasons who wanted him at the time.
He plays for his country in European competition.
He may make it, He may not - I'm not a coach, so haven't a clue. But it's great to see his development & he enjoy's playing.

Ultimately, that's what it's all about. If he's not the absolute standout player of his age group, then he needs to become a hard worker (if he isn't already) and get a ton of luck and/or contacts. There's more chance of a solid career in football from the academies then there is of playing for one of the bigger clubs as a starter (statistically). But ultimately, it comes down to their own enjoyment, motivation and experience. There used to be a saying - we're not coaching players, we're coaching future coaches. Kids like your nephew may or may not make it, but they'll learn the process that might help them to help someone who will, in the future. The overall experience of being an elite youth player is worth it. The chances of being a top starter are statistically small. So it's always best to look at it from a holistic point of view than to look at it specifically about getting the big contracts at the big clubs.

[Coolie High]

I don't really understand what you're arguing here.  Wilson should get games over Mane and Salah just because he's from the Academy?  Foden should play when he's not better than De Bruyne or Silva?  The clubs see these players train for years yet we here know better?

Sancho is a great, and also extreme, example in that would anybody actually take him over Sterling or Sane?  So he moved on to a club where he could play regularly and it benefited all involved.  Happens every day to every player that can't play at the top level, there's nothing wrong with that.

I don't even know what to make of your Pedro example.  Pep played a 21 year old Messi and Pique while Busquets was 19 in a season in which they won La Liga and the CL.

I would have taken Sancho over everyone at that club he looked like an obvious world beater and better than any other English player not named Rooney at the same age.. in recent years.

[stevo7]

Ultimately, that's what it's all about. If he's not the absolute standout player of his age group, then he needs to become a hard worker (if he isn't already) and get a ton of luck and/or contacts. There's more chance of a solid career in football from the academies then there is of playing for one of the bigger clubs as a starter (statistically). But ultimately, it comes down to their own enjoyment, motivation and experience. There used to be a saying - we're not coaching players, we're coaching future coaches. Kids like your nephew may or may not make it, but they'll learn the process that might help them to help someone who will, in the future. The overall experience of being an elite youth player is worth it. The chances of being a top starter are statistically small. So it's always best to look at it from a holistic point of view than to look at it specifically about getting the big contracts at the big clubs.

Thanks for feedback. His head is screwed on and he lives at home. Seeing his development since travelling abroad with his country has been interesting.
Ste Gerrard had a go at him when his team played Liverpool, so he can't be doing too much wrong. Although I hope he doesn't end up at Rangers.

[BrandoLFC]

I would have taken Sancho over everyone at that club he looked like an obvious world beater and better than any other English player not named Rooney at the same age.. in recent years.

If that means you'd stop fellating over Hazard then I'd have to agree as well

[KingKolo]

Sorry, lads/lasses. But having been involved in player development for nigh on 20 years, having worked with youth players who went on to be professionals and internationals in a few cases, I can say with a good measure of certainty, that most here have a really idealised and incorrect view of elite youth development. Truly top class players aren't held back. They are, in fact, promoted quite readily. The sad truth is that most players in the academy level will only ever have good and steady careers. Some will have great careers but will be "water-carriers" for the teams they end up playing for (not unskilled, but not the standout player in a top team, either). And then a small percentage will become all-time greats. And a further percentage will drop out of the game altogether, or become coaches instead of players.

But for anyone to sit here and say that just because youth academy players aren't getting their chance at City, or Chelsea, or whoever, that they are not ever going to reach their full potential, and that we won't know a Messi unless they are given a run of games, is naive at best. We ALWAYS know that player. They ALWAYS stand out. Whether they become a great is largely up to their professionalism and dedication and ability to turn talent into consistency (see the aforementioned Robinho, but also Balotelli for a more polar extreme example). But they were never "hidden" behind 2 or 3 inferior, but senior, players at their clubs. They were obvious talents. Barca didn't sign Messi up on a napkin in Argentina on the flip of a coin. They saw what he could become with the right guidance. They didn't take all of his youth team-mates as well, just in case it was the coaching that made Messi great at that age. They took Messi. Here is a good article about Barca signing Messi. When you see that player, you know. You don't know how far they'll go, but you know that they have the tools to go far if they apply themselves: https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/oct/15/lionel-messi-barcelona-decade

It's all relative. Academy players in general stand out from their local peers, and that's why they become Academy players. Then in the Academy, they stand out from their team-mates, so they get to play up an age when allowed. Then they stand out from their select peers who get to play up an age, and they train with the first team squad. Then they stand out from the squad players, so they get put on the bench. Then they stand out from the bench players, so they get a start. Then they stand out from the starters, so they get a run. Then they stand out from the league, and they become a transfer target. Then they stand out from the opposition, and they become a great.

