Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 The players sales you've totted up are over a 10 year period (which is fine btw & thanks for doing it!), but the club's total revenue is about £75m per season. Yes but then all their revenue streams and the interest they generate falls back to their ethos - developing young players. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 SBS how many youth players have appeared for rangers first team over the last 3 year's? Also when calculating how much Ajax have made against ours how are you detracting the original out lay? Are you calculating it as a percentage of outlay? How are you evaluating available infrastructure as an influence on outcomes? How are you then calculating the area outside the youth academies influence to make brand awareness null and void? I don't see any relevance in the number of players who have played a token match or two. How many played regularly? How many players have we played that were good? How many did we profit from? Can we please stop comparing the difference between ours and Ajax's youth academies? It's an absolutely insane argument. You may as well compare us to Barca. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 I don't see any relevance in the number of players who have played a token match or two. How many played regularly? How many players have we played that were good? How many did we profit from? Can we please stop comparing the difference between ours and Ajax's youth academies? It's an absolutely insane argument. You may as well compare us to Barca. They were only second in the European research so that means we are far better than them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 As I said before it all depends on the conditions and criteria that you are looking under. You can change that and the result will give you an answer that fits that criteria. Brechin city may have all players playing that came through their youth system does that make their youth system better than Ajax? You can bend it any way you want. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 (edited) sbs you are trying to evaluate the academy on several points that cant be mixed. uefa fifa the eca and several bodies for years have tried and failed to create a formula that is a fair reflexion of an academies success. The closest they have came is to state before evaluation the academy must first through the clubs board state its intended goals. Be it to maximise value through transfer income against outlays, have players good enough to play for the first team reducing outlay on transfers or it can also be to create footballers from local kids. If our academy was judged on transfer income it would fail but it would argue that the academy does not choose the time or price of when to sell and would point to its graduates being of a large value later on in their careers as proving its merits. If our academy was judged on how many players it had playing reguarely for the first team it would first point to the amount of players who had been promoted then once again point the finger of balme at the managers as these players have left the club then achieved a comparable level of success. If our academy was judged on how many youngsters from the local area it had taken and given the foundations to continue a professional career in football against investment it would be deemed a massive success so what criteria are you choosing? it cant be them all its impossible to do them all at once. Playing regularly would mean you didn't accept offers etc. pick one then i will play devils advocate . Common sense dictates you must first understand the criteria and parameters must be stated and evaluated fairly. To be honest, I couldn't really care less what the governing bodies assess! They will be looking at things objectively and are not interested in who reaps the benefit of a player. I don't think you can just separate the youth system and the club itself, it's all intrinsically linked. If the senior club doesn't get the benefit, then as far as the club is concerned it has failed. The whole point of youth development is to bring through players who can make a decent contribution to the team and/or generate the club a significant profit. We are completely failing there. I will still answer each point though. 1. Without doubt it would fail because very few youth players in the past 10 years or so have actually generated any significant profit. It's only really McCormack who has gone on to be of more value. He also joined just before his 16th birthday, then left a few seasons later after hardly playing, does he even count? Adam was almost 18 when he joined. 2. Correct, though we haven't exactly seen a huge amount of youth players slipping through our fingers? Perhaps the lack of first team exposure at a crucial stage of their development is hindering their progress. All too often we keep players until they are well into their 20's with next to no game time - Jordan McMillan and Rory Loy were both kept until 23 and they featured 4 times in total! 3. Developing also ran Scottish league footballers might be of benefit to those clubs, it certainly isn't to us nor is it generally of benefit to the international game. If we produce a player who ends up moving on a free transfer to Partick Thistle, I don't think that can be considered a success whichever way you look at it. Edited July 14, 2015 by Ser Barristan Selmy 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 I'm not sure why we all feel the need to focus on past failings within the Academy. I think it was generally accepted that this was largely to do with the influence of Sinclair as well as the 1st team management team not giving a shit about the Academy side of the Club. Why can't we focus on what seems to be a much healthier approach from Mulholland in terms of quality of player (football players, not physical brutes as was Sinclair's type of player) and the fact that Warburton seems to be immersed in changing the footballing ethos throughout the Club, at all levels from all ages. Seems to me you guys are now just having a pissing contest. Focus on what seem to be positive improvements instead of dwelling on the past. It is what it is, so long as we learn from those mistakes. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 I'm not sure why we all feel the need to focus on past failings within the Academy. I think it was generally accepted that this was largely to do with the influence of Sinclair as well as the 1st team management team not giving a shit about the Academy side of the Club. Why can't we focus on what seems to be a much healthier approach from Mulholland in terms of quality of player (football players, not physical brutes as was Sinclair's type of player) and the fact that Warburton seems to be immersed in changing the footballing ethos throughout the Club, at all levels from all ages. Seems to me you guys are now just having a pissing contest. Focus on what seem to be positive improvements instead of dwelling on the past. It is what it is, so long as we learn from those mistakes. Well said Sir! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.