Development Players: Will somebody help me understand the idea? (5 Viewers)

[Gibbo]

Can people closer to the action, and who see more games than me, help get my head around exactly what, “buying a player for development” means in reality? Here is my sort of understanding
· A stream for providing new players that started in summer 2017 with Hyam. It adds to the existing streams of purchase, out of contract, loan and youth development. Did it exist before then?
· The concept is that we acquire for a minimal or no fee younger players 20-22 years old whom we see as having unfulfilled potential, usually from other clubs higher up the league.
· The expectation is that they will not be regular first teamers for at least 12 months, although could be on the fringes / on the bench quite quickly
· This is a volume model. Unlike regular acquisitions, we will acquire more than we need, some will make it and some will not. But as players they are quite cheap on the wages bill, so you can afford a bigger squad, that covers against injuries to regulars.
· A good but inexperienced young player from a division above can be better value than acquiring established players at our level – who will cost more
· Can a development player be in the first team from the start, like Mason? Isn’t that just a regular acquisition? Sometimes it is not clear.
· Although it hasn’t happened yet, logically they could be sold on at a profit, after “development”.

Players currently in the squad who are (or have been) “development”
In the first team quite quickly because of injuries and now established: Hyam
As above but place not cemented: Bakayoko, Westbrooke
In the squad / subs bench: Pask, Wakefield
U 23’s: Drysdale, Bartlett
Tried and moved on: Allesani, (and one assumes Baka and Westbrooke eventually)
I know I have missed a couple who have come and gone.

 

---

[superskyblue]

I don't think Baka was a development player? Dexter Walters, David Bremang, Sam McCallum and Morgan Williams are others that i can think of off the top of my head.

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

It's a watered down version of PL/championship clubs snaffling up the likes of George Thomas, Ciaran Harries etc (Chelsea doing it by the bucketful) and then loaning them out. The odd one makes it back to the parent club (Tammy Abraham) or gets sold on (Patrick Bamford). The PL clubs can afford to speculate; we can't afford to make too many mistakes, although we will inevitably get the odd dud who won't progress.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Can people closer to the action, and who see more games than me, help get my head around exactly what, “buying a player for development” means in reality? Here is my sort of understanding
· A stream for providing new players that started in summer 2017 with Hyam. It adds to the existing streams of purchase, out of contract, loan and youth development. Did it exist before then?
· The concept is that we acquire for a minimal or no fee younger players 20-22 years old whom we see as having unfulfilled potential, usually from other clubs higher up the league.
· The expectation is that they will not be regular first teamers for at least 12 months, although could be on the fringes / on the bench quite quickly
· This is a volume model. Unlike regular acquisitions, we will acquire more than we need, some will make it and some will not. But as players they are quite cheap on the wages bill, so you can afford a bigger squad, that covers against injuries to regulars.
· A good but inexperienced young player from a division above can be better value than acquiring established players at our level – who will cost more
· Can a development player be in the first team from the start, like Mason? Isn’t that just a regular acquisition? Sometimes it is not clear.
· Although it hasn’t happened yet, logically they could be sold on at a profit, after “development”.

Players currently in the squad who are (or have been) “development”
In the first team quite quickly because of injuries and now established: Hyam
As above but place not cemented: Bakayoko, Westbrooke
In the squad / subs bench: Pask, Wakefield
U 23’s: Drysdale, Bartlett
Tried and moved on: Allesani, (and one assumes Baka and Westbrooke eventually)
I know I have missed a couple who have come and gone.

McCallum is the obvious one

 

[fatso]

It's quite simple really,
We identify young players who we think might have a chance at making the grade, then we take a gamble on them and sign them up before they reach an age where bigger clubs want them.
Then hopefully, in a few years time they play in our first team, look good, and get sold for shitloads of money, which is then used to keep the club in business.
Simples.

 

[covcity4life]

I must say even thoigh mcallum does sometimes seem the weak link its always nice to remember he is just 20! Could have a very good career for us

 

[rob9872]

I must say even thoigh mcallum does sometimes seem the weak link its always nice to remember he is just 20! Could have a very good career for us

19

 

[lifeskyblue]

I must say even thoigh mcallum does sometimes seem the weak link its always nice to remember he is just 20! Could have a very good career for us

Agreed. When you think his first full game of the season saw him stepping in at right back it shows his development as well as the trust robins places in him. Mason had a great start to the season (but was often criticised last year for being a little weak, not supporting forward enough, missed placed passes etc) but unfortunately picked up an injury. McCallum might not be a shining light as yet but he certainly hasn’t looked out of place. The more he plays the better he will get and as he matures both physically and mentally he will as you say have a very good career.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[covcity4life]

