Wasn't their longest serving player someone who was constantly out on loan and never played one first team game?
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Oliver Skipp
- Thread starter Spur of the moment
- Start date
-
- Tags
- youth
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
Yep
One thing I can't explain, though... if our youth development is so good, where is the stream of players that we are regularly selling to lower tier Premiership / upper level Championship sides? Other than KWP, which youth player was sold for more than a million in recent years? And what stopped us from buying a fudging truckload (even a pickup load would be sufficient) of youth/promising players, loaning them out and using the model to develop/sell on at a profit and buy replacements from the investment?
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
Just to comment on your final paragraph. Chelsea actually have huge interest in youth development. They spend more on their academy than just about any other team in England. Yes they bring in lots of players and loan them out but that has proven to be very fruitful for them. They also have a very good record in the premier youth competition (the FA Youth Cup) which shows that clearly the development that their kids get is very good. Remember also that Chelsea's ambitions are set higher than ours. Our ambition is to get into the top four and play in the CL whereas Chelsea's ambition is to win the PL and CL, that means that players who would probably get a run in our team are unlikely to be good enough to get a run in Chelsea's team.
If you just look at what Chelsea have currently having come through their youth you see Reece James, Mason Mount, Billy Gilmour, Hudson Odoi and Trevor Chalobh.... that is after them having sold Tammy Abraham.
Chelsea have been very, very smart in the way that they have operated their academy combining local(ish) youngsters with poaching/purchasing the best youngsters from elsewhere. I don't think it is coincidence that we brought in Derby's head of youth recruitment a short while back as I think Paratici has quickly realised that we had previously overlooked this aspect somewhat.
Last edited:
Mason, Carroll, Bentaleb, Caulker, Livermore, Townsend, Onamah ?? (off the top of my head)
We don't buy them by the truckload because we are not trying to launder money and/or dodge FFP.
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
Buying and selling young players doesn't have to have anything to do with laundering money or dodging FFP. It is simply a very good, sensible policy to ensure that you have a steady stream of potential young players to come into your squad or a steady stream of income from selling them if you don't think they will quite make it or you can't quite wait for them to make it.
It would do a club such as our own a world of good to operate like this ourselves.
You just missed Alex Pritchard.
And thank you for proving my point by referring to players sold more than 5 years ago.
As for the laundering / FFP, I am tired of the sanctimony and the excuses - the only reason we don;t buy them by the truckload is because we simply are not good enough to play that game...
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
I expect Paratici to address this to be honest. With him (seemingly) having control over football matters we now have a chance to ensure we operate as well as, if not better than, the most forward thinking clubs. I think Chelsea are the most successful English club over the last 20 years and we should therefore absolutely be looking at how they operate and what we can learn from them.
Only if you don't care about the initial investment, you keep "leaving" this out, and yes the first reason they went player hording is specifically to sell them post FFP implementation (you really think RA gives a rats ass about player development?)
Chelsea may be running a decent buy/flip model now, but it required investment in the beginning that I don't think they have recouped (hard to tell which part of that is on the £1.5B+ on the IOU to RA)
Amos, Eyoma, Oakley-Boothe, Edwards, Cirkin, plus CCV will go this window
Why do people trip over themselves to brick on the club?
Spurs Academy works, it pays for itself (surely makes a profit) and right now -> Kane, Skipp, Tanganga, Winks, Scarlett, Paskotsi (6 players) are genuinely part of the squad.
What more are you expecting?
Lemonade Money
Steffen Freund
Did you just name the six best players out of the 500 to choose from?
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
Eh?…. I named the ones in/closest to their first team squad this past year or two (though thinking about it I missed one more in Loftus Cheek).
Am just not sure how one can say Chelsea have no interest in youth development when they are bringing players through to their first team as well as many Chelsea youth products playing professional football elsewhere?
Last edited:
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
What was the initial investment on their acquired youth players?…. Considerably less than they have sold for I bet? (and that’s ignoring the high valuations of the ones still at the club).
