• Current Donation Goals

Boogle

Chelsea Reserve & Youth Team

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Juni said:

It's very simple. You have four CBs out of contract next summer and two of them in their 30s. You move on from at least one of them now and give Guehi 20-25 games in a 55-60 game season (and he is absolutely good enough), a platform to then stake his claim for more the following season. I guarantee you that would be acceptable but it won't be. They might sell Zouma but they'll probably sign Lacroix and it's that sort of behaviour that puts off talented academy players.

Essentially you're also saying that Mount and James would've been acceptable sacrifices for the 'greater good' too btw, because Chelsea are apparently good enough to be able to overlook talents of their abilities in normal times. Don't worry though, there'll be another chaotic collapse in the next twelve months and they'll lurch into another direction again soon enough.

Your whole argument hinges on what is in bold, and that's a matter of opinion. Yours would be more informed than mine, but I really doubt as informed as those at the club. It's possible, but it's always going to be more likely that the player who has never played a single PL minute and has 57 career senior appearances in a lower league isn't good enough to play a significant role in a title-chasing team than they are. You're looking at a prodigal talent there, one who (with respect) probably would be aiming higher than a deal with Crystal Palace.

This is also quite a shift from the position you seemed to be taking only a few posts ago, when Barkley/Zappacosta/Emerson minutes were good enough. And it captures neatly the Guehi dilemma. Far too good for the role Emerson plays in the squad. Not good enough for the role Christensen (at least for most of last year, maybe Zouma more recently) had. 

As for your last bit on Mount and James ... A bit weird, tbh. Love both those players, think both are hugely talented, think Chelsea have contributed to that, think a lot of it is them and they'd have succeeded elsewhere in an alternate timeline, pleased they've instead made it here. But would I support Chelsea and accept (and be grateful) that the club aims to win trophies more than it does develop players even at their expense. Well ... Yeah. Who wouldn't? Most of us support Chelsea FC, not the Chelsea academy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chara   
1 hour ago, paulw66 said:

Not if you believe what Eddie Newton said the other day. Purely guess work, but I am certain if Mount had been discarded, he would have risen to the top somewhere else, because he is that good, and that determined. Ditto Reece James. 

The previous lot who have been discarded, have not kicked on. Solanke, Chalobah, McEachren, Sinclair, Woods, Mancienne, Bruma.........all the next great hopes who have at best, had resepctable careers, or at worst, didn't make it anywhere. 

I tried to make the same point about players who did not kick on elsewhere on a different post site here.."The Ones That Got Away" etc.

Clough once stated that "There is no such thing as a good YOUNG keeper"....he could have said CB as well....of course what he meant was young players in those positions have a long way to go as opposed to say a CHO as a very fast tricky winger type player who looks good to start with but tend to lose traction as the learning curve isn't quite as long..if that makes sense...not said it well.... A young inexperienced CB/Keeper will struggle in any title chasing club as they are positions of absolute bedrock importance.and learning on the job is not an option so unless forced by circumstances a title chasing club coach will always go for experience against untried on a long term youngsters...Frank was in a unique position with his squad....no incoming and older players moving on and the options were the youngsters..his luck was that Mason and Reece were experienced in grown up football and exceptional talents....there is a case for saying Tammy and Tomori were lucky to be included at that time and both didn't quite make the grade in the way Mount and James have..... a case for that argument...not a stand on my part.

Anyone inheriting(!) a litter of working pups knows how hard it is to pick THE one to keep and work with...invariably some top potential pups get sold..it's part of the game.......as it is with academy products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Juni   

If it's all about winning trophies and not having a sense of identity and soul and a connection with the club, then it doesn't really matter what colour the shirt is or what's on the badge. Might as well support PSG. I'm not asking for a whole squad of academy products but I am asking for them to be treated with the respect their ability deserves and for just as equal a chance as some utter waster like Hakim Ziyech gets just because someone's reputation is riding on having given the nod for a £30m transfer.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paulw66   
14 minutes ago, Juni said:

If it's all about winning trophies and not having a sense of identity and soul and a connection with the club, then it doesn't really matter what colour the shirt is or what's on the badge. Might as well support PSG. I'm not asking for a whole squad of academy products but I am asking for them to be treated with the respect their ability deserves and for just as equal a chance as some utter waster like Hakim Ziyech gets just because someone's reputation is riding on having given the nod for a £30m transfer.

