And Van Gaal would rather play a youngster than a senior player out of position apparently? Must've been a different Carrick in defence or a different Fellaini up front.

Youngsters only played when push come to shove, luckily some have worked out and now LVG is a promotor of youth. People are just lieing to themselves if they think he would of played the youth anyway.

Carrick played CB against Arsenal and I thought UTD was going to get smashed that day.

Edited April 23, 201610 yr by Ernie_blue

He's Technical Director. When things go wrong then he deserves his share of the blame. Or shall we just pretend that any criticism of him is racist?

Racism apparently, though I'm still waiting for the evidence.

Pochettino, Klopp, LVG - they might not be miracle makers when it comes to youth but they definitely utilised them more than José and Guus did this season.

 

As I see the problem is that despite the club built a great academy in the past 12 years, we do not have a clear plan in place how to integrate its best products to the first team. Or maybe we had too many plans constantly changing them, in the end that's the same as not having a clear plan. The managerial revolving door did not help the academy prospects either.

So Emenalo is in charge of youth development but bares not a single ounce of fault for the fact that not a single youth has come through in his half a decade here despite spending untold millions?

So Emenalo is in charge of youth development but bares not a single ounce of fault for the fact that not a single youth has come through in his half a decade here despite spending untold millions?

 

He isn't though. Head of youth development is Neil Bath.

Hahaha ... The truth can be so inconvenient when it doesn't fit the agenda!

He isn't though. Head of youth development is Neil Bath.

 

Neil Bath oversees the Academy and we have an amazing record at pretty much every age-grade level.

 

After that it falls to Emenalo who oversees what happens with the players when they go on-loan and such. That's his stated role at the club so even if he didn't choose each individual loan for each player, the overall failure to develop any of the hugely talented youngsters into first-team players must surely fall at his feet, no?

He isn't though. Head of youth development is Neil Bath.

Apologies, as technical director which I assume puts him in charge of Neil and that department.

Apologies, as technical director which I assume puts him in charge of Neil and that department.

 

It does. Neil Bath oversees the Academy so oversees players between the ages of 8-18. Obviously there are coaches for the under-21, under-18, under-16 etc. teams but ultimately Neil would be in charge of running the whole Academy.

 

Now does anyone think we have a problem with any of these teams? I don't. Our record in competitions would suggest we don't.

 

It's after that where the issue is and when the same issues arise year after year after year then surely the Technical Director should bear some of the brunt of the problems that he ultimately oversees. 

Neil Bath oversees the Academy and we have an amazing record at pretty much every age-grade level.

 

After that it falls to Emenalo who oversees what happens with the players when they go on-loan and such. That's his stated role at the club so even if he didn't choose each individual loan for each player, the overall failure to develop any of the hugely talented youngsters into first-team players must surely fall at his feet, no?

 

He oversees all youth level in his role as

 

 

Neil Bath - Head of youth development

Management Team

Neil Bath joined the Chelsea schoolboys coaching staff part-time in 1993 and has worked his way up.

In 2002 he was appointed assistant Academy director with a responsibility for the Under 8-16 age groups and in the summer of 2004, he became Academy manager. 

In 2011 his role was further extended to oversee the Reserves/Under-21 set-up as head of youth development.

 

Emenalo is involved in loan decisions for sure. He's not involved in the actual coaching though and he's not picking the first team. He has zero direct influence on whether youngsters are getting opportunities at Chelsea or not.

 

It's a very simplistic view to blame a single person for the failure to integrate academy players to the main squad. Sure, Emenalo has to bear some responsibility but it's not all him, far from it.

Hahaha ... The truth can be so inconvenient when it doesn't fit the agenda!

Good lord, such a disgusting stench of hypocrisy.

I didn't think anyone was blaming Emenalo for everything, I just thought people was saying he has to bear some responsibility for the lack of youth team players and also leads to people questioning his job at the club.

He oversees all youth level in his role as

 

 

Emenalo is involved in loan decisions for sure. He's not involved in the actual coaching though and he's not picking the first team. He has zero direct influence on whether youngsters are getting opportunities at Chelsea or not.

