Should Latics have a youth development scheme or not ?

[rudemedic]

I've posted in the other thread about this- think BP 1960 is right we have a good crop of talented youngsters coming through. Out u16s beat United's comfortably a few months ago. It's a Yes from me.

[opinions4u]

For those who have voted "disband", have you thought it through?

 

Squad size. Bigger needed. More wages to pay.

 

Signing on fees. Bigger if they come from elsewhere.

 

Wages for non-homegrown talent. Bigger (at first).

 

Transfer fees once they've signed a pro-contract. Unchanged. We would still get the Eaves money in similar circumstances.

 

Loan system. Under direct threat.

Edited January 12, 2013 by opinions4u

[tangerinedreams]

keep it and be more selective and ruthless with players. too many Ryan Brookes have played for us and we need to spot talent early and build it up, rather than hope they do it themselves

 

This

[Ricardo]

Folly to scrap the youth team, if you don't invest in training then the lifeblood of you business is cut off.

Look at the current squad of 26 players and the number who are from Latics youth team

 

Namely: Tarkowski; Millar; Hughes; Winchester ; Belzika; Sutherland; Mellor; Cooper

 

SO from that 26, 8 are from our youth set up - so 30% of the current squad would not be available under this proposal.

 

From the money saved you are not going to fill that gap in the squad.

To go on about return of investment being just about selling players on to other clubs for large amounts is misleading, as the return on investment is the saving of wages when your team has the likes of Chris Taylor, Paul Black, Marc Tierney etc. in the 1st team.

 

Just because some don't step up to the grade like Ryan Brooke is the nature of the business, there is no guarantee that this is the case either with pro's brought in - in recent times you only have to look at the likes of Marsh-Brown to see that, and getting rid of these players is more expensive that getting rid of youngsters that don't fulfill their potential.

 

Look at the last games team

4 of the 7 subs were from the youth team

 

It is down to the coaching and management to utilise the youth players and develop them.

 

I would rather the likes of Connor Hughes or Chris Sutherland be given the chance instead of Montano, who has been attrocious in the recent games he has played.

 

So I am keeper

[Crusoe]

Slept on it, decided I'm in the "keep" camp.

[JoshOWTB]

It would be folly if the Latics scrapped the youth scheme and lost out on this tremendous prospect who the pundits raved about when he played against England.

Many believe he will go right to the top.

 

http://www.oldhamath...nes-497525.aspx

 

Double post please ignore!

Edited January 12, 2013 by JoshOWTB

[Ricardo]

I've had to vote No.

 

Any decent youth we got would be snapped up by the big boys for peanuts. Why should we pay to develop youth players to benefit the Premiership. Most of their youth players don't make it anyway, and drop down the leagues. Let them pay for youth development for our benefit.

 

If we kept the youth system, then we would have to play then whether they were good enough or not, like Crewe do, and would have to suffer relegations when there was no transfer money coming in. It's a huge gamble which would condemn us to lower league football for ever.

 

I would like all the people who have voted Yes, to really think of the possible consequences.

 

Is this the same Crewe that are are 11th in the table and 3 points outside of the playoff zone?

 

You are right al_bro I have thought about the point you made and still vote yes as right now Crewe are in a far better position than we are.

Also if you think right now we are going to be any better off than we are currently are by scrapping the youth team then you are very deluded - we are rotting in lower league football because we get a paltry income from gate receipts it has nothing to do with the youth team (aside from having clueless managers).

[JoshOWTB]

It would be folly if the Latics scrapped the youth scheme and lost out on this tremendous prospect who the pundits raved about when he played against England.

Many believe he will go right to the top.

 

http://www.oldhamath...nes-497525.aspx

 

But if Man City or United come in for him now and offer him better facilities he will leave and go to them and we will get what £12k for him??

 

Is that worth £200k a year to HOPE that our best prospects don't get poached before we sign them to professional contracts?

[tangerinedreams]

20k per month to put towards a salary isn't a great deal. How far will the gates plummet if relegation happened? 20k per home game?

 

No matter which way they decide to go there will be objections, but they just can't make their minds up by what they read on here, it needs to be a consenus from those that are attending the home matches seeing as that's where the majority will be. A simple yes/no.

 

It's not that hard, is it....? Lol

[BP1960]

But if Man City or United come in for him now and offer him better facilities he will leave and go to them and we will get what £12k for him??

 

Is that worth £200k a year to HOPE that our best prospects don't get poached before we sign them to professional contracts?

 

If he comes good at one of those clubs eventual compensation will rise to well above £200,0000, maybe £millions.

[laticsmarra]

Keep it but look after the graduates from the youth team better

[bigfatjoe1]

I'd keep it because i think it is healthy for football in general, for young players who otherwise wouldn't get a chance and for the young energy it brings to a club.