Everyone's progress is measured on that ladder just there, and everyone has an upper limit. It's not like players go home and do nothing from game to game, and then just turn up an hour before kick-off and the manager has to guess who is capable of what. They are constantly being informed by their staff of the progress of the Academy players in training, and if anyone stands out, they will be urged to have a look at them, and if they like what they see, they have them work with the first team, and if they stand out in first team training, they get minutes. That's the process. No manager is going to come across a top class Academy player, watch them turn the starters inside out (or mark them out of a training game), and then say "You know what? I don't need that player. Keep him with the other kids". My mind boggles that anyone would think it was different than that.

Much of what you're saying makes lots of sense, obviously, but I do think you have to look at the cases of Foden and Sancho as counter examples.

Sancho is clearly an elite level talent, but City have Sterling, Mahrez and Sane.
Foden won the golden ball at the FIFA U17 World Cup (if that's not standing out in the way you describe, I don't know what is), but City have KDB, the Silvas and Gundogan.

The pathway is blocked for those two elite talents. One of them has gone elsewhere for games and is flourishing, and the other has stayed put and is making cameo appearances.

It's not just City either. Ademola Lookman is another one. He was much better off in Germany than he is at Everton. I'm sure Hudson-Odoi would have benefitted from games too if he'd been allowed to leave Chelsea.

These players need to be playing proper competitive senior football at 18/19/20. If they spend those years playing U23 and making do with sporadic League Cup games, their careers will suffer. As I've said a fair bit on this thread (to the irritation of many), I massively do not believe in the U23 league as a breeding ground for top level talent.

And whilst your Messi/Balotelli/Mbappe/Vinícius Júnior type talents are all fast-tracked into first teams because they're so ridiculously good at an early age, you surely know as well as I do (if not better) that players can develop later and still reach an elite level.

Andy Robertson is arguably the best left-back in the league now. He wasn't getting fast-tracked anywhere at the age of 17.

Job Flanagan was never and will never be an elite talent, but during the 13/14 season he was thrown in at the deep end, sink or swim. He swam (somehow), nearly won the league and even made an England squad.

[stevo7]

snip

I don't know what country you are from.  Do you support Corbyn?

[BrandoLFC]

Much of what you're saying makes lots of sense, obviously, but I do think you have to look at the cases of Foden and Sancho as counter examples.

Sancho is clearly an elite level talent, but City have Sterling, Mahrez and Sane.
Foden won the golden ball at the FIFA U17 World Cup (if that's not standing out in the way you describe, I don't know what is), but City have KDB, the Silvas and Gundogan.

The pathway is blocked for those two elite talents. One of them has gone elsewhere for games and is flourishing, and the other has stayed put and is making cameo appearances.

It's not just City either. Ademola Lookman is another one. He was much better off in Germany than he is at Everton. I'm sure Hudson-Odoi would have benefitted from games too if he'd been allowed to leave Chelsea.

These players need to be playing proper competitive senior football at 18/19/20. If they spend those years playing U23 and making do with sporadic League Cup games, their careers will suffer. As I've said a fair bit on this thread (to the irritation of many), I massively do not believe in the U23 league as a breeding ground for top level talent.

And whilst your Messi/Balotelli/Mbappe/Vinícius Júnior type talents are all fast-tracked into first teams because they're so ridiculously good at an early age, you surely know as well as I do (if not better) that players can develop later and still reach an elite level.

Andy Robertson is arguably the best left-back in the league now. He wasn't getting fast-tracked anywhere at the age of 17.

Job Flanagan was never and will never be an elite talent, but during the 13/14 season he was thrown in at the deep end, sink or swim. He swam (somehow), nearly won the league and even made an England squad.

What are you even trying to argue?  That youth players don't get chances yet you're bringing up ones that do?

