The Academy

[Palacesince64]

I believe there are sell-on clauses in one or more of the deals hence the lowish fees. Furthermore, Imray, Devenny and Ozoh were very much wanted by the clubs they went to and have, in the main, been starters. Whitworth, now Wigan's first choice keeper, went to a club whose manager was managing Exeter for the two years Whitworth was on loan there. I think all four of them have landed up at clubs where they can do well.

Neither Jemide's move to Portugal, nor Adamarola's to Belgium was about money as the fees were six figure sums.

All four seem sensible lads and decent pros who should do well. For Palace they represented pure profit which not only brought in some money when we needed it, but I assume also helped our SCR with the PL and UEFA.

 

[MarkA333]

I am trying to think back to the last home grown academy player that we produced. Obviously there was the team of the 80’s with TV. Then Zaha. Mitchell came from the Brentford academy. My thoughts are that it’s incredibly difficult to produce an academy player that can progress to premiership first teams level.

 

[samprior]

I am trying to think back to the last home grown academy player that we produced. Obviously there was the team of the 80’s with TV. Then Zaha. Mitchell came from the Brentford academy. My thoughts are that it’s incredibly difficult to produce an academy player that can progress to premiership first teams level.

Clyney, and in a round about kind of way he did go on to play for us in the Prem. Ben Watson and Routledge spring to mind but obviously all of those are from a while ago. *** As others have mentioned Wan-bissaka and Moses. How did I forget them!

Mitchell is the most recent example of success but like you said he joined from Brentford I think at around 18.

Drakes-Thomas and Benamar looked promising in their brief appearances for us last year so hopefully they could be the next ones.

Ozoh and Rak-Sakyi looked like they might do it but it didn't quite work but hopefully they'll have decent careers.

Overall I think the Academy is ticking along nicely and with the transfers of Devenny, Imray and Ozoh it's already paid for itself 👍

 

[doombear]

I am trying to think back to the last home grown academy player that we produced. Obviously there was the team of the 80’s with TV. Then Zaha. Mitchell came from the Brentford academy. My thoughts are that it’s incredibly difficult to produce an academy player that can progress to premiership first teams level.

Clyne and Wan-Bissaka come to mind as players we produced in the last 20 years who made it. I know Clyne moved on to Southampton before our last promotion to the PL but he was always good enough to play in the Prem as he proved when he came back in the twilight of his career. A dozen or so England xaps also speaks volumes of his quality

 

[Ex Dubai Eagle]

Clyne and Wan-Bissaka come to mind as players we produced in the last 20 years who made it. I know Clyne moved on to Southampton before our last promotion to the PL but he was always good enough to play in the Prem as he proved when he came back in the twilight of his career. A dozne or so England xaps also speaks volumes of his quality

Victor Moses ?

 

[TheBigToePunt]

The chances of producing a first team player through the youth team/academy have always been very slim, the number that make it alone tell you that.

Other factors have increasingly come into play, however.

1. The better our team, the harder it is for a youth player to get in. Being in the premier league requires a better academy, and premier league success allows us to invest more in it, yet having a successful premier league team makes it less likely the academy can produce a player good enough for the team.

2. The idea that a sold youth player is 'pure profit' for FFP/SCR turns an academy into a factory for the external marketplace. It also seems to make it more likely we sign a kid from abroad and sell one we produced than the other way around. Doesn't come up that often, but in borderline cases the system is tilted against the home grown player. Madness.

3. We don't make space for youth products, instead we actively block the pathways. I'm the first to say that a kid has to be good enough and that very few are, so I don't have unrealistic expectations. That said, we increasingly sign youthful promise from other countries after only a handful of games, so what's the difference ?Hopefully Gozo turns out great, but he's not expected to play right now. Is he actually better than what we have produced at home? Canvot was little more than an untried kid when we signed him, he still has a very long way to go. Did we really have nobody comparable in the building? I know it was years before, but we let O'Brian go and he'd be a big upgrade on Canvot.

Also, someone like Guessand was re signed on loan as cover even though he'd been very average last year. Why not just have Drakes-Thomas as the cover player? How does that signing allow him to develop? Or even give him hope and focus?

The third point is the one that gets me. Traditionally , the club could invest heavily in the youth set up but have to accept it if the manager didn't rate the youth players enough to pick them. Squad composition was the managers domain, after all, and there were only so many spaces.

Nowadays that's not really the case. It's the club that puts the squad together. It could choose to leave gaps, but has instead opted to block them.

 

[cryrst]

The chances of producing a first team player through the youth team/academy have always been very slim, the number that make it alone tell you that.

Other factors have increasingly come into play, however.

1. The better our team, the harder it is for a youth player to get in. Being in the premier league requires a better academy, and premier league success allows us to invest more in it, yet having successful premier league team makes it less likely the academy will produce a first team player.

2. The idea that a sold youth player is 'pure profit' for FFP/SCR turns an academy into a factory for the marketplace. It also seems to make it more likely we sign a kid from abroad and sell one we produced than the other way around. Doesn't come up that often, but in borderline cases the system is tilted against the home grown player. Madness.

