Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
'The Big Four' - Merely stumbling, re-aligning or finished altogether?
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
There is a lack of young talent at Liverpool and Chelsea. Now is the time to invest in young players who have the potential to make it into your first team. United and Arsenal have a good bunch of youngsters there who are already being blooded to see what they can do. If you can't match the spending power of your competition then you have to catch players early so you don't have to pay an arm and a leg for them.
It was more to this post that I was replying, which was saying there was a lack of young talent at Liverpool. While Liverpool are slightly behind in terms of blooding youngsters, it's quite clear that Liverpool are trying to catch players early and so far seem to be doing a reasonably decent job of it.Pepe LeFrits wrote: »In terms of comparison I'm not sure it is erroneous for PHB to leave out the ones you've added. There is a discrepancy between the amount of youth in Liverpool's first team squad and United/Arsenal. It's difficult enough as it is for people to know if the youngsters who are already in the first team squads are going to make the grade without delving into reserve and youth teams.
A line needs to be drawn somewhere and participation in the first team seems like as sensible as any. If they're not in the first team now it's difficult to foresee them having much of an impact on their club's fortunes for a couple of years at least.
Probably reasonable enough in terms of drawing the line at the first team but in addition to those that have featured for Liverpool's first team the following three should probably be included
- Nemeth who is playing regularly and doing well at AEK
- San Jose who is starting consistently the last while for Bilbao in La Liga [played something like the full 90 minutes for the last 9/10 games for them; and bagged 2 goals in them games - not bad going for a twenty year old CB]
- Mihaylov while he hasn't featured much for Twente has started competive games for the Bulgarian senior team, which is not bad going for a 21 year oldSorry I took it from ESPN as that is generally the squad that would be called on for PL games. If you want to go into reserves, we can. My point was a simple one though. Looking at the squads, the first team squads, United and Arsenal (to a greater extent) have much more quality at younger ages.
I hope I explained this above. I would have a slight quibble about calling a 24 year old a "young player" but overall the central thrust of your arguement is correctHow much it cost to get them there is pretty irrelevant, because they are there now, and we're discussing the future.
Sorry but this was just a massive guffaw.
I think if Liverpool spent something like £50m more the young prospects in the squad would look substantially better - at least I'd hope so. I know of at least two of the players Wenger signed for a few million [Diaby and Dennilson] that Rafa was reportedly seriously interested in but simply couldn't compete in terms of paying such relatively serious for youth prospects.
I understand the rest of your point and would broadly agree with it [maybe some quibbles about some of the prospects]as well but I was initially replying to the comparison of Liverpool being on a similar level to Chelsea when talking about youth prospects and there being a "lack" of youth prospects at Liverpool. I was making the counter-argument that there was not a lack of youth prospects at Liverpool.
Also I wonder if a mod might maybe split off the youth prospect stuff off to a similar thread as it has kinda derailed an interesting thread.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
leninbenjamin wrote: »You really refuse to let yourself see the bigger picture here, don't you?
Arsenal spend less money on transfers p.a. than Liverpool. That Arsenal have that money to spend over others on youth is not because they have more money to burn, but rather because they prioritise it. Benitez could easily have bought Diaby, Denilson, Walcott, Ramsey and a few others if he so wished, but instead he didn't. Instead he chooses to spend the bulk of his money on more established players, buying the likes of Dossena, Johnson, Mascherano, Kromkamp, Morientes, Keane and Kuyt etc. At Arsenal it's the opposite, the bulk of the money goes into young prospects and the experienced buys tend to be a lot less frequent.
Tbh, there's no less risk in either, it all boils down the expertise of the scouts and managers, but it's clear that Arsenal's approach in the past few years has been much more sustainable and productive.
I don't follow you bit about don't following.
On the Diaby and Denilson buys from what I've heard it was the board (i.e. Parry) telling him that he couldnt afford to spend millions on youth prospects.
Might have had something to do with the fact that Parry's son was a coach under the previous youth regime, although this is just speculation on my part.
It simply wasn't an option to buy these players when the price went over the million mark. From this I doubt Walcott and Ramsey were ever realistic options either given the price they ended up going for. I know there was talk about Liverpool being interested in them (Ramsey moreseo) but in both instances it was simply a case of too rich for our blood. Kinda like the time the board wouldn't sanction an extra million to buy Alves.
In the last while Rafa has come out and expressly said that the Arsenal/Barcelona method is the model we intend to try and emulate at youth level.
To reiterate my point wasnt that Arsenal and United don't have decent youth prospects but to put forward the case that Liverpool do actually have some youth prospects as well. There is also the point that Liverpool have spent considerably less on young players than United and quite a bit less than Arsenal (especially when you consider the wages on offer at Arsenal)
This is in spite of a previously utterly disastrous period at Liverpool combined with a period where the whole youths/Academy situation was a politcal football in the boardroom.0 -
MementoMori wrote: »I don't follow you bit about don't following.
Well, to be blunt, you phrased it as if Liverpool had no alternative, that those prices were above your means. This is simply not the case, it was a decision, whether it was Parry, the board or Rafa is irrelevant to this thread.
Yes, I've heard Rafa mention the Arsenal/Barca model on many occasions but when one compares the investment that's actually been made by Pool to Arsenal/.Barca/United, all Rafa's statements can only be taken as lip service (unless the full picture of who is in control at Pool becomes clear).
And you do have a few decent prospects, but nowhere on the level of United/Arsenal/Chelsea. For example, Nemeth, one of the original Rafa prospects is now 21 and still on loan at a time when Liverpool are crying out for a another striker. This does not bode well for the club.
All in all, Liverpool need to seriously up the level of investment in youth for the long term future, as I'm sure you'd agree.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
MementoMori wrote: »I did see an interesting graphic a while back comparing the absolute population within 60 minutes of Highbury compared to within 60 minutes of Anfield. Surprisingly the population in the greater London area is substanially higher than the population within 60 minutes of Anfield - the fact that the population of the Irish Sea is effectively nil, really screws things up for Liverpool.;)
0
Advertisement