 

It's a very simplistic view to blame a single person for the failure to integrate academy players to the main squad. Sure, Emenalo has to bear some responsibility but it's not all him, far from it.

 

i don't blame a single person. I blame Abramovich for sending the wrong message and employing people who don't have the requisite qualifications to do anything except carry out his wishes. That's fine, it's his club and he can do what he wants with it. He has no responsibility to us supporters because it's not our club, it's his.

 

But I think it's getting a bit ridiculous when people are now bringing up Neil Bath in this discussion when he has been brilliant in his time here. He delivers a world-class group of youngsters every year and we just loan them and loan them.

 

If that isn't Emenalo's responsibility then we need to bring someone in who can handle that job and then let him do it.

 

We need Roman to take a step back but he won't. He's still the same guy who hired his mate as DoF and then sacked Jose Mourinho two months later to install him as coach.

 

He's been treating this club like his plaything for a decade now so nothing will change. 

After that it falls to Emenalo who oversees what happens with the players when they go on-loan and such. That's his stated role at the club so even if he didn't choose each individual loan for each player, the overall failure to develop any of the hugely talented youngsters into first-team players must surely fall at his feet, no?

i don't blame a single person. I blame Abramovich for sending the wrong message and employing people who don't have the requisite qualifications to do anything except carry out his wishes. That's fine, it's his club and he can do what he wants with it. He has no responsibility to us supporters because it's not our club, it's his.

 

So which one is it?

 

 

But I think it's getting a bit ridiculous when people are now bringing up Neil Bath in this discussion when he has been brilliant in his time here. He delivers a world-class group of youngsters every year and we just loan them and loan them.

 

It wasn't about Bath's performance, it was about correcting a factual mistake. I thought that's pretty clear...

 

If that isn't Emenalo's responsibility then we need to bring someone in who can handle that job and then let him do it.

 

It's obviously the manager's (or first team head coach, however we call him) responsibility, he is picking the match squad and the starting 11.

So which one is it?

 

 

I'm happy to share the blame but Roman is at fault for hiring Emenalo. He should hire someone better qualified and then take a step back. Roman's only talent in football is the same as every other Chairman/owner - writing cheques. 

 

 

It's obviously the manager's (or first team head coach, however we call him) responsibility, he is picking the match squad and the starting 11.

 

But if the owner is saying 'win now' then incorporating youngsters reduces the chances of winning. That's the thing, young players will make mistakes whilst learning so you have to factor that into your short and long-term planning.

 

We don't do that, as evidenced by over a decade of failing to develop an Academy talent despite having the best youth teams in England and arguably Europe.

 

What your suggesting is that a coach picks teams in a vacuum which is obviously untrue. 

Despite being one of the most senior people at the club according to some posts I'm reading here Emenalo isn't responsible or accountable for anything to do with the first team.

The man is made from Teflon.

I'm happy to share the blame but Roman is at fault for hiring Emenalo. He should hire someone better qualified and then take a step back. Roman's only talent in football is the same as every other Chairman/owner - writing cheques. 

 

 

But if the owner is saying 'win now' then incorporating youngsters reduces the chances of winning. That's the thing, young players will make mistakes whilst learning so you have to factor that into your short and long-term planning.

 

We don't do that, as evidenced by over a decade of failing to develop an Academy talent despite having the best youth teams in England and arguably Europe.

 

What your suggesting is that a coach picks teams in a vacuum which is obviously untrue. 

 

You really think that the owner has more say in the team selection than the manager? Come on now. Roman has his faults and made his share of mistakes but at the end of the day it's him deciding whether this or that youngster is in the match squad or not. The problem is not coming from a single person, the blame has to be shared by all parties involved. It's the manager however who bears the most responsibility.

Edited April 23, 201610 yr by undertow

You really think that the owner has more say in the team selection than the manager? 

 

 

I didn't say that. I said that the owner sets the tone, the ambition, the targets. 

 

The problem is not coming from a single person, the blame has to be shared by all parties involved. It's the manager however who bears the most responsibility.

 

I think it's naive to think that simply changing the coach will change the end result but you might be right, Maybe it'll be different under Conte.