3. We don't make space for youth products, instead we actively block the pathways. I'm the first to say that a kid has to be good enough and that very few are, so I don't have unrealistic expectations. That said, we increasingly sign youthful promise from other countries after only a handful of games. Hopefully Gozo turns out great, but he's not expected to play right now. Someone like Guessand was re signed on loan as cover even though he'd been very average last year. Why not just have Drakes-Thomas as the cover player? How does either signing allow him to develop? Or even give him hope and focus? Canvot was little more than an untried kid when we signed him, he still has a very long way to go. Did we really have nobody comparable in the building? I know it was years before, but we let O'Brian go and he'd be a big upgrade on Canvot.

The third point is the one that gets me. Traditionally , the club could invest heavily in the youth set up but have to accept it if the manager didn't rate the youth players enough to pick them. Squad composition was the managers domain, after all, and there were only so many spaces.

Nowadays that's not really the case. It's the club that puts the squad together. It could choose to leave gaps, but has instead opted to block them.

Some silly number /1 of them making it.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

Some silly number /1 of them making it.

To be fair, there are only so many job opportunities, so that's always been a key factor throughout modern history. Thousands of kids are in youth systems across the country, there is really only need for a hundred or so every summer, roughly speaking.

 

[MarkA333]

Let’s face it. We bought every single player except Mitchell who came from Brentford academy. In fact, the only reason we have an academy, which in itself is the 1/1000 chance we unearth a star.

 

[chris123]

Let’s face it. We bought every single player except Mitchell who came from Brentford academy. In fact, the only reason we have an academy, which in itself is the 1/1000 chance we unearth a star.

And we need a team to play matches, kids and U21

 

[doombear]

Let’s face it. We bought every single player except Mitchell who came from Brentford academy. In fact, the only reason we have an academy, which in itself is the 1/1000 chance we unearth a star.

We are required by the football authorities to have an Academy. Brentford had to resurrect theirs a couple of years ago. It's supposedly about providing pathways for youngsters into professional football (not necessarily into the Prem). Hence, we've sold a number of players to clubs in the EFL leagues in recent years, several of whom are now plying their trade in the Championship (Ozoh at Derby, Street at Lincoln, Imray at Wrexham - I don't count Devenny because he didn't really come through our Academy and didn't qualify as a Palace home grown player for European football). In short, the Academy is doing what the FA wants it to do.

 

[est1905]

Sad to see Imray departed. Still 5 million was probably a good amount. I recon that pays for a few years of the academy's costs.

Good luck to him at Wrexam.

Parish said in a recent interview that in a low expense year (in other words in a good year) it costs over £5m a year to run our academy so the sale of Imray will cover almost a year and thats only when all installments have been paid.
I can understand why the club need to sell a couple every now and then to help keep the academy ticking over.
I had a procedure done on my hand recently and was surprised when the appointment came through that it was at the AMEX arena in Falmer. Turns out BHA started outsourcing some of their high tech medical department to private heathcare. When that partnership proved a success they now do a lot for the NHS.
I imagine it helps Brighton with the costs of running such a department (primarily started for their own players and academy). I'd imagine Palace will have factions of their training facility that they could sell to the public/businesses in similar ways to help with costs. That is if they are not doing that already?
It has to be the future when you consider the costs involved in running these facilities.
I see a regular advert on TV now that Norwich now offer grass roots childrens teams to spend 5 nights at The Nest, learn additional coaching skills, play a few matches, etc. They must make good money doing that. It looks really popular amongst small grass roots teams.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

Parish said in a recent interview that in a low expense year (in other words in a good year) it costs over £5m a year to run our academy so the sale of Imray will cover almost a year and thats only when all installments have been paid.
I can understand why the club need to sell a couple every now and then to help keep the academy ticking over.
I had a procedure done on my hand recently and was surprised when the appointment came through that it was at the AMEX arena in Falmer. Turns out BHA started outsourcing some of their high tech medical department to private heathcare. When that partnership proved a success they now do a lot for the NHS.
I imagine it helps Brighton with the costs of running such a department (primarily started for their own players and academy). I'd imagine Palace will have factions of their training facility that they could sell to the public/businesses in similar ways to help with costs. That is if they are not doing that already?
It has to be the future when you consider the costs involved in running these facilities.
I see a regular advert on TV now that Norwich now offer grass roots childrens teams to spend 5 nights at The Nest, learn additional coaching skills, play a few matches, etc. They must make good money doing that. It looks really popular amongst small grass roots teams.

All of those costs (which I presume are operating costs rather than repayments on construction costs) are exactly why I doubt many clubs would bother with a cat A academy set up unless the premier league forced them to.

I do wonder what the academy kids get out of our set up that they wouldn't get from a youth team that cost a fraction of the price to run.

 

[Stirlingsays]

All of those costs (which I presume are operating costs rather than repayments on construction costs) are exactly why I doubt many clubs would bother with a cat A academy set up unless the premier league forced them to.

I do wonder what the academy kids get out of our set up that they wouldn't get from a youth team that cost a fraction of the price to run.

