Chelsea have long used their academy as a source or revenue. They had a very strong stable of youth, few of which got a chance but a lot sold on to generate decent revenue.
I think it is the sale of the masses from the academy, rather than the odd individual quality HG player, that is the most important function of the academy. The aim might to make 11 Harry Kanes, but the reality is that such successes are very rare at PL level.
If you cannot produce a star, at least produce half a dozen decent players who other teams will pay good money for.
Brighton tend to make good money on players they bought in on the cheap rather than academy products.
A youngster getting a bit of game time for a big club increases their value a lot, as long as the hype can be produced. Also getting the loans right. Look at Rhian Brewster, a couple of cup games and a half decent spell in the championship and they mugged Sheffield United off for a fortune.
Our youth academy has been poor for years but finally we seem to have turned a corner. Top of the U21s and U18's league. A couple of youth trophies last season. Quite a few players are representing England at youth level.
I hope next season we start to see some lads getting more chances in the 1st team. Or continue to develop with good loans like Phillips and Devine.
I think that for bigger clubs, the academies become more about making money than finding talent.
It is very difficult to introduce kids into a team if you want to also be successful.
Players often do not get the game time in a pressurised league situation to truly develop, while loans are hit and miss