You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > How Important Is Our New Academy to Our Future?
October 19 2021 12.07pm

How Important Is Our New Academy to Our Future?

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

 

View CrazyBadger's Profile CrazyBadger Flag Ware 06 Oct 21 10.21am Send a Private Message to CrazyBadger Add CrazyBadger as a friend

Academies purpose changes depending on where you are in The Footballing chain.

football League Clubs often rely on them to get in cheap talent for their first teams.

the higher echelon of premier league clubs; the ones that get the majority Of the TV/European coffers also seem to use them to get talent in their first team squads. They can afford to sign a higher number of these players, so they can skim off only the best players. They also have the benefit of Stronger Squads that can 'carry' the odd young developing player without too much reduction in quality, and are involved in so many competitions that they can play these prospects without too much risk, while giving them vital playing time.

For the rest of the Premier League clubs, the advantage is twofold;
1) the Main aim is to is to get in Talent, either by buying from other academies, or signing young, and developing them so they can be sold for profit, creating a decent revenue stream.
2)When their hand is forced(ie. injuries) they should have a greater standard of replacement available.

There is always the chance that a few of these prospects will be naturally good enough to get into the first team, but the Stakes Are higher.
Relegation is a massive danger, so playing these players is a Risk, often one that clubs are not prepared to take. Without that extenuating circumstance, many of the players will find it hard to get gametime.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View NEILLO's Profile NEILLO Online Flag Shoreham-by-Sea 06 Oct 21 10.25am Send a Private Message to NEILLO Add NEILLO as a friend

Originally posted by Wilbraham413

Can anyone educate me as to how our new academy works in terms of which young players do we have the advantage of signing? From what I understand, we should have an advantage signing young players in the South London area. Is this true? And now that we have a top level academy, it makes it more likely that we can retain local talent?

I'm hoping that our new academy gives us a pipeline of good young players that other mid-tier clubs won't have. Like I would imagine South London would have a constant stream of good young talent. That makes me think that even if we have a terrible year, and get relegated, we should be able to rebound quickly.

The Academy is highly important to the clubs future.

To compete for the best talent both locally and from outside South London, the club needed to invest heavily to ensure we have facilities and an infrastructure that will make that talent consider Palace as somewhere they would want to be.

There are no guarantees that this will lead to a conveyor belt of youngsters feeding into the First Team, but it does give the club and the players the best possible platform to succeed.

Already we are seeing the U23's and U18's thriving, and I am sure the enhanced facilities we now have are having a positive effect on their performances.

 


Old, Ungifted and White

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View MrRobbo's Profile MrRobbo Flag Purley 06 Oct 21 10.47am Send a Private Message to MrRobbo Add MrRobbo as a friend

Coming back to Brentford, I do think it’s a fascinating experiment.

For anyone that doesn’t know, they folded their academy as the ROI wasn’t there for them. They still have reserve teams, but are not developing kids from a young age.

When you look at the U23s how many have we nurtured from kids, vs shipping in from other Academies?

But if you look at the guys that are ‘closest’ to the first team, there are a lot that were transferred straight in at U18s or U23 level, namely:

Rak-Saki – Came from Chelsea
Banks – Dundee
Nya Kirby – Spurs
Obrien – Cork
Hannam – West Ham

So could we do away with anything U17 and just get some more scouts in?


Edited by MrRobbo (06 Oct 2021 10.50am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View NEILLO's Profile NEILLO Online Flag Shoreham-by-Sea 06 Oct 21 11.09am Send a Private Message to NEILLO Add NEILLO as a friend

Originally posted by MrRobbo

Coming back to Brentford, I do think it’s a fascinating experiment.

For anyone that doesn’t know, they folded their academy as the ROI wasn’t there for them. They still have reserve teams, but are not developing kids from a young age.

When you look at the U23s how many have we nurtured from kids, vs shipping in from other Academies?

But if you look at the guys that are ‘closest’ to the first team, there are a lot that were transferred straight in at U18s or U23 level, namely:

Rak-Saki – Came from Chelsea
Banks – Dundee
Nya Kirby – Spurs
Obrien – Cork
Hannam – West Ham

So could we do away with anything U17 and just get some more scouts in?


Edited by MrRobbo (06 Oct 2021 10.50am)

First off, it's interesting what Brentford have done but is it sustainable ? It may not suit their current business model but at some point that may need to change.

Their reserve ( B ) team don't appear to be playing against quality opposition on a regular basis so I'm unclear as to how that helps with player development.

As for our own Academy, the investment made is starting to pay dividends in as much as we can attract players from other clubs academies as well as giving us a better chance with local talent.

 


Old, Ungifted and White

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View EverybodyDannsNow's Profile EverybodyDannsNow Flag SE19 06 Oct 21 11.33am Send a Private Message to EverybodyDannsNow Add EverybodyDannsNow as a friend

Originally posted by MrRobbo

Coming back to Brentford, I do think it’s a fascinating experiment.

For anyone that doesn’t know, they folded their academy as the ROI wasn’t there for them. They still have reserve teams, but are not developing kids from a young age.

When you look at the U23s how many have we nurtured from kids, vs shipping in from other Academies?

But if you look at the guys that are ‘closest’ to the first team, there are a lot that were transferred straight in at U18s or U23 level, namely:

Rak-Saki – Came from Chelsea
Banks – Dundee
Nya Kirby – Spurs
Obrien – Cork
Hannam – West Ham

So could we do away with anything U17 and just get some more scouts in?