Like Lampard you mean!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does appear that we have once more engineered an atmosphere of fear at the club with a coach who feels he cannot possibly take a chance on youth .

What was that ? Eighteen months ? Good work .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paulw66   
3 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

It does appear that we have once more engineered an atmosphere of fear at the club with a coach who feels he cannot possibly take a chance on youth .

What was that ? Eighteen months ? Good work .

How do we know that, at this stage? The only fear I have seen is on the forum (unless that's what you are referring to?)

TT had no opportunities to take any risks / chances last season due to the situation he inherited. Now, 2 days into pre season, apparently he can't take a chance on youth? 

I am not saying he will, but Jesus, let's wait and see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

How do we know that, at this stage? The only fear I have seen is on the forum (unless that's what you are referring to?)

TT had no opportunities to take any risks / chances last season due to the situation he inherited. Now, 2 days into pre season, apparently he can't take a chance on youth? 

I am not saying he will, but Jesus, let's wait and see. 

He's not going to Paul , he's already under heavy manners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Juni said:

If you're not offering pathways to players you have developed in-house and who are clearly good enough, you are wasting your time and your money. Go ahead, sink another year into a declining Thiago Silva, spend £30m on a CB nobody will remember in two years, and pretend it's a sustainable theme while forgetting exactly why Chelsea are currently Champions of Europe.

Guehi has been offered the same pathway as Mount, Tomori Abraham and James - I really don't see an issue here.  It is the pathway that works - Academy players must be as aware as you or I of that.

3 hours ago, Juni said:

And yes, you could absolutely convince Guehi to sign and do one more year of loan if you weren't feeding him absolute bullshit that anyone with any remote detection could smell a mile off. As soon as Frank was sacked, the academy players knew the score. Only one returning successful academy loanee has ever been given the meritocratic opportunity to impress in the first team outside of his reign and that was Christensen. Count the academy grads/returning loanees who committed to long-term deals before a ball had been kicked under Lampard. It's really not hard to work out what the players think.

no no - and this is really dangerous and wrong talk (because many people really do think Mount had nothing to do with his own success)..

Frank at Chelsea did nothing to bring Chelsea players through.  Sarri, Frank and TT were freed from the burden of trying to make a proper player out of RLC.  The work was mainly done on loan (including Derby and Frank at another club).

All the young players know well that the loan system is the right way to go - either that or go straight to a non-top 6 club.
What Guehi is doing is simply taking advantage of a Chelsea 16+ salary and then going to a first team squad that is able to pick him.  Youngsters that shop around for clubs to train with is the norm.

 

3 hours ago, Juni said:

Guehi has done everything Mount and James did, perhaps more, but hasn't got a favourable manager in the dugout so doesn't get the same treatment. There's no way you can say Mount and James made it because they were good enough without recognising they had help in breaking through the closed door that so many of their predecessors were frustrated by.

How many of them would've scaled new heights had they been given the chances Mount and James were given? Development isn't linear and it is absolutely affected by where you end up being forced to play. If Lampard wasn't here, Mount would've definitely been loaned out again, because Chelsea had previously shown no interest in giving a Championship player a chance in the first team, and there is a strong possibility he'd be nowhere near the first team now, or at the very least not the player he's become. Surely this much has become obvious over the last decade?

Sorry this is rubbish.  I respect your views, on the Academy, frequently praise  and link to your pieces on here.  But the idea that players might be good enough to break through here but then falter because they are sent on loan to lesser clubs is plain daft.

 

3 hours ago, Juni said:

Chelsea have won just the two PL titles in the last decade while ignoring the academy btw, and had just as many disastrous seasons, it's hardly like the alternatives have been much better. But sure, put your faith in the board that at best stumble into good fortune rather than the only part of the men's side of the club that has been a consistent and undeniable success.

