All the players you mentioned are unproven at the highest level...it was only a few weeks ago Aina was subbed after coming on as a sub as we conceded four against ny red bulls...Bamford has only scored goals in lower leagues and while I was impressed with Kalas in that Liverpool game, it's surely significant that he can't get a loan to top flight club...he even went to Koln last year and didn't get a single game and came back to boro, where Jose's mate is in charge...it's madness to suggest they should be in team defending the title now, even if we were sh*t on Saturday

Compare Ivanovic at RB against Swansea, to Aina at RB against Fiorentina, the 18yo had pace, acceleration and never looked uncomfortable in that position, Ivanovic looked slow, clumsy and unfit.

 

Remember when Kalas kept Suarez out during slipgate ? He had a blinding game, but he never made the team since, 12 months later and we head hunt a youngster for £30m?? from Everton.

 

Bamford banging them in where ever he goes, we target manyoo reject Falcao and Bamford ends up on the Palace bench.

 

Being a youngster for Chelsea is like being a space cadet for Nasa.

 

You can go beyond that - like Sinclair, Cork, Borini (yes I like him still), Töre, Stoch & the list forever grows...then again I have been called a Romantic so you can discount this post :P

Edited August 9, 201510 yr by robdog

You can go beyond that - like Sinclair, Cork, Borini (yes I like him still), Töre, Stoch & the list forever grows...then again I have been called a Romantic so you can discount this post :P

 

Accept mediocrity and that's exactly what you'll get (harsh I know).

How many of our academy players do we regret selling? Matic is the only one I can think of.

 

He wasn't an academy product. Bought and put in the first team.

 

 

Because we are one of the biggest clubs in England and have invested heavily in our academy. Plus we have that unbelievable recent record in the FA Youth Cup which has also put a number of players into the spotlight so it is no wonder we are being highlighted.

 

We are proof that throwing money does not a good player make. If anything setting up these kids in the life of luxury with high salaries makes them complacent.

 

How are we supposed to find another Lampard when a 16 year old can make more money than I ever will just for showing up in youth teams. Wheres the motivation to work hard and improve.

Edited August 9, 201510 yr by Stim

How are we supposed to find another Lampard when a 16 year old can make more money than I ever will just for showing up in youth teams. Wheres the motivation to work hard and improve.

 

 

Good point mate - I have two examples - Pato & Freddie Adu - I am sure there are loads of them

 

He wasn't an academy product. Bought and put in the first team.

 

 

 

We are proof that throwing money does not a good player make. If anything setting up these kids in the life of luxury with high salaries makes them complacent.

 

How are we supposed to find another Lampard when a 16 year old can make more money than I ever will just for showing up in youth teams. Wheres the motivation to work hard and improve.

 

 

Yep - sad but true. It's become an old cliche that these youngstera have it too easy and get too much too soon but it is how it is.

Yep - sad but true. It's become an old cliche that these youngstera have it too easy and get too much too soon but it is how it is.

Lamps and JT go on about it all the time but no one takes any notice of them...unfortunately agents and families believing the kid is next great thing makes them hold clubs to ransom or they join their rivals...McEachran is a great example...used interest from Real Madrid to geT A £38,000-a week contract and has gone backwards ever since

People keep saying none of the youth have been good enough expect Matic. Well, if it wasn't for Benfica (Jorge Jesus mainly) then Matic would have also been included in that category. So perhaps think twice and imagine what would have happened if some of the other players had ended up at clubs like Benfica that put effort into developing them, or better yet if we had given them similar chances. 

All the players you mentioned are unproven at the highest level...

 

But that's kind of the point I was making. 

 

You could say none of  them have been tested at the highest level.

Edited August 9, 201510 yr by coco

People keep saying none of the youth have been good enough expect Matic. Well, if it wasn't for Benfica (Jorge Jesus mainly) then Matic would have also been included in that category. So perhaps think twice and imagine what would have happened if some of the other players had ended up at clubs like Benfica that put effort into developing them, or better yet if we had given them similar chances. 