19

Even better

Not even hit his prime when we get to prem

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Can people closer to the action, and who see more games than me, help get my head around exactly what, “buying a player for development” means in reality? Here is my sort of understanding
· A stream for providing new players that started in summer 2017 with Hyam. It adds to the existing streams of purchase, out of contract, loan and youth development. Did it exist before then?
· The concept is that we acquire for a minimal or no fee younger players 20-22 years old whom we see as having unfulfilled potential, usually from other clubs higher up the league.
· The expectation is that they will not be regular first teamers for at least 12 months, although could be on the fringes / on the bench quite quickly
· This is a volume model. Unlike regular acquisitions, we will acquire more than we need, some will make it and some will not. But as players they are quite cheap on the wages bill, so you can afford a bigger squad, that covers against injuries to regulars.
· A good but inexperienced young player from a division above can be better value than acquiring established players at our level – who will cost more
· Can a development player be in the first team from the start, like Mason? Isn’t that just a regular acquisition? Sometimes it is not clear.
· Although it hasn’t happened yet, logically they could be sold on at a profit, after “development”.

Players currently in the squad who are (or have been) “development”
In the first team quite quickly because of injuries and now established: Hyam
As above but place not cemented: Bakayoko, Westbrooke
In the squad / subs bench: Pask, Wakefield
U 23’s: Drysdale, Bartlett
Tried and moved on: Allesani, (and one assumes Baka and Westbrooke eventually)
I know I have missed a couple who have come and gone.

I would say it's not mainly talent from higher placed league clubs - it's a mix of a few of those (like Wakefield, Pask, Bartlett, Hyam, Mason, Westbrooke) and those brought in from lower down (Allassani, Bremang, Bosma, Rose, McCallum, Walters, Drysdale, Williams, Newton, Young)

Mason wasn't meant to be in the first team - he was intended to be back up to Brown. But if a player comes in and looks good immediately then why not put them in the team. Or an unforseen injury may mean they get used before you'd ideally want to.

It has sort of existed beforehand, but on a more individual player basis (think Sayoud and Kwame) rather than a policy. That seems to have come about since Viveash has been around and undoubtedly something he's brought in from his Chelsea days but on a much scaled down version. Similar happens in the academy, with youngsters being brought in who've been released by other academies on top of those that progress through our age groups.

Of course they can be sold on after development if someone wants to buy them and are willing to pay more than we think they're worth to the team/squad overall. That could be a nominal fee for someone who doesn't quite make it (although chances are those will more than likely be released at the end of their contract) or a few million if they progress well and become a first team regular.

At the moment our system seems to be a hybrid of Soton's academy from when they were progressing through the leagues and Chelsea's development system, with emphasis starting to move from the former to the latter but if we get another good age group that may shift back.

My fear with it is that we've attracted some youngsters because of the decent chance of progressing to the first team (even if at times it's been due to necessity and budget more than anything) whereas with bringing in a greater volume of players that chance diminishes and so we become a less attractive prospect, even though that opportunity is clearly still there as the likes of Mason and McCallum attest to.

 

[Gibbo]

It's quite simple really,
We identify young players who we think might have a chance at making the grade, then we take a gamble on them and sign them up before they reach an age where bigger clubs want them.
Then hopefully, in a few years time they play in our first team, look good, and get sold for shitloads of money, which is then used to keep the club in business.
Simples.

more succinct than me. But the points of interest in it as a model are

• This new, it started with Hyam. is this correct?
• As yet we haven't sold anybody on and so far none of them have the look of big cash, even if they are good at this level
• Sometimes the expression "development" is used an expression to down play fan's expectations. Actually it's a straight forward new player. I suspect mason and Wakefield are in that camp.

 

[better days]

Jodi Jones came on loan with a view to buy when he was 18 as a development player

 

[Gibbo]

Ok I have deleted Baka from the list and added Walters, whom I had forgotten. I thought Bremang, Williams and McCallum came through youth but am obviously misguided. Where did they come from? Bremang is too young surely.

As regards having too large a squad, there are two things to discount that argument. Firstly injuries show just how quickly a player can get his chance as a sub - after that it is down to the player to impress. Wakefield has had several chances as sub but has not grabbed any of them in the way Hyam did. Secondly, as I know from a friend who is chairman of a 7th tier club that feeds in a Div 2 team, there are hundreds of desperate young players (with pushy parents quite frequently) who will give their eye teeth for the chance to play at our level. Supply well exceeds demand so we should exploit that to the full.

I also wonder whether this might have originated in part at least with our owners, who have this excellent training facility and want to extract as much value as possible. It is not the same as Chelsea, as our preference is that the players do turn out for City - Chelsea know that 99% of there youth squad will not

 

[clint van damme]

more succinct than me. But the points of interest in it as a model are

• This new, it started with Hyam. is this correct?
• As yet we haven't sold anybody on and so far none of them have the look of big cash, even if they are good at this level
• Sometimes the expression "development" is used an expression to down play fan's expectations. Actually it's a straight forward new player. I suspect mason and Wakefield are in that camp.

but some signings are expected to come in a make an immediate impact on the first team, (Godden), others aren't expected to be around the first team squad until they've been worked on by the coaching staff. I'd class the latter as development players.

