Next seasons squad

[Ace Face]

Vuskovic shouldn't "have a path", he should have to earn that spot and that's the issue.

This.

Him, Moore, Lankshear etc. can be a part of the squad when they are good enough, which means beating out the competition for that place, whether it is as a starter or backup.

Potential means nothing until it is realized. Loan them out to play and develop until they are fully ready to contribute.

Having younger players pushing the older ones for a squad number is healthy, but come the start of the season I want players who are good enough already to step in and play at the required level.

 

[NaijaSpurs]

Exactly this.

Who was really given the chance to fail fast or succeed from our younger group?

I've lost count of the amount of times I've seen imbalanced 20 man squads because our managers pick the 25-30 year olds to make up the numbers rather than the actual position that balances the squad. We've even picked 3 keepers at times rather than get a kid onto the bench.

Part of me would love the FA to implement policies about composition of match day squads. That would be the cat amongst the pigeons if every squad had to have 2 or 3 club trained players in it.

My point exactly

 

[NaijaSpurs]

This.

Him, Moore, Lankshear etc. can be a part of the squad when they are good enough, which means beating out the competition for that place, whether it is as a starter or backup.

Potential means nothing until it is realized. Loan them out to play and develop until they are fully ready to contribute.

Having younger players pushing the older ones for a squad number is healthy, but come the start of the season I want players who are good enough already to step in and play at the required level.

I think you're looking at it backwards.
Nobody is arguing that Moore, Lankshear, Vuskovic or any other young player should be handed a starting place because they have potential. The issue is that Spurs have a long history of not giving academy players and young signings enough opportunities to develop into first-team players.

If the standard is that a teenager must already be better than established internationals before getting meaningful minutes, then almost no youngster will ever break through. The reality is that players improve through exposure to first-team football.

Look at the clubs that consistently develop young talent. They don't wait until a player is the finished article. They give them minutes in cup games, Europa League matches, dead rubbers and substitute appearances, allowing them to grow into the role.

We often spend years saying a player isn't ready, loan him out, loan him out again, then eventually sell him before finding out whether he could have contributed. Meanwhile, other clubs are integrating 18-21 year olds into the squad and increasing their value on and off the pitch.

Of course young players should compete for places. But competition only works if they are given a genuine pathway. Too often at Spurs, the pathway exists in theory but not in practice.

My argument isn't that every youngster is a future star. It's that we are poor at identifying which youngsters can become future stars because we rarely give them enough meaningful first-team minutes to find out.

 

[NaijaSpurs]

For those of you who say yhere should not be a pathway I could not disagree with you more.

The irony is that people say, "They're not good enough yet," but how do you know? Most young players don't go from academy football to looking like finished Premier League players overnight. Development isn't linear. It comes through managed exposure, mistakes, and experience.

If your standard is that a teenager must already be better than a £40m signing or an established international before he gets opportunities, then you've effectively closed the pathway. You're not judging the player; you're judging him against an impossible benchmark.

 

[Muttley]

This.

Him, Moore, Lankshear etc. can be a part of the squad when they are good enough, which means beating out the competition for that place, whether it is as a starter or backup.

Potential means nothing until it is realized. Loan them out to play and develop until they are fully ready to contribute.

Having younger players pushing the older ones for a squad number is healthy, but come the start of the season I want players who are good enough already to step in and play at the required level.

I'm OK with that if I couldn't name you senior pro's who take squad places and are simply not good enough. Last season we had the following

Davies - perennial crock who isn't even competing for a first team slot ever. Just making up the numbers
Dragusin - just doesn't look good enough at this level. He will get moved on.
Muani - never played for the shirt. Just picked and chose when he applied himself

So why does this "not good enough" tag apply to the younger players but not the older ones?

 

[Ace Face]

I'm OK with that if I couldn't name you senior pro's who take squad places and are simply not good enough. Last season we had the following

Davies - perennial crock who isn't even competing for a first team slot ever. Just making up the numbers
Dragusin - just doesn't look good enough at this level. He will get moved on.
Muani - never played for the shirt. Just picked and chose when he applied himself

So why does this "not good enough" tag apply to the younger players but not the older ones?

Not arguing that but who from our youth setup in those positions, LB and CB would you have preferred?

I’ll give you Muani but tbf he did arrive with a record of success during his previous loan and a full season in the Bundesliga where he tore it up.

 

[Ace Face]

I think you're looking at it backwards.
Nobody is arguing that Moore, Lankshear, Vuskovic or any other young player should be handed a starting place because they have potential. The issue is that Spurs have a long history of not giving academy players and young signings enough opportunities to develop into first-team players.

If the standard is that a teenager must already be better than established internationals before getting meaningful minutes, then almost no youngster will ever break through. The reality is that players improve through exposure to first-team football.

Look at the clubs that consistently develop young talent. They don't wait until a player is the finished article. They give them minutes in cup games, Europa League matches, dead rubbers and substitute appearances, allowing them to grow into the role.

We often spend years saying a player isn't ready, loan him out, loan him out again, then eventually sell him before finding out whether he could have contributed. Meanwhile, other clubs are integrating 18-21 year olds into the squad and increasing their value on and off the pitch.

Of course young players should compete for places. But competition only works if they are given a genuine pathway. Too often at Spurs, the pathway exists in theory but not in practice.

My argument isn't that every youngster is a future star. It's that we are poor at identifying which youngsters can become future stars because we rarely give them enough meaningful first-team minutes to find out.

You’re absolutely correct in that we have been poor at developing youth for a while. But which of our youth have we let go and they have gone on to make us regret it? Madueke and….?

If they are good enough then yes give them a chance. But until they can show that in training, then they shouldn’t get a squad place just because they came through the academy imo.

 

[Aldo]

You’re absolutely correct in that we have been poor at developing youth for a while. But which of our youth have we let go and they have gone on to make us regret it? Madueke and….?

If they are good enough then yes give them a chance. But until they can show that in training, then they shouldn’t get a squad place just because they came through the academy imo.

You regret that we let Madueke go?