Sancho - club wouldn't guarantee him playing time so he didn't sign a new contract and went to a club that would guarantee him minutes.  What's the issue with that?
Foden - No idea what the club is promising, probably that D. Silva has only a year or two left?  So he signed a new contract which is a risk for both him and the club as he's clearly not better than D. Silva or he'd be playing
Lookman - He's getting minutes in the first team in the league, isn't that what you are saying should happen?
Robertson - He wasn't a PL academy player, what are you even arguing?
Flanagan - Got his chance, was fine but clearly not good enough long term for whatever reason
Hudson-Odoi - Do you think Bayern are going to play him more than Chelsea if he isn't of the required level?  LOL

[El Lobo]

Flanagan didn’t get thrown in during 13/14 anyway, he got his debut a few years before

[trimore]

Sancho is clearly an elite level talent, but City have Sterling, Mahrez and Sane.

That actually sounds like a, well not exactly terrible, but far from an optimal deal for City. They should never have bought Mahrez, kept and used Sancho as the backup for Sterling and Sane and spent the Mahrez money on a proper replacement/deputize for Fernandinho at DM and got him in this season. Luckily for us they didn't. 

[Maldini]

Sancho left because he didn't want to be back-up

[trimore]

Sancho left because he didn't want to be back-up

That's great for us and Dortmund. But to me that's a slightly disappointing attitude from a young player if true. He would have got plenty of minutes as City are competing on all four fronts, as Mahrez and Bernardo Silva's playing times have shown. I'd like to think whatever marginal additional minues he gains at Dortmund isn't worth giving up the chance to learn from experienced pros like Aguero, De Bruyne and David Silva day in, day out over a season or more.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Andy Robertson is arguably the best left-back in the league now. He wasn't getting fast-tracked anywhere at the age of 17.

He was a 1st team regular at aged 17/18,pretty unusual for a defender.

[U-238A]

To the coaches - How often do you see someone be amazing in training, but it simply doesn't translate to real game minutes? Or the opposite? They don't really stand out, but due to injuries, are thrown into the deep end, hold their own and become first choice after a consistent run of good games?

Anyone believe Trent would've got his run-in if Clyne was fit? If yes/no... Why?

[Gerry Attrick]

That's great for us and Dortmund. But to me that's a slightly disappointing attitude from a young player if true. He would have got plenty of minutes as City are competing on all four fronts, as Mahrez and Bernardo Silva's playing times have shown. I'd like to think whatever marginal additional minues he gains at Dortmund isn't worth giving up the chance to learn from experienced pros like Aguero, De Bruyne and David Silva day in, day out over a season or more.

Marginal additional minutes? He's played nearly 1700 minutes and counting for Dortmund this season. He'd have needed to play like Garrincha to approach 600 or 700 at Man City. To describe a player's attitude as disappointing if they want to play football matches is absolutely ludicrous.

[Cpt_Reina]

The cream will rise to the top.

But PoP you're being dismissive if you don't think an individual clubs current situation can't impact that or prohibit it from happening.

Pogba was and is elite, he was ready for first team football at united and all and sundry knew it. But Rafael got games at CM ahead of him along with Park Ji Sung and a retired only to be resurrected old man Scholes.

So he had to leave least he risk wasting his talent watching less talented footballers from the stands.

It happens. It will happen more often than is desirable under a manager like Mourinho and a club like Chelsea for the very specific and very situational specifics of a manager and/or a club placing much more emphasis on immediate results and therefore place much more trust in senior players they know rather than risk a talented but inconsistent teenager.

Pogba, Sancho, any number of Real Academy graduates and so on, its really not that short a list. They all had to leave their clubs to realise their potential. It's a sliding doors moment ultimately, neither of us can sit here and claim to know for sure how things pan out for Pogba if he stays at United. If he languishes or succeeds because ultimately that scenario didn't come to pass.

We do know however that these players, their advisors, they knew something had to give and that they were more ready than the opportunities being provided.

You look at someone like Loftus Cheek and there's a clearly top level talent there, PL and International quality talent. But his lack of first team games is hampering both his career and his improvement. That's the flipside of the coin if you don't remove yourself from such a situation. 

[PhaseOfPlay]

Pogba left united due to money, not playing time,  though.

[Cpt_Reina]

If you say so.