 

However, this is a business. Does it make business sense? Can this be quantified? Can it really be justified from a business perspective (ie in financial terms - bottom line).

 

It would be sad to lose the youth system, but it's been a slippery slope since Bosman.

[dave_ragg1984]

We're a football club, and football clubs cost money to run.

 

We can't, and shouldn't, moan about the youth set up costing us money to run. The first team costs a lot of money to run too. Should we scrap that too?

 

There is more to the club than just the first team.

 

Plus, if we scrap it and then in 2 years time we realised that was a massive mistake, it will be ridiculously hard to re-establish a youth set up from scratch.

[JoeLatics]

I may be being really thick but I don't understand what the £200kpa actually goes on?

[Barryowen]

I have read all the comments on the two posts running on this topic and thank everyone for their valuable contributions.

 

Though I would just comment on a few points.

 

There is no conspiracy theory in involving the fans and the Board are genuinely interested in their views on such an important topic that can have massive implications for the club. The Board will not shy away from the decisions it needs to take but at least any action taken will be more informed.

 

Some comments have been made aboiut he amount of money that is spent on running a Youth Section. All I can say is that it is a very expensive operation with staff costs, accomodation cost and the care and welfare of so many people. £20.000 is a lot of money that needs to be found each month and it may be money well spent if returns are seen with quality players coming into our first team or from fees that can be derived from transfer activity. Like any other financial operation the money spent has to be justified. As with all areas of accountancy at a football club each area of expenditure is looked at in the light of priorities. Equally so we have to assess any rule changes and assess the likely impact on our budget. Certainly with youth in mind we have to look very carefully at the long term effect of any decisions we make.

 

In comparison with those considerations you also have to look at the bigger picture and assess any changes of policy you may make. For example would the first team benefit from any monies saved by the scrapping of the youth team. In actual fact many clubs like ours are producing lower and lower budgets each year for first team squads and again you have to look at how money should be spread to secure a good first team. I note that many say that any demise of the youth section would see the end of their support for the club. Equally so ,in any results industry you also have to consider if fans will be patient enough to see a young first team squad made up from many youth players who may not get you the instant results as quickly as fans may demand. This woulld be occurring season after season and if implementing a "Crewe" like system you have to be prepared to "support" your team with such a policy in mind.

 

The Crewe model is great in many ways but one has to remember that they have had their rough spells with relegations.

 

Thank you Leeslover for your comments and regards when I was diagnosed with the prostate cancer. I am well on the way to recovery and have never taken your comments and views personally. The way my operation was conducted with experimental and up to date equipment has allowed me a swifter recovery and less side effects than perhaps Alan Hardy had. You are perfectly at liberty to resume any attack on me that you see fit and indeed I enjoy the many sensible and intelligent points you make.As you know I do not always respond on the board because many fans have asked me not to.

 

I appreciate that many of you may not see the expenditure of the youth section as being a major conisderation but believe me the gates and revenue we receive do not cover the total expenditure of the annual costs. Whilst it may be a different topic we are very fortunate to have a Chairman who takes the worries on board of cash flow problems.

 

Whatever fans thinks and I do not believe that anything I say will change some peoples' minds, every single penny of expenditure has to be looked at.

 

I must MAKE IT CLEAR that final decisions have not been made about the structure of our club for next season and the debate amongst the Board continues. Your views are being looked at very carefully and we find it helpful that we have so many varied and frank views.

 

To help the process the debate will continue with the assistance of the Oldham Chronicle so we cannot be accused of limiting the availability of information to the official site and subsequenty OWTB.

 

If any fans wishes to speak to be personally on this topic (or any other for that matter) I am available.

 

Equally so if fans believe it might be helpful to hold a meeting to discuss the topic I can also arrange.

 

Regards to you all

 

Barry

[opinions4u]

Thanks for that Barry. Good to hear that you're on the road to recovery.

 

My gut instinct is that scrapping the youth system is the wrong way to go. I've speculated further up the thread (or in the other thread) about false economy. I also understand that smaller attendances mean less money coming in to he club which is presumably driving this thinking.

 

So what can be done to keep the youth set up in place, perhaps costing less, while raising extra revenue for it?

 

We talk about £400k a year with half of that funded by the club. So a 5% cut in budget through improved housekeeping could free up £20k. Easy to say, maybe harder to do. But not impossible.

 

I think the half time draw at Latics is a drab affair. What can be done to reinvigorate it? I'm not familiar with lottery laws but breathing some life in to it could generate more income that could be directed to the youth budget.

 

- increase ticket prices to £2

- introduce some sort of cumulative jackpot which isn't paid out every game but is in the thousands, not hundreds.