And spending considerably less than Man U or Man C and similar to Liverpool.

1 hour ago, Juni said:

It's very simple. You have four CBs out of contract next summer and two of them in their 30s.

We had 5 CBs out of contract next summer - including Guehi.  They sold one of them.  Sarr and Ampadu remain.

 

1 hour ago, Juni said:

1.  If it's all about winning trophies and not having a sense of identity and soul and a connection with the club, then it doesn't really matter what colour the shirt is or what's on the badge. Might as well support PSG. I'm not asking for a whole squad of academy products but I am asking for them to be treated with the respect their ability deserves and for just as equal a chance as some 2. utter waster like Hakim Ziyech gets just because someone's reputation is riding on having given the nod for a £30m transfer.

1.  It isn't the 1960s.  Chelsea young players don't all live within 10 miles of Harlington and come here because this is their only way into football.
Our youngsters get invitations to other clubs every year from the age of 10 onwards till they sign contracts.

What we are seeing is as much the end of loyalty by youngsters and parents and agents more than any lack of loyalty from club.

2.  (Ignoring the point that actually Ziyech has been OK since he arrived).  Chelsea have sidelined Bats, Baka, Zappacosta, Barkley, Drinkwater, and a host of other players.  To suggest that players are kept in the squad to protect the ego of Marina or club scouts is just out of touch with reality.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paulw66   
1 hour ago, Droy was my hero said:

Guehi has been offered the same pathway as Mount, Tomori Abraham and James - I really don't see an issue here.  It is the pathway that works - Academy players must be as aware as you or I of that.

no no - and this is really dangerous and wrong talk (because many people really do think Mount had nothing to do with his own success)..

Frank at Chelsea did nothing to bring Chelsea players through.  Sarri, Frank and TT were freed from the burden of trying to make a proper player out of RLC.  The work was mainly done on loan (including Derby and Frank at another club).

All the young players know well that the loan system is the right way to go - either that or go straight to a non-top 6 club.
What Guehi is doing is simply taking advantage of a Chelsea 16+ salary and then going to a first team squad that is able to pick him.  Youngsters that shop around for clubs to train with is the norm.

 

Sorry this is rubbish.  I respect your views, on the Academy, frequently praise  and link to your pieces on here.  But the idea that players might be good enough to break through here but then falter because they are sent on loan to lesser clubs is plain daft.

 

And spending considerably less than Man U or Man C and similar to Liverpool.

We had 5 CBs out of contract next summer - including Guehi.  They sold one of them.  Sarr and Ampadu remain.

 

1.  It isn't the 1960s.  Chelsea young players don't all live within 10 miles of Harlington and come here because this is their only way into football.
Our youngsters get invitations to other clubs every year from the age of 10 onwards till they sign contracts.

What we are seeing is as much the end of loyalty by youngsters and parents and agents more than any lack of loyalty from club.

2.  (Ignoring the point that actually Ziyech has been OK since he arrived).  Chelsea have sidelined Bats, Baka, Zappacosta, Barkley, Drinkwater, and a host of other players.  To suggest that players are kept in the squad to protect the ego of Marina or club scouts is just out of touch with reality.

 

Lovely stuff. Agree with all of that. The very last point is particularly prudent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

Frank at Chelsea did nothing to bring Chelsea players through.  Sarri, Frank and TT were freed from the burden of trying to make a proper player out of RLC.

Very good - but not correct.

Sarri for season two would have been to deliver the PL "regardless of the transfer ban", like all other Chelsea coaches, else he was gone. Instead he decided to jump ship at the end of season one

Frank - had a free pass along with the other coaching staff, due to there inexperience, the transfer ban and the only WC player in the squad jumping ship. Hence he was able to promote players who produced the goods, whereas they would have been destined for another loan or sold under a more senior coaches with their reputations to keep intact.

TT - delivered the CL, however this season is about somehow winning an additional 7 - 10 games in a PL season to catch Chitty or he be gone. Going to be interesting to see who get benched first if the season starts off slower than expected

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now