[HopefulRed]

interesting article with Barry Lewis (LFC U18 manager) talking about his squad.  I saw it in the Echo. 

https://www.goal.com/en/news/gerrards-cousin-the-scouse-german-and-meet-liverpools-next/hxe540f7d1lz1tegjs55wktvw

[Tobelius]

interesting article with Barry Lewis (LFC U18 manager) talking about his squad.  I saw it in the Echo. 

https://www.goal.com/en/news/gerrards-cousin-the-scouse-german-and-meet-liverpools-next/hxe540f7d1lz1tegjs55wktvw

Thanks for this mate,interesting read 

[PhaseOfPlay]

If you say so.

I don't - Raiola (his agent), does:

Paul Pogba was then a teenage hopeful at Manchester United. He hadn’t broken into the first team and Raiola told him he was underpaid, but added that perhaps he ought to stay anyway, especially as United had a “fantastic manager”, Alex Ferguson. However, in 2012 Raiola asked United for a better contract. He breaks into English to recount the negotiations:

Ferguson to Raiola: I don’t talk to you if the player is not here. Raiola: Get the player out of the locker room and sit him here. Pogba enters. Ferguson to Pogba: You don’t want to sign this contract? Pogba: We’re not going to sign this contract under these conditions. Ferguson to Raiola: You’re a twat.

Raiola was unfazed, partly because he didn’t know the word.

Raiola: This is an offer that my chihuahuas — I have two chihuahuas — don’t sign. Ferguson: What do you think he needs to earn? Raiola: Not that. Ferguson: You’re a twat.

- https://www.ft.com/content/548155cc-9bcf-11e6-b8c6-568a43813464

Ferguson on Pogba -

"I mean if we hold Pogba back, what's going to happen? He's going to leave. You know, in a couple of years' time when his contract is going to finish. So we have to give him the opportunity to see how he can do in the first-team and he's got great ability."

- Marshall, A; Sharrock, D (12 August 2011). "Boss set to promote Pogba". Manchester United F.C. Retrieved 12 August 2011.

[Cpt_Reina]

Pogba on pogba

Ferguson had omitted Wayne Rooney, Jonny Evans and Darron Gibson after a night out and, lacking three injured central defenders, played Michael Carrick in the back four and selected a new central-midfield partnership of right-back Rafael da Silva and Park Ji-sung.

And Pogba told Canal+: "It was a very, very difficult moment for me because I was in love with Manchester and I was a Mancunian.

"It was the match against Blackburn in December 2011 at Old Trafford.

"Paul Scholes had retired, Darren Fletcher was injured. There was no one left to play in midfield. And I was training and I was beginning to get better bit by bit and the coach never stopped telling me, 'You're this far'.

"And I didn't understand. This far away from what? Playing? From having some playing time? From getting on the field? Or what?

"And there was Rafael in midfield and I was disgusted. I was disgusted and I didn't get on either."

United lost 3-2 to Blackburn with Pogba remaining an unused substitute and he said that day convinced him to leave Old Trafford.

http://en.espn.co.uk/football/sport/story/276115.html

[Cpt_Reina]

Doesn't exactly sound like a lad who was assured of breaking in to that team regardless of the players in front of him.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Doesn't exactly sound like a lad who was assured of breaking in to that team regardless of the players in front of him.

Or maybe he's just a preening tit who thought a lot of himself, much like he is now.

Fact is, Ferguson is quoted as saying he wanted him in the first-team squad, and is also quoted as saying he didn't want to hold him back. Which is the point I made - managers don't "hold back" talents. Pogba's impatience doesn't disprove that.

[Cpt_Reina]

He played 37 times, including 8 apps in the CL for Juve the next season and won the league.

He was ready and was being held back in favour of inferior players.

[PhaseOfPlay]

He played 37 times, including 8 apps in the CL for Juve the next season and won the league.

He was ready and was being held back in favour of inferior players.

Ferguson says he wasn't. Ferguson was the one picking the team.

[Cpt_Reina]

He was wrong then wasn't he.

And he might have continued to be wrong to not play Pogba possibly indefinitely.

Cos essentially the notion of the cream rising to the top is predicated on the selection whims of one man, the players manager.

...unless of course the player removes himself from that situation as Pogba and Sancho did.

[trimore]

Marginal additional minutes? He's played nearly 1700 minutes and counting for Dortmund this season. He'd have needed to play like Garrincha to approach 600 or 700 at Man City. To describe a player's attitude as disappointing if they want to play football matches is absolutely ludicrous.