Edited by MrRobbo (06 Oct 2021 10.50am)

No doubt youth recruitment is important, but all of our most successful graduates are from within:

Moses, Zaha, Clyne, AWB - behind that you've got your Routledge and Watson types.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View MrRobbo's Profile MrRobbo Flag Purley 06 Oct 21 11.36am Send a Private Message to MrRobbo Add MrRobbo as a friend

Only time will tell if its sustainable, but there are a lot of positive things happening at Brentford. As well as on pitch, they seem to excel in other areas e.g. scouting.

I guess my point was about the usefulness about anything below the U18s when it seems that you can just ship in a load of talent at 18 to fill the reserve teams. So, is that money spent on the 8-17 year olds better off spent on youth scouts?!

Not sure I believe it is, but an interesting debate, especially considering how many of our up and coming players were ‘poached’.

But that all being said. Wan-Bisakka came though and made us a tonne of profit, and Mitchell came to us after Brentford folded their academy.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View doombear's Profile doombear Flag Too far from Selhurst Park 06 Oct 21 11.58am Send a Private Message to doombear Add doombear as a friend

Originally posted by Wilbraham413

Can anyone educate me as to how our new academy works in terms of which young players do we have the advantage of signing? From what I understand, we should have an advantage signing young players in the South London area. Is this true? And now that we have a top level academy, it makes it more likely that we can retain local talent?

I'm hoping that our new academy gives us a pipeline of good young players that other mid-tier clubs won't have. Like I would imagine South London would have a constant stream of good young talent. That makes me think that even if we have a terrible year, and get relegated, we should be able to rebound quickly.


Thanks for starting this thread Wilbraham. Some varied and interesting views which show just how complex the question is.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View NEILLO's Profile NEILLO Online Flag Shoreham-by-Sea 06 Oct 21 12.05pm Send a Private Message to NEILLO Add NEILLO as a friend

Originally posted by MrRobbo

Only time will tell if its sustainable, but there are a lot of positive things happening at Brentford. As well as on pitch, they seem to excel in other areas e.g. scouting.

I guess my point was about the usefulness about anything below the U18s when it seems that you can just ship in a load of talent at 18 to fill the reserve teams. So, is that money spent on the 8-17 year olds better off spent on youth scouts?!

Not sure I believe it is, but an interesting debate, especially considering how many of our up and coming players were ‘poached’.

But that all being said. Wan-Bisakka came though and made us a tonne of profit, and Mitchell came to us after Brentford folded their academy.

Just my view, but the ' real money ' is spent at a higher level than the 8-17 age groups. But the improved Academy gives those age groups something tangible to aim for as opposed to the rough and ready facilities the club has had in the past.

As for spending more money on youth scouts, well I can only speak from experience but I was only paid expenses when I was one ( not for Palace, I might add ). At the lower age groups I've seen kids go to several clubs without making it for one reason or another, it's a real ' churn ' at those levels, and indeed further up the age scales...where you have the Rak-Sakyis and Hannans of this world.

 


Old, Ungifted and White

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Frickin Saweet's Profile Frickin Saweet Flag South Cronx 06 Oct 21 12.43pm Send a Private Message to Frickin Saweet Add Frickin Saweet as a friend

Originally posted by MrRobbo

Coming back to Brentford, I do think it’s a fascinating experiment.

For anyone that doesn’t know, they folded their academy as the ROI wasn’t there for them. They still have reserve teams, but are not developing kids from a young age.

When you look at the U23s how many have we nurtured from kids, vs shipping in from other Academies?

But if you look at the guys that are ‘closest’ to the first team, there are a lot that were transferred straight in at U18s or U23 level, namely:

Rak-Saki – Came from Chelsea
Banks – Dundee
Nya Kirby – Spurs
Obrien – Cork
Hannam – West Ham

So could we do away with anything U17 and just get some more scouts in?


Edited by MrRobbo (06 Oct 2021 10.50am)

in Eze's recent lengthy video interview that was widely shared, a lot of youngsters go from academy to academy, and it's all part of the process of trying to get your talents recognised and find the right fit for club and player

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View MrRobbo's Profile MrRobbo Flag Purley 06 Oct 21 12.44pm Send a Private Message to MrRobbo Add MrRobbo as a friend

Originally posted by NEILLO

Just my view, but the ' real money ' is spent at a higher level than the 8-17 age groups. But the improved Academy gives those age groups something tangible to aim for as opposed to the rough and ready facilities the club has had in the past.

As for spending more money on youth scouts, well I can only speak from experience but I was only paid expenses when I was one ( not for Palace, I might add ). At the lower age groups I've seen kids go to several clubs without making it for one reason or another, it's a real ' churn ' at those levels, and indeed further up the age scales...where you have the Rak-Sakyis and Hannans of this world.

I'm sure you are right, I've got no idea on what the breakdown of spend would look like.

Its always going to be tricky to prove the ROI of an academy. But with Wilf and Mitchell in the team, Rak-saki in the wings and AWB money in the bank we're probably doing alright.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Midlands Eagle's Profile Midlands Eagle Flag 06 Oct 21 12.55pm Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle Add Midlands Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by MrRobbo

Its always going to be tricky to prove the ROI of an academy. But with Wilf and Mitchell in the team, Rak-saki in the wings and AWB money in the bank we're probably doing alright.

Mitchell was actually a product of the Brentford academy and we acquired him when Brentford closed it

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View EverybodyDannsNow's Profile EverybodyDannsNow Flag SE19 06 Oct 21 1.13pm Send a Private Message to EverybodyDannsNow Add EverybodyDannsNow as a friend

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

Mitchell was actually a product of the Brentford academy and we acquired him when Brentford closed it

He still only joined us as a scholar and played for both the 18s and 23s with us - he is still someone you'd consider when looking at ROI of the academy.

We swept up Rak Sakyi from Chelsea at 16/17, exactly the same as Mitchell.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > How Important Is Our New Academy to Our Future?