Jump to content

Dylan Williams - signed for Chelsea


Jubbs

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, GenBr said:

We lost the three players to united, we lost delap, we lost Gordon and now we're losing williams. All of them for basically nothing in return.

I can't blame any young player for wanting to go to one of the biggest teams in the world, but the compensation we get is abysmal. 

Most of these players would have gone whether we were in financial trouble or not. Will and Jeff never really had the big teams courting them.

Maybe it's easier to get picked off as the risk is close to zero, but if we'd have signed them it would have been a bigger risk, so maybe no sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I was thinking about this too. The very best players will be snapped up, they won't play for our first team and we'll only receive a fee matching their development cost. So worst case is, we breakeven with them financially, but the ones who stick with us benefit from playing with better players (are you more likely to improve playing alongside Cristiano Ronaldo or Gary Teale?)

It then just becomes a question of whether you get your money's worth from the remaining group of players.

Unless we can convince them to do a Bellingham?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck to him, we got him on a free from Wolves academy in 2020. We seem particularly good at this , Hughes and Huddlestone from Forest, Plange from Arsenal . Knight of course can from Ireland so not through academy from a young age .

Darren Wassell and academy recruitment team have done exceptionally well, I know we lost today but 5 of the starters came from our academy, with the exception of Lawrence no significant fee paid for any of the starting 11 and we are competitive in this division ...just shows what can be done with proper recruitment 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Rev said:

You seem very clued up on these matters, so can I ask a question?

If being a Cat 1 academy doesn't give us  protection from such poaching, which I believed it would when we went for it, what is the point? 

Would we be any worse off at Cat 2, for instance, or does the fact we have top tier status enable us to attract a better class of youngster's, and so is a wise investment even taking into account the departures we've seen?

Category essentially is a way of grouping clubs by similar academy expenditure. That cost is more or less just infrastructure and coaching hours.

In our region, there's Forest, Leicester Stoke, Villa, Birmingham, West Brom and Wolves who're all Cat 1. If we drop to Cat 2, chances are the players we'd be after would choose one if these sides instead. I think the evidence of this is the number of youth players we've picked up from Nottinghamshire, capitalising on Forest being Cat 2 prior to this season.

Another benefit if being Cat 1 is that you get more compensation for players than at lower Category Levels.

Whilst a higher category doesnt necessarily mean you get better players, the consistency in player ability we're producing is seemingly improving. In the Clough years I think spend was about £2m pa. O'Brien, Hendrick, Hughes, Bennett and Lowe are just about the only Football League quality we produced. You could say 1 a year. We've since increased to £5m pa and are now producing several EFL (or greater) quality players every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I was thinking about this too. The very best players will be snapped up, they won't play for our first team and we'll only receive a fee matching their development cost. So worst case is, we breakeven with them financially, but the ones who stick with us benefit from playing with better players (are you more likely to improve playing alongside Cristiano Ronaldo or Gary Teale?)

It then just becomes a question of whether you get your money's worth from the remaining group of players.

If you show a yougster a video of CR7, the reaction might be, i ll never be able to do that.

if you show them videos of Gary Teale and tell them dont do that a) they might think thats achievable and b) they should improve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The EFL agreed to the EPPP in exchange for improved "Solidarity Payments". Those payments go to all EFL clubs, even the ones who don't have Academies, and even the ones that want to see DCFC annihilated. So our talent gets snaffled on the cheap so that Wycombe Wanderers and their ilk get paid more.

Makes you spit, doesn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Crewton said:

The EFL agreed to the EPPP in exchange for improved "Solidarity Payments". Those payments go to all EFL clubs, even the ones who don't have Academies, and even the ones that want to see DCFC annihilated. So our talent gets snaffled on the cheap so that Wycombe Wanderers and their ilk get paid more.

Makes you spit, doesn't it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read online on Twitter (not the most reliable of sources) that we received around 400k for Dylan. I don't think that is too bad all things considering in our situation. At least it's a considerable amount to help with the clubs cash flow in the short term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ram1988 said:

I've read online on Twitter (not the most reliable of sources) that we received around 400k for Dylan. I don't think that is too bad all things considering in our situation. At least it's a considerable amount to help with the clubs cash flow in the short term.

I heard that amount which I do believe and it didn’t come from Twitter as I don’t do it. I do not know if there are any add ons for the future 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ram1988 said:

I've read online on Twitter (not the most reliable of sources) that we received around 400k for Dylan. I don't think that is too bad all things considering in our situation. At least it's a considerable amount to help with the clubs cash flow in the short term.

400k is pretty much the basic compensation for a player that age. Quite bad for someone who has already made 8 first team apps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Ram1988 said:

I've read online on Twitter (not the most reliable of sources) that we received around 400k for Dylan. I don't think that is too bad all things considering in our situation. At least it's a considerable amount to help with the clubs cash flow in the short term.

Not too bad considering. It's a shame that we are always selling youngsters for peanuts though, just read Forest have rejected £18m for Brennan Johnson! If we hadn't have been so royally shafted by Mel, maybe we would have been getting offers in that range for players like Kaide "The Best 16-year-old in the Country" Gordon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, desirelines said:

Not too bad considering. It's a shame that we are always selling youngsters for peanuts though, just read Forest have rejected £18m for Brennan Johnson! If we hadn't have been so royally shafted by Mel, maybe we would have been getting offers in that range for players like Kaide "The Best 16-year-old in the Country" Gordon. 

I think our trouble is that our best young players come under the spotlight at an earlier age than Forest's do because we are playing - and beating - the very best academy teams at both under 23 and under 18 levels. 

The coaches go back to their clubs and talk about our players to their recruitment teams, whereas they just don't encounter the Forest youngsters very often. 

If Forest get a couple of seasons extra to get them onto pro contracts and give them a bit of first team experience, they'll make more out of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...