See Scott Sinclair has just bagged his 20th goal of the season against Leeds.

It's a point I brought up a while back, it's clear our academy has been set up not only to produce

players for our first team but to give other youngsters a career in the game at a profit to ourselves.

We have seen players like Stoch, Matic as well as Scotty leave recently.

One wonders if sell on fees have been agreed with the clubs concerned, got a feeling Sinclair

might just be the one we let slip away by concentrating too much on his development on the

wing, where as he is now showing signs of using his pace and trickery down the middle.

To be honest I think its more he`s found his level. He struggled when out on loan at prem teams yet is tearing it up in the Championship. The jump between that and playing for Chelsea is a massive one.

I would take Scott over Sturrige any day

To be honest I think its more he`s found his level. He struggled when out on loan at prem teams yet is tearing it up in the Championship. The jump between that and playing for Chelsea is a massive one.

Maybe true, but it doesn't stop someone like Sunderland with cash in their pocket paying say an over top £10 million for him,

a 40% sell on fee generates money for us to re- invest in other youngsters, ie Gael Kakuta types that incur costs.

Edited February 26, 201115 yr by Star

Maybe true, but it doesn't stop someone like Sunderland with cash in their pocket paying say an over top £10 million for him,

a 40% sell on fee generates money for us to re- invest in other youngsters, ie Gael Kakuta types that incur costs.

Your right, if we didnt put in a sell on fee then it would be a joke.

I would take Scott over Sturrige any day

I wouldnt, not even nearly. Sturridge has proven himself already whilst out on loan, Sinclair never did anything of note whilst out on loan.

Sturrige has played, what, 5 games. Proven himself?

Sturrige has played, what, 5 games. Proven himself?

More than Sinclair? Yes.

More than Sinclair? Yes.

my comment wasn't a comparrison it was about Sturrige having proved himself after a handfull of games, think this is probably a dicussion for another thread.

Make it 21 lads he has just scored again !

my comment wasn't a comparrison it was about Sturrige having proved himself after a handfull of games, think this is probably a dicussion for another thread.

Right, sorry I misunderstood. But I still would rather we had Sturridge than Sinclair, Sincalir had 2 or 3 loan opportunities to prove himself capable of playing in the prem and never looked nearly good enough. I also seem to remember something from when we sold them where some of our coaches questioned his ability to play at the highest level .

To be honest I think its more he`s found his level. He struggled when out on loan at prem teams yet is tearing it up in the Championship. The jump between that and playing for Chelsea is a massive one.

I think this is the crux of the issue really. He seems like one of those Rob Earnshaw or Richard Cresswell-esque players who lights up the Championship but is found wanting after promotion. Still, I wish him all the best and hope he can establish himself in the Premiership.

Right, sorry I misunderstood. But I still would rather we had Sturridge than Sinclair, Sincalir had 2 or 3 loan opportunities to prove himself capable of playing in the prem and never looked nearly good enough. I also seem to remember something from when we sold them where some of our coaches questioned his ability to play at the highest level .

He's still only 21, he was far to young to judge when on loan at Birmingham, Plymouth, Charlton and QPR. He made his proffesional debut at 15. Yes he is the same age as Sturrige, the difference to me is that Scott has taken a step back and improved and will continue to improve, I just cant believe the same will apply to Daniel. It's just my opinion though.

Good to see Scotty running L**ds ragged.

3-0 to Swansee now.

He's still only 21, he was far to young to judge when on loan at Birmingham, Plymouth, Charlton and QPR. He made his proffesional debut at 15. Yes he is the same age as Sturrige, the difference to me is that Scott has taken a step back and improved and will continue to improve, I just cant believe the same will apply to Daniel. It's just my opinion though.

I would love to see him prove me wrong, but in all the games I saw him in he never looked anything other than a quick winger with a few tricks. He never seemed to play with his head up, maybe he will learn to do that but playing at the level he is isnt really an indicator of whether he could play in the Prem.

I was sure you were describing Sturrige, until I read the last part

I was sure you were describing Sturrige, until I read the last part

Ah, touche...

I'd rather have Sinclair than Sturridge to be honest. Although both wouldn't have been bad. I'm sure with Sinclair's pace and the lack of decent wingers we have at the moment he could have had a chance this season to get a few games in.

He's already scored more than carrol did last year in a Newcastle team that smashed the league. Could be a late bloomer, didn't look good enough when he was here though, we should be putting sell on clauses on every player we sell under 23. Take David bently for example wasn't good enough for arsenal but spurs paid 17m for him.

He's already scored more than carrol did last year in a Newcastle team that smashed the league. Could be a late bloomer, didn't look good enough when he was here though, we should be putting sell on clauses on every player we sell under 23. Take David bently for example wasn't good enough for arsenal but spurs paid 17m for him.

Carroll was outscored by Peter Whittingham, Nicky Maynard, Gary Hooper, Michael Chopra and Charlie Adam last season.

I think it's now pretty obvious the club sees the sale of youngsters as a valid source of income. Expect many more loans then sales. There will be players the club know full well won't make it at Cfc but still will be nurtured and subsquently developed with a view to a sale.

In the past few years we have sold SS, Stoch, DiSanto all for around the 3 million mark. If this continues , over a ten year period you can work out the total figures we could be ooking at. Of course you have to factor in wages, fees and development costs , but it's still a healthy profit margin.

Edited February 26, 201115 yr by bjd

And as for Sinclair , I would suggest he has found his level. How many loans was it exactly? 7 ?

dp

Edited February 26, 201115 yr by bjd

So thats 14 loans now then... :D

Good point on the sale of young players though, its something other clubs like Utd and Arsenal have done for years and is the right way to go. If we can bring through one player a season into the 1st team squad while the academy pays its own way with sales then I would be happy with that.

Completely agree with you BJD,

Abramovich is, afterall, a business man. That's why he's invested so much into the academy. If we produce future stars for the first team, then it's a bonus and we get the feel good factor of seeing someone coming through the ranks.

If we produce some decent players that we then sell on, then that's just as good.

I'd maybe even caution all those expecting PVA, Bruhma, Clifford, Mellis, etc to break into our first team to realize that these are the types of players seen more as assetts than future first team players