If what PoP is saying is true and the star players are obvious and easy to pick out before in the youth set up before they ever kick a ball in the first team then no, I don't think Sancho had to play like Garrincha to get 600 to 700 at Man City when Mahrez has over 1200 and counting for City. I really don't know why you would find that ludicrous? Like a single young forward with no experience but loads of obvious talent has never helped a team win trophies before.
 

[PoetryInMotion]

I can see the different points of view being discussed, but if you look at life and say that all talents in all the fields are given clear path/enough opportunities, then it's plain delusion. Life has never been like that. A lucky few get their chances to expose their talents. I'm not in the game like PoP is, but if you apply what you know about the world to football, then you'd think there'd be sufficient obstacles in front of you even if you've 'talent'.

Coaches maybe good in recognizing talents, but they're not Gods. To claim there are no lost talents at the top level in football is extremely reaching for me, and it's simplistic to conclude if you're talented enough, you'll make it. It works in some cases, it doesn't because there're plenty of obstacles to get to the top, there's going to be politics, there's going to be money - so there's going to be agents & clubs and negotiations, there's going to be influences, wrong advises, lack of opportunities and so on and on factors at play. Are these factors not in football? I don't know. I just see it to be a case by case individually. You got two talents, you'll have different coaches guessing who'd be the elite one at that age, but there's every chance that both of them will make it, or only one of them will make it, or neither will. Who knows? To say every coach will agree which of the two will make it or know to predict make it seem like they're Gods, and I know they are not. Apply that to 100s of players these coaches see and then someone claiming each & every one of the predictions that these coaches make are agreed between them and spot on about everybody at that age, just sounds insane and out of this world to me.

There're going to be lost talents in football and there have been plenty before. I'm very sure of it.

[Nessy76]

I can see the different points of view being discussed, but if you look at life and say that all talents in all the fields are given clear path/enough opportunities, then it's plain delusion. Life has never been like that. A lucky few get their chances to expose their talents. I'm not in the game like PoP is, but if you apply what you know about the world to football, then you'd think there'd be sufficient obstacles in front of you even if you've 'talent'.

Coaches maybe good in recognizing talents, but they're not Gods. To claim there are no lost talents at the top level in football is extremely reaching for me, and it's simplistic to conclude if you're talented enough, you'll make it. It works in some cases, it doesn't because there're plenty of obstacles to get to the top, there's going to be politics, there's going to be money - so there's going to be agents & clubs and negotiations, there's going to be influences, wrong advises, lack of opportunities and so on and on factors at play. Are these factors not in football? I don't know. I just see it to be a case by case individually. You got two talents, you'll have different coaches guessing who'd be the elite one at that age, but there's every chance that both of them will make it, or only one of them will make it, or neither will. Who knows? To say every coach will agree which of the two will make it or know to predict make it seem like they're Gods, and I know they are not. Apply that to 100s of players these coaches see and then someone claiming each & every one of the predictions that these coaches make are agreed between them and spot on about everybody at that age, just sounds insane and out of this world to me.

There're going to be lost talents in football and there have been plenty before. I'm very sure of it.

I think you're probably right when it comes to mid-level talents. There are probably any number of players who spend their careers at a lower level than they are capable of, too. But the gap between the average academy player, and someone who can make an impact at a side competing for the title in the toughest league on Earth (tm) is huge. People could see it with Sterling. I think if anything the risk is that you get too many false positives there. You can see a kid who looks amazing for his age group, but once he moves up to the first team, he just hasn't got that extra something to get him through. Or he fails to reach his potential for various reasons.

And yes, there is a question of opportunity. You have to be better than whatever is in front of you to play, so the quality of what you are behind is crucial. Rickie Lambert would never have got a game if he had been kept on at Liverpool, but by moving down the leagues he was able to show what he could do. Ultimately, he was not good enough to be a starter for us. Maybe we got it right. But the whole loan system is built on this idea. The lads playing at Rangers, in another world they could be Rangers academy players. They would be getting the same games up there that they are not going to get here. Does that ultimately improve their chances of playing for us? The jury is still out on that one. We send a lot of players out on loan, and while it definitely helps us to move them on, and them to put themselves in the shop window, are they getting experience that will actually help them to make it at Liverpool? Or is it just Lambert again? Proving they can do it at a lower level does not mean that they are more likely to do it where we really want to see it.