I think Abramovic’s (interest free) loan to Chelsea is £1b…. About the same as the debt our club is carrying (though unfortunately ours carries interest). We have a great stadium, they have about 20 trophies. I think all RA gives a ‘rats ass’ about is winning. I’d love to have owners with that same priority. Note that I don’t think our owners give any more of a ‘rats ass’ (are you American by the way?) about player development than RA does. We also buy, sell and release young players every year.
If you can be bothered to go look through the 50-100 odd youth players they bought and see if it added up go ahead. If I could give a brick I could probably name half a dozen Marko Marin's they bought and absolutely lost their shirts on.
Yes RA cares about success, because it's a vanity project and something his master Putin told him to do, he doesn't give a fudge about the club, youth players, etc. The only reason they do their model is a smart way to funnel funds (but, hey believe whatever you want)
The difference between the £1B we owe and theirs is we will pay off ours in time.
See my point above, why so desperate to prove our Academy doesn't work? Kane, Skipp, Tanganga, Winks, Scarlett, Paskotsi, John in this year's squad, you really think other clubs are doing so much better?
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
I don’t think Marko Marin was a youth player?
Funnel funds? You mean put in £1b as owner funding?…. Good business sense as he’d probably make double that if selling the asset.
We may pay ours off or may just pay the interest and roll the loans (think you yourself argued we’d do the latter previously).
im not desperate to prove that at all, I think we have a good academy, one of the better ones in England…. Doesn’t mean we can’t learn from the most successful English club of the past 20 or so years though.
Funnel money as in money laundering, taking money that could not legitimately be accounted for, buy players, sell (loss or profit) = money clean
Again, we are a sustainable business model, something repeatedly you have emphasized you don't give a brick about, you like Chelsea and City fans are happy to hope that nothing changes in the world (like price of oil) that leaves your club completely defunct.
From 2003, Chelsea lost money for a decade strait, half of the record top 20 annual losses in the PL belong to Chelsea, but yeah, lots for us to learn there.
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
Sorry, that first line doesn’t make sense…. Chelsea buy players and Chelsea sell players, both buy and sale is shown in their accounts.
Chelsea are also sustainable. We’ve taken on external debt, Chelsea owner funding. Debt level of two assets similar, asset value similar, turnover similar…. And I would much prefer our debt to be to our owners like Chelsea’s is.
Tell you what if one specific thing in the World changed (interest rates) then we’d be in big trouble.
Last edited:
We could go down a rabbit whole here mate, but let me give you an example, you buy a player via cheque from "someone" vs the club in another country (that same cheque couldn't be deposited in a UK bank because the funds weren't traceable to a legitimate business), you put it in the books as owner investment, that player is then an asset on the books, and when they are sold, just like magic that money becomes "clean" (which would actually be worth taking a loss on)
How many times can we have this conversation, you cannot input £1B into a business, lose money for a decade, then build a model where you are fiscally viable in year but still have the debt of £1B (with no line of sight to paying it off) and call that a viable business model. I could buy any fudging business and if I didn't pay off the original investment make it appear like it's viable until the day the debt gets called.
Chelsea has not done what you usually advocate for, i.e. dilute the holding, RA still has effectively an IOU, so regardless of if the value of the club is £20 or £2B, whoever buys it need to pay him off.
Our interest rates aren't variable mate, so it would make brick all difference to us
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
Ahaha. Are you seriously suggesting Roman Abramovich has been clever investing to make money. That is the funniest thing yet. He has more money than he knows what to do with. Good business sense you say. Ok then!
Mooresinho
Michael Brown
Came here to read about Skipp being a starter ahead of Winks (no shock) and people singing his praises, yet find this is a Chelsea thread?
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
Makes good financial sense as well how Chelsea have behaved. The is always a premium on British players. We made a tidy sum on Caulker, Liverpool, Mason and Townsend.