 

What's that phrase? Oh yeah....

 

Fourteenth times the charm.

I didn't say that. I said that the owner sets the tone, the ambition, the targets. 

 

 

I think it's naive to think that simply changing the coach will change the end result but you might be right, Maybe it'll be different under Conte.

 

What's that phrase? Oh yeah....

 

Fourteenth times the charm.

 

You might as well have quoted only my last sentence seeing that you fully disregarded the first in order to twist my words. It's a wee bit ironic after starting with "I didn't say that".

Step 1.

It's the managers responsibility to decide keep them in the first team squad or not. Not emenalo, not bath- the manager.

Step 2.

If the manager doesn't want to keep them it is emenalos responsibility to find the player a suitable club to go out on loan to, or to sell them if the manager has no long term interest in them. The player had to agree to the loan as well.

Step 3.

It is down to the player to take his chances whether he stays in the first team or not. At the end of the season you go back to step 1.

Has emenalo done a good job there? Yes, in my opinion he has. I think mistakes have been made, but I don't think Bamford is an example. Chalobah to napoli was a mistake. Delac loaned out as a second choice keeper was a huge mistake, even though he was never going to be a Chelsea player. Wallace to inter. But the successes are out there. Thorgan hazard, Andreas christensen, Thibaut courtois, Kevin de Bruyne, Bertrand traore, Nathan ake, Lewis baker and dom solanke have all had or are still having loans that are clearly benefitting their development.

You might as well have quoted only my last sentence seeing that you fully disregarded the first in order to twist my words. It's a wee bit ironic after starting with "I didn't say that".

 

I apologise if you think I twisted your words. I'll have another go.

 

You really think that the owner has more say in the team selection than the manager? Come on now. 

 

I didn't say that. I said that the owner sets the tone, the ambition, the targets. 

 

 

 Roman has his faults and made his share of mistakes but at the end of the day it's him deciding whether this or that youngster is in the match squad or not.

 

 

I disagree. It isn't Roman deciding.

 

Better?

Despite being one of the most senior people at the club according to some posts I'm reading here Emenalo isn't responsible or accountable for anything to do with the first team.

The man is made from Teflon.

Oh you nasty racist.

I apologise if you think I twisted your words. I'll have another go.

 

 

I didn't say that. I said that the owner sets the tone, the ambition, the targets. 

 

 

 

I disagree. It isn't Roman deciding.

 

Better?

 

It's not Roman deciding, that was a typo obviously :) I was arguing that the manager has way more influence on the selections than him.

 Chalobah to napoli was a mistake. Delac loaned out as a second choice keeper was a huge mistake, even though he was never going to be a Chelsea player. Wallace to inter. But the successes are out there. Thorgan hazard, Andreas christensen, Thibaut courtois, Kevin de Bruyne, Bertrand traore, Nathan ake, Lewis baker and dom solanke have all had or are still having loans that are clearly benefitting their development.

 

Chalobah to Forest under Billy Davies was a mistake. The loan to Burnley was also a mistake. Basically anything after Watford was either a bad loan or a half-arsed attempt to fix a bad loan. Napoli was just laughable.

 

Delac who cares?

 

Wallace to Inter was stupid but that was the player's fault allegedly.

 

Hazard, Courtois, De Bruyne and Traore aren't Academy products.

 

Christensen, Baker and Solanke are 'wait and sees' because two of them are probably leaving Vitesse to go somewhere else and that is the decisive loan, where we usually f**k up.

 

None of this changes the fact that in Roman's time here (and Emanlo's) we've not developed a single Academy player into a first-team player. It's a problem.

On chalobah I disagree to a point - Jose wasn't giving him chances and it was out of the window so the options were limited for first team football. If a player goes to a club where he gets a chance or if he gets injured then that can't be put on emenalo.

On the non academy players my point is that clearly those are examples of the loans working. Also traore is an academy player. He doesn't count as one, but that is a technical issue. He's a product of the Chelsea system as much as anyone.

It's a problem that no academy players has fully established themselves since jt, but it needs to be recognised that no technical director can force a manager to play the kids. He has to want to.