- make it more in your face as you enter the shop, stand or sponsorship area. I often don't see a seller. More mentions on the PA system. More sellers in the stands moving about finding buyers.

- have a one-off draw for the Liverpool game with £5 tickets, a guaranteed winner of £500 in each of the Chaddy, Main Stand, RRE small, RRE away section

 

I reckon the first three could / should double income - maybe another £10k a season? Put winners on the web site. Make more of it. Clearly advertise the fact the proceeds go to the youth budget if they do.

 

I know I've not bridged the full gap by a long way there. But what other costs could be removed from the set up? What other income could it drive? An extra £1 on admission to youth games. Better marketing of those games. Playing them on Sundays to avoid floodlight costs and get more people in? Maybe nibbling around the edges here but look at the opportunity to generate a bit more revenue from the lads.

 

Fight the case to return to five subs in first team football. Smaller first team squad needed then. Can cost be taken out of the reserve set up and diverted to youth, without ending the reserves existence again?

 

Any other ideas chaps?

Edited January 14, 2013 by opinions4u

[oafcmetty]

Any other ideas chaps?

Playershare equivalent for the youth setup? Perhaps with a portion of any transfer fee received for a home grown prospect going back into the pot?

[Stevie_J]

Playershare equivalent for the youth setup? Perhaps with a portion of any transfer fee received for a home grown prospect going back into the pot?

I'd rather put my money towards a youth set-up, personally.

[oafcmetty]

I'd rather put my money towards a youth set-up, personally.

As in you'd rather contribute to 'youthshare' than playershare? Me too.

[Stevie_J]

As in you'd rather contribute to 'youthshare' than playershare? Me too.

Yep. I'd rather contribute to the development of young players than the signing of overpaid pros.

[Oh Heck C-Beck]

Thanks for commenting Barry but your comments are very worrying IMO.

 

I don't believe for one minute decent money would be put into the first team after scrapping the youth system and even if we can bring in an extra few players we are still likely to be crap an extra 200k a year will not make us competitive. Unearthing a new Taylor eardley tierny etc might tho.

 

I hear that a lot of the young players in and around the first team do not have a good attitude maybe this is influencing the thinking?

 

It does however sound like we have some better prospects coming through soon it would be a shame to cut these off.

 

Personally I would much rather copy Crewes model as it would give the club the chance of long term survival and the chance to bounce back if we did go down. And anyway they are doing much better than we are ATM and have been in the championship in the last ten years. IMO our current model and a future model with no means to bring through our own players will see the death of the club.

 

I genuinely think if the club was geared up towards bringing through good quality youth you might stop some of the rot that has set in. I think many people like me are losing interest because there is no plan. We are just treading water and slowly sinking. Scrapping the youth is papering over the cracks.

Edited January 14, 2013 by Oh Heck C-Beck

[bigfatjoe1]

I think an alternative model might involve taking 18-19 year olds who haven't made it at Premier League level but who might have the incentive and motivation to succeed if given a second chance. Chances are they would have more raw talent than any youngsters that we might attract. They would also have benefited from a top class apprenticeship.

Makes much more sense.

Crewe will never go anywhere. Why on earth do people think this is a good model? We might get relegated but we might bounce back? It really doesn't sell it for me.

I don't want to be a feeder club.

The financial structure of youth football has changed.

We have to think about a different model. Obsessing over a youth system that doesn't really deliver, and will give us even less in the future, doesn't appeal. Sentiment is getting in the way of reality.

[BP1960]

I have read all the comments on the two posts running on this topic and thank everyone for their valuable contributions.

 

Though I would just comment on a few points.

 

There is no conspiracy theory in involving the fans and the Board are genuinely interested in their views on such an important topic that can have massive implications for the club. The Board will not shy away from the decisions it needs to take but at least any action taken will be more informed.

 

Some comments have been made aboiut he amount of money that is spent on running a Youth Section. All I can say is that it is a very expensive operation with staff costs, accomodation cost and the care and welfare of so many people. £20.000 is a lot of money that needs to be found each month and it may be money well spent if returns are seen with quality players coming into our first team or from fees that can be derived from transfer activity. Like any other financial operation the money spent has to be justified. As with all areas of accountancy at a football club each area of expenditure is looked at in the light of priorities. Equally so we have to assess any rule changes and assess the likely impact on our budget. Certainly with youth in mind we have to look very carefully at the long term effect of any decisions we make.