 

Exactly.  People think it's so easy.  Oh you just send a player on loan and they'll improve.  

 

Matic improved because he was taught and developed by a great coach.  If Matic had gone elsewhere he wouldn't be half the player he is today.

 

One thing to note with regards to Vitesse.  Generally in Portugal the dutch league is considered a bit of a joke where tactics are poor and teams just attack each other.  I honestly don't know if our players learn great things going to a league like this. 

RLC wasn't even on the bench yesterday. Says it all really...

One thing to note with regards to Vitesse.  Generally in Portugal the dutch league is considered a bit of a joke where tactics are poor and teams just attack each other.  I honestly don't know if our players learn great things going to a league like this. 

 

United spent like 30 mil on Depay from there. Suarez also came from Holland.

He wasn't an academy product. Bought and put in the first team.

*young players

That just proves the point further. What youngster has done anything to make us regret selling them on?

Its a fair point for everyone to say our young players havent been tested at the highest level so how can we write them off. Kalas specifically puzzles me. But as someone said earlier, we are trying to win 4 different trophies every year, not just survive and live to see next season. Some top teams have it easier for developing players, they can put out a few reserves once a month when they play Troyes or Hannover or Levante who have barely a glimmer of hope to get point. The top teams here have to deal with the posdibility of their full strength team losing to West Ham at home.

Id love to have Bamford or Chalobah in the team but how do you justify keeping them around if they only get a handful of apps?

But that's kind of the point I was making. 

 

You could say none of  them have been tested at the highest level.

But given our current squad, who are they seriously going to replace in the first team given what they've done in their careers so far...like I said, big difference between west ham taking a punt in Reece Oxford and Jose doing the same thing...if anything at least he's made a commitment to Aina, Traore and cheek being in and around the squad this season

I think pointing at Sinclair/Kakuta/Chalobah/McEachran etc who haven't made it and saying 'well they haven't done anything elsewhere, we haven't missed anything' could be looking at it the wrong way.

 

Have they fallen off because they're not good enough, or are they not good enough because they spent their vital 18-21 years as loan nomads? Would they have developed better if they'd been given more of a chance with us, rather than sent out to Championship teams/Vitesse, where they have no sense of permanence, no understanding of the wider club philosophy, lower quality coaching?

 

It's worked in the cases of De Bruyne/Courtois/Lukaku in the sense that these players have either come back to our first team, or been sold on for big profits. Difference with the Belgian trio being that they had already had significant first team football in Belgium, and were all sent to top division European clubs. It's a difficult one- we need to balance winning in the short term with making the most of what obvious talent we have in our youth teams. I do think though that we're not making the most of what we have.

But given our current squad, who are they seriously going to replace in the first team given what they've done in their careers so far...like I said, big difference between west ham taking a punt in Reece Oxford and Jose doing the same thing...if anything at least he's made a commitment to Aina, Traore and cheek being in and around the squad this season

 

But if that's the case, and considering our current squad, why are we trying to spend £30m + on a young defender who is unproven at the highest level and unlikely to replace any of our first team.

But if that's the case, and considering our current squad, why are we trying to spend £30m + on a young defender who is unproven at the highest level and unlikely to replace any of our first team.

 

so damn right, so Nate or Kalas aren't better options? A hella of lot cheaper as well. Hell what about Ken Omeruo? This kid has played for his country in big matches. I saw him play oustanding vs Cavani, Suarez & Forlan for Nigeria. IMHO this guy could be an addition to Chelsea, but the club will probably sell him next year. Who is running this club?

I'm considering the Solanke case and youth academy separately. 

 

 

Firstly. The youth system as a whole.

Personally I think it is quite productive and has the signs of getting better and better. The fact that you have examples of players that are ex-Chelsea academy in the BPL (despite not being good enough for Chelsea) shows that we are at least producing top quality players and this in a generation of youth that wasn't as good as we have now.
This to me is very encouraging and shows that we are at least nurturing and developing our players to a reasonable degree.