Well, it's because when you get a Zaha he plays a big part in keeping the club in the top division.......Someone should work out just how much Zaha is likely to have earned the club.....then there's a Mitchell who has been very important.

We currently have a keeper in the academy who has bags of potential for the Premiership and as Samprior said, Drakes-Thomas and Benamar look like they have futures in the game.

 

[est1905]

All of those costs (which I presume are operating costs rather than repayments on construction costs) are exactly why I doubt many clubs would bother with a cat A academy set up unless the premier league forced them to.

I do wonder what the academy kids get out of our set up that they wouldn't get from a youth team that cost a fraction of the price to run.

Education, High tech performance data, medical advice/assistance, top coaching, highest level of competitive games, the list goes on. My son was in the youth team of Crawley town FC until a year and a half ago. He quit (with my full support) mainly because of a lack of competitive games. They are not an academy therefore they are nbot allowed to step on the toes of grass roots football therefore they can only play games when lads grass roots teams are not playing. IE sometimes in midweek but usually school holidays.
Academies open far more doors and look after youngsters far better than any youth team could

 

[syd snot]

Unfortunately it's all part of this disgusting money driven game we all love.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

Well, it's because when you get a Zaha he plays a big part in keeping the club in the top division.......Someone should work out just how much Zaha is likely to have earned the club.....then there's a Mitchell who has been very important.

We currently have a keeper in the academy who has bags of potential for the Premiership and as Samprior said, Drakes-Thomas and Benamar look like they have futures in the game.

I'm not arguing against producing young footballers in-house. I'm just wondering what the actual difference is between coming through an academy and coming through an old fashioned youth team.

Regarding @est1905 very interesting post, I appreciate that an academy might have better facilities etc, but so long as reasonable minimum standards are met then does that really matter? I get the point about good coaching but, to be fair, how often have we heard that academy coaching just produces an endless stream of bland identikit robots? Can both be true? I never got the impression Zaha became the player he was because of academy coaching. Perhaps more despite it?

Ultimately, the benefit seems to be in the frequency and level of games. If you're not an academy then you can't play against the other best kids. That's plainly the most important thing. Always has been, always will. That's not an argument in favour of academies as such, though. The same could be achieved in an old fashioned youth team (and was). It's just a closed shop now.

 

[mtp1958]

I'm not arguing against producing young footballers in-house. I'm just wondering what the actual difference is between coming through an academy and coming through an old fashioned youth team.

Regarding @est1905 very interesting post, I appreciate that an academy might have better facilities etc, but so long as reasonable minimum standards are met then does that really matter? I get the point about good coaching but, to be fair, how often have we heard that academy coaching just produces an endless stream of bland identikit robots? Can both be true? I never got the impression Zaha became the player he was because of academy coaching. Perhaps more despite it?

Ultimately, the benefit seems to be in the frequency and level of games. If you're not an academy then you can't play against the other best kids. That's plainly the most important thing. Always has been, always will. That's not an argument in favour of academies as such, though. The same could be achieved in an old fashioned youth team (and was). It's just a closed shop now.

Academy still teaches like a normal school but with the focus more on football out side of the standard education , this way if they dont make it as a footballer they have a solid education , so thats the major difference , Academys are appearing more and more purpose built for sports around the country

 

[Stirlingsays]

I'm not arguing against producing young footballers in-house. I'm just wondering what the actual difference is between coming through an academy and coming through an old fashioned youth team.

Regarding @est1905 very interesting post, I appreciate that an academy might have better facilities etc, but so long as reasonable minimum standards are met then does that really matter? I get the point about good coaching but, to be fair, how often have we heard that academy coaching just produces an endless stream of bland identikit robots? Can both be true? I never got the impression Zaha became the player he was because of academy coaching. Perhaps more despite it?

Ultimately, the benefit seems to be in the frequency and level of games. If you're not an academy then you can't play against the other best kids. That's plainly the most important thing. Always has been, always will. That's not an argument in favour of academies as such, though. The same could be achieved in an old fashioned youth team (and was). It's just a closed shop now.

I think in theory the youth team model would work if all the clubs played ball, while I'm for what we are doing I do think you have a point insomuch as closing their academy worked ok for Brentford back in the day didn't it.

They closed because the EPPP compensation rules delivered tiny fees when bigger clubs poached their best teens. They replaced it with a B-team model for ages 17–21, recruiting released Premier League prospects and overseas talent, organising their own high-level friendlies. It worked out for them (Premiership rules meant that they had to restart an academy and now they have an Category 1 academy)

However, by the same token, the same approach didn't work out for Wycombe Wanderers or Bolton Wanderers.

I also think you have a point about an identikit approach in the Premiership and with coaching.....not that I think this actually happened in Zaha's case. In fact I think Palace's record in terms of keeping an individual player's flair while helping them professionalise other facets of their game does stand up.

I do think the Cat 1 academy approach is the better option for Palace.....I could bore you with reasons for why but I think you probably know why. I'll only do so if you ask but others have probably already mentioned them.

That said I think the question about academies is always a question worth the asking.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Unfortunately it's all part of this disgusting money driven game we all love.

Filthy lucre.

Snort.