 

In comparison with those considerations you also have to look at the bigger picture and assess any changes of policy you may make. For example would the first team benefit from any monies saved by the scrapping of the youth team. In actual fact many clubs like ours are producing lower and lower budgets each year for first team squads and again you have to look at how money should be spread to secure a good first team. I note that many say that any demise of the youth section would see the end of their support for the club. Equally so ,in any results industry you also have to consider if fans will be patient enough to see a young first team squad made up from many youth players who may not get you the instant results as quickly as fans may demand. This woulld be occurring season after season and if implementing a "Crewe" like system you have to be prepared to "support" your team with such a policy in mind.

 

The Crewe model is great in many ways but one has to remember that they have had their rough spells with relegations.

 

Thank you Leeslover for your comments and regards when I was diagnosed with the prostate cancer. I am well on the way to recovery and have never taken your comments and views personally. The way my operation was conducted with experimental and up to date equipment has allowed me a swifter recovery and less side effects than perhaps Alan Hardy had. You are perfectly at liberty to resume any attack on me that you see fit and indeed I enjoy the many sensible and intelligent points you make.As you know I do not always respond on the board because many fans have asked me not to.

 

I appreciate that many of you may not see the expenditure of the youth section as being a major conisderation but believe me the gates and revenue we receive do not cover the total expenditure of the annual costs. Whilst it may be a different topic we are very fortunate to have a Chairman who takes the worries on board of cash flow problems.

 

Whatever fans thinks and I do not believe that anything I say will change some peoples' minds, every single penny of expenditure has to be looked at.

 

I must MAKE IT CLEAR that final decisions have not been made about the structure of our club for next season and the debate amongst the Board continues. Your views are being looked at very carefully and we find it helpful that we have so many varied and frank views.

 

To help the process the debate will continue with the assistance of the Oldham Chronicle so we cannot be accused of limiting the availability of information to the official site and subsequenty OWTB.

 

If any fans wishes to speak to be personally on this topic (or any other for that matter) I am available.

 

Equally so if fans believe it might be helpful to hold a meeting to discuss the topic I can also arrange.

 

Regards to you all

 

Barry

 

Thanks Barry for a very good constructive reply,

I am sure you will take to the board over 88% on this site voted to keep the youth development scheme.

 

My own feeling is that in addition to retaining the youth development scheme a strong reserve league needs to be introduced with something like 16 clubs in order to have sufficient fixtures to give the youth a chance to progress.

Have you considered contacting the reserve league executives about a restructuring on the lines I have mentioned as many other clubs must be in the same boat as the Latics ?.

 

Another idea is to amalgamate the Manchester Senior and Junior cups on a Champions League basis, with non league clubs in the qualifying groups followed by Football League lower division clubs reserves at the next stage, qualifiers from these groups would join Championship and Premiership reserve clubs in the later stage groups - progressing then to a knock out competition.

Ii would take some tweaking, but there's enough clubs in the area to make a 'Greater Manchester League Cup' work.

I think Sponsors would love such a competition and it would bring in extra revenue for all the clubs.

In addition such a competition would enable an easy check could be kept on non league and emerging league talent.

Edited January 14, 2013 by BP1960

[Dave_Og]

I don't want to be a feeder club.

 

 

Maybe this is where we are going - the Spanish model?

 

I've raised this point a couple of times over the years and have always been slated for it; usually by the people who can read a headline but struggle in getting past the first line.

 

Some things are obvious:

 

The volume of kids available to smaller clubs is signficantly smaller than it once was due to the greater reach of the big boys. Less kids almost inevitably means that the chances of unearthing a real gem are reduced.

 

The Bosman ruling (which was unarguably right) has had a very signficant effect on the potential for clubs to generate significant transfer fees.

 

The ability of Premiership clubs to pay high wages and therefore attract players from other countries has reduced the need for them to scout and develop emerging talent from lower division clubs.

 

Reserve team football has become less competitive as bigger clubs do not use it much for players whjo are in the first team squad.

 

The gap between lower leagues and the top division means that the nmber of players capable of making the leap is much lower than it once was.

 

The funding requirements to gain academy status (which Latics could not meet) meant that those clubs who did not attain that status lost furher opportunities to play competitive matches.

 

Thee are two questions.

 

Does maintaining the youth system make economic sense? There are too many variables to give a definitive yes or no but reent developments have meant that the negative outcomeis now more likely to come to pass than they were.

 

Does the youth system have an intangible value; community etc. which overrides reasonable economic cost? There is no right answer - you decide.

[leeslover]

I think the half time draw at Latics is a drab affair. What can be done to reinvigorate it? I'm not familiar with lottery laws but breathing some life in to it could generate more income that could be directed to the youth budget.

I've bought one Strike it Lucky ticket in my life, and that was before the Crewe game when I was ambushed by a 6 year old girl in the club shop (possibly one of Lisa and Dan's). So there is the answer - child labour.