However we have a very hard team to get into, with one of the top squads in the world, with most of our players having to be in the top 10 or 20 in the world, in their respective position, to be able to hold down a starting place.
Can we really expect to be producing players that are of this standard on a regular basis I don't think its possible and personally I think it is a massive achievement to be able to create 1 every 10 years.

We currently have a great situation where a hand full of players seem to have the potential required to reach this feat. Surely this shows we are doing a hell of a lot right.
Will any of these players ever make the Chelsea starting 11 that is a long shot, if 1 makes it brilliant if 2 or 3 then that's absolutely amazing. But even if they don't we are going to make a hell of a lot of money and this only benefits the team as it gives us the opportunity to buy a top class player with that money, putting our club in a much stronger position.
Also the more top players we produce that make any top flight the more hot prospects we as a club can attract, as I am pretty sure most people will be happy making it to a BPL la Liga or Bundesliga club that is still a great achievement and one hell of a fruitful career.

Now on to what I think gets most people's goat the 'loaning conveyor belt'.
Unfortunately for us the U21 league and competitions aren't very competitive, with most top clubs preferring to loan there top talents out, so in order to provide competitive game time, which is essential for development, we have to do the same and as we all know and have seen loaning seems to be pretty much a lottery, And for every player loaned that's one less players who gets exposure to the Chelsea first team, training under Jose and around some of the best players in the world any chances that might pop up in cup games or through injury crises. Limiting the chances our youth has to play a competitive game for the club and show our manager their worth. 

So I don't see it as Chelsea's fault that so many players have to be loaned out, for me the problem lies with the lack of competitive youth football. And that unfortunately is out of our hands.


Now lets consider Solanke who is clearly too good for the quality of U21s football and has also shone at U18's internationally, but is no where near the levels of Costa, Remy and even Falcao. What are his options. 

1 We give him another season in the u21s where he gets to train with the first team which would be good for his development as he is around top players and coaches and he might get the odd bit of first team exposure in a cup game or two. But he won't really get any week in week out competitive football.   Or

2. He gets loaned out to somewhere where he can get more regular competitive football. Somewhere that he can get a get a decent amount of first team football, good coaching and a favourable environment. Where would do this
So lets consider Vitesse 
Vitesse should be a good environment as he will be with fellow Chelsea youth players, hopefully this also provide a platform for competition between them, which should hopefully avoiding any stagnation which can easily happen on loan.

Solanke should be able to compete to get in the first team with Baker and Brown already given starting berths and Pantic and Nathan getting game time. Also I would say that it is probably quite close to his current skill level.

So the only thing left is, is the coaching good enough? I don't know is the honest answer they seemed to do well with Traore but so many others have done poorly there, whether that's down to the players mentality, whether they were unsettled, they simply weren't good enough or the coaching isn't up to scratch, again I don't know. So that's an obvious worry.

But the clubs hierarchy seem to like Vitesse so hopefully that means they feel the coaching is up to scratch and it isn't just because Roman likes the owner.

EDIT: sorry this was supposed to be a short post about Solanke to Vitesse but kinda got carried away

Edited August 9, 201510 yr by PedroMendez

 

Now lets consider Solanke who is clearly too good for the quality of U21s football and has also shone at U18's internationally, but is no where near the levels of Costa, Remy and even Falcao. What are his options. 

1 We give him another season in the u21s where he gets to train with the first team which would be good for his development as he is around top players and coaches and he might get the odd bit of first team exposure in a cup game or two. But he won't really get any week in week out competitive football.   Or

2. He gets loaned out to somewhere where he can get more regular competitive football. Somewhere that he can get a get a decent amount of first team football, good coaching and a favourable environment. Where would do this

So lets consider Vitesse 

Vitesse should be a good environment as he will be with fellow Chelsea youth players, hopefully this also provide a platform for competition between them, which should hopefully avoiding any stagnation which can easily happen on loan.

