Have a read:

metro.co.uk/2014/01/12/why-chelsea-will-never-dominate-england-again-until-they-sort-out-their-youth-system-4258568/

Rubbish article.

 

We won't dominate till we have a good manager (check) and a good squad (nearly there)

 

Youth is a bonus not a goal.

The best youth system is poverty. Ask the south americans why they got so good.

When will these so-called journalists realise that there is more the one way to be successful in England? Just because teams like Manchester United or Arsenal have had players break into the first team, doesn't mean every other team must do it that way. We always get stick for not having players break into our first team but doesn't Manchester City do the same? It's just another topic for more "experts" to slag us off...but as long as we keep winning, stuff 'em

It's just another stick they use to 'selectively' beat us with.
Along with Manure we are the top trophy winners in the last decade, so how the feck do we need to bring youth through to be successful ?
Yes, as a fan it would be nice to see another JT, but our success proves it's not essential.
Anyway f**k'em, Last year it was we needed managerial stability.. as we went on to win the Europa league 

The fact of the matter is our youth system is working very well thank you very much.

We now buy players very young, develop them for a few years and sell for profit, which helps us buy the established players.

If a young player cant break into the team because he is not at a standard high enough for the first team, that's not Chelsea's problem, its the player's.

The best youth system is poverty. Ask the south americans why they got so good.

 

The demise of street football has contributed a lot to this country's youth system. Instead of playing five hours a night in overcrowded kickabouts, a lot of kids today will play for a set hour on an astroturf which is less conducive to honing close ball control.

The likelihood of finding another jt is almost impossible in my eyes. He (in my eyes) is our version of maldini. A top defender who has won everything there is to be won at club level. Apart from a few personal hiccups he has been one of the best defenders in Europe for the last 10 years. Also apart from the mancs "class of 92" how many good youth players have made the grade??? Wes brown-sh*te, o'shea-sh*te, fletcher-sh*te and so on and so on!!! The fact is to sign an young player at 10 years old, getting him to stay at your club for 15 years and make turn him into a world class player is almost impossible. Every club signs big players and now and again you may have to play a young player and he turns out to have a great game and you accidentally find a gem. Look all over the world and you will see players who left Chelsea coz they weren't good enough to get a game at the time but they end up making an ok player but are they good enough to cope with the demands of being expected to win every week and play well??? How many players can you name at any team in Europe now who come through the youh team and are still there doing it week in week out? (Barca excluded). Also u have to ask yourself who is to blame for making all these transfers?? My opinion is the agents forcing moves all the time to line their own pockets causes the lack of loyalty in football. If u were a 21 year old Frenchman in Chelsea u21's getting £8,000 a week and had a hope of playing in the 1st team one day would you stay if a mid/table German side came in and offered u £20,000 a week? Probably not. He may go on to be a great player if he was patient at Chelsea but the fact is the agent would get a cut of the maybe 4mllion transfer and the player doubles his money!!!

The demise of street football has contributed a lot to this country's youth system. Instead of playing five hours a night in overcrowded kickabouts, a lot of kids today will play for a set hour on an astroturf which is less conducive to honing close ball control.

Or play for five hours on the Xbox.

Yeah right, we produced the most dominant side in the history of the premier league in the mid 00's with only 1 first-team academy player.

Guys we are forgetting a couple of things:

 

1. The article is not looking for a stick to beat us with. It was written by a Chelsea season ticket holder if I remember correctly.

2. The only way for us to be a sustainable club (and we will need to be in the long term be it under FFP or a tighter successor) is to actually start to build some players as well as buy them. I have no issue with buying in the best we would never have been the club we are without Drogba etc. bought for top dollar.

 

However, is it really an issue for the second or third string players to be our own or at least young players we have procured reasonably cheaply? Now you might say they haven't been good enough. However I disagree with that sentiment. 

 

My problem with our current approach as I said in the Matic thread is that we are so obsessed with new shiny things that too often we have neglected what we already have. This has led us I believe to making poor choices. Sturridge is a perfect example, what he needed was a shot in the middle, instead we loan him out or pigeon hole him into a role he wasn't suited for to accommodate Torres, he leaves and tears it up for Liverpool. Matic doesn't get a game, so we pawn him off to get a new shiny thing and then two years later when he is a little shinier we are trying to buy him back. 

 

Say what you like about our success, but let's be honest and say that our current approach isn't the most sustainable, efficient or effective. We can improve this and I think that can only make us better as a football club.