I'm fairly impressed with the way we've done it so for and it's early days but we've got some young players with real promise.

 

[Gibbo]

No, I am impressed too. I think it is an excellent way to hold a larger squad at Div 1 level. A good young player from a higher league is just as good as and cheaper than some seasoned pro. And easier to be rid of if they don't make it.

 

[skybluesam66]

in the current matchday squad we have
Hyam
McAllum
Westbrooke

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Ok I have deleted Baka from the list and added Walters, whom I had forgotten. I thought Bremang, Williams and McCallum came through youth but am obviously misguided. Where did they come from? Bremang is too young surely.

As regards having too large a squad, there are two things to discount that argument. Firstly injuries show just how quickly a player can get his chance as a sub - after that it is down to the player to impress. Wakefield has had several chances as sub but has not grabbed any of them in the way Hyam did. Secondly, as I know from a friend who is chairman of a 7th tier club that feeds in a Div 2 team, there are hundreds of desperate young players (with pushy parents quite frequently) who will give their eye teeth for the chance to play at our level. Supply well exceeds demand so we should exploit that to the full.

I also wonder whether this might have originated in part at least with our owners, who have this excellent training facility and want to extract as much value as possible. It is not the same as Chelsea, as our preference is that the players do turn out for City - Chelsea know that 99% of there youth squad will not

Bremang from Conquest Academy
Williams from Mickleover Sports
McCallum from Herne Bay (although technically at the time he was academy age it was as a development player as it was pro terms)

 

[Hobo]

Not a new concept. Ian Wallace and Gary Gillespie were two who broke through into the first team very quickly, which they weren't expected to do. Of course it was known as the Rederve Team then. The days of the no 12, one sub.

 

[ccfcway]

Bowe Bosma !

 

[larry_david]

Ponticelli came from Strachan foundation... Was he the first of this new model?

 

[wingy]

Not a new concept. Ian Wallace and Gary Gillespie were two who broke through into the first team very quickly, which they weren't expected to do. Of course it was known as the Rederve Team then. The days of the no 12, one sub.

Deisel?

 

[Gazolba]

I must say even thoigh mcallum does sometimes seem the weak link its always nice to remember he is just 20! Could have a very good career for us

Age is no barrier to good players.
Look how good Michael Owen and Wayne Rooney were at 17.
Pele played in a World Cup Final at 17 (and scored two goals). He scored a hat-trick in the semi-final.
Of course, those were outstanding players and players mature at different ages.
But if you are good enough, you are old enough.

 

[COVKIDSNEVERQUIT]

It's quite simple really,
We identify young players who we think might have a chance at making the grade, then we take a gamble on them and sign them up before they reach an age where bigger clubs want them.
Then hopefully, in a few years time they play in our first team, look good, and get sold for shitloads of money, which is then used to keep the club in business.
Simples.

 

[Gibbo]

• To single out occasional instances in the past like Gillespie, Wallace and even Jones misses the point. We have always had instances like that from time to time. But now there is a concerted programme
• This programme is based on the assumption that a %, maybe quite a high one, will not make it. After all in Saturday's team only two were development - McCallum and Westbrooke, and both these can expect to lose their places. It is early days but thus far only Hyam is established.
• People are right to spot the Chelsea influence. It is not the same, but is clearly derived from it.
• The net is clearly cast very wide - Herne Bay!! Who the hell are Conquest Academy?? Which means resources are devoted to it.

The team on Saturday came from 6 different strands. This is good.
Youth - Shipley
Loan - Walsh
Out of contract - Marosi & McFadzean
Purchase - Godden, Rose,
Not sure whether we paid anything or not - Jobello, Hiwula & Dabo (and small beer if we did)
Development - McCallum & Westbrooke

From 2018-19 = 4 - Shipley, Westbrooke, McCallum and Hiwula.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Major successes

McCallum
Mason

• To single out occasional instances in the past like Gillespie, Wallace and even Jones misses the point. We have always had instances like that from time to time. But now there is a concerted programme
• This programme is based on the assumption that a %, maybe quite a high one, will not make it. After all in Saturday's team only two were development - McCallum and Westbrooke, and both these can expect to lose their places. It is early days but thus far only Hyam is established.
• People are right to spot the Chelsea influence. It is not the same, but is clearly derived from it.
• The net is clearly cast very wide - Herne Bay!! Who the hell are Conquest Academy?? Which means resources are devoted to it.

The team on Saturday came from 6 different strands. This is good.
Youth - Shipley
Loan - Walsh
Out of contract - Marosi & McFadzean
Purchase - Godden, Rose,
Not sure whether we paid anything or not - Jobello, Hiwula & Dabo (and small beer if we did)
Development - McCallum & Westbrooke

From 2018-19 = 4 - Shipley, Westbrooke, McCallum and Hiwula.

rose was a free out of contract

 

[Gibbo]

Major successes

McCallum
Mason

rose was a free out of contract

even better