Solanke should be able to compete to get in the first team with Baker and Brown already given starting berths and Pantic and Nathan getting game time. Also I would say that it is probably quite close to his current skill level.

So the only thing left is, is the coaching good enough? I don't know is the honest answer they seemed to do well with Traore but so many others have done poorly there, whether that's down to the players mentality, whether they were unsettled, they simply weren't good enough or the coaching isn't up to scratch, again I don't know. So that's an obvious worry.

But the clubs hierarchy seem to like Vitesse so hopefully that means they feel the coaching is up to scratch and it isn't just because Roman likes the owner.

EDIT: sorry this was supposed to be a short post about Solanke to Vitesse but kinda got carried away

 

 

They played today, Solanke was not in their 18 man squad.

But if that's the case, and considering our current squad, why are we trying to spend £30m + on a young defender who is unproven at the highest level and unlikely to replace any of our first team.

Stones is already an England international and nearly made 50 appearances in the PL...no he's not worth £30m but he's far more proven than the players you're on about...

I appreciate we all want to see young talent be given a chance, but it works both ways...how much is it down to club blocking their progress and how much is it down to lack of ability/work-rate from the player in question who thinks he's already made it when given a massive contract.....loans are not blocking progress, they're a chance to impress...Traore took his opportunity at Vitesse and been rewarded with a place in the first team squad...not as if many who we have let go have proven us wrong

They played today, Solanke was not in their 18 man squad.

didn't he only arrive this week surely that's fair enough

I think pointing at Sinclair/Kakuta/Chalobah/McEachran etc who haven't made it and saying 'well they haven't done anything elsewhere, we haven't missed anything' could be looking at it the wrong way.

Have they fallen off because they're not good enough, or are they not good enough because they spent their vital 18-21 years as loan nomads? Would they have developed better if they'd been given more of a chance with us, rather than sent out to Championship teams/Vitesse, where they have no sense of permanence, no understanding of the wider club philosophy, lower quality coaching?

It's worked in the cases of De Bruyne/Courtois/Lukaku in the sense that these players have either come back to our first team, or been sold on for big profits. Difference with the Belgian trio being that they had already had significant first team football in Belgium, and were all sent to top division European clubs. It's a difficult one- we need to balance winning in the short term with making the most of what obvious talent we have in our youth teams. I do think though that we're not making the most of what we have.

Salient point about the loan army. KDB, Thibo, Lukaku all played regular football when they were that age and thats what our young players should be doing, which is why we loan them instead of keeping the around and giving them only a few games. The purpose loaning the likes of Chalo, Solanke, Kalas etc was to get them playing somewhere. For whatever reason we they dont seem to play much most of the time which means either the club are doing a poor job of placing them or the players are out of their depth. Mcceachran was a good example, were we stupid to think he would get time there or did he make a mess of it himself?

They played today, Solanke was not in their 18 man squad.

 

Apparently he won't be eligible to play until later this month... says report here

 

 

but Dominic Solanke will not be able to make his debut until later in the month at the earliest owning to paperwork issues. With no established centre-forward in the squad and a lack ofgoals thus far, manager Peter Bosz has already declared that he will be relying on the 17 year-old to bring some of his 41 goals of last season with him to his new club

Unsure why we don't send our players to Portugal or Spain for experience instead of Holland. I would rather them go get experience in the best leagues than lesser ones.

Stones is already an England international and nearly made 50 appearances in the PL...no he's not worth £30m but he's far more proven than the players you're on about...

I appreciate we all want to see young talent be given a chance, but it works both ways...how much is it down to club blocking their progress and how much is it down to lack of ability/work-rate from the player in question who thinks he's already made it when given a massive contract.....loans are not blocking progress, they're a chance to impress...Traore took his opportunity at Vitesse and been rewarded with a place in the first team squad...not as if many who we have let go have proven us wrong

 

I don't buy into the 'already made it' thinking. I watched the U21's yesterday at Liverpool, they are some good lads who work hard and give it everything, don't judge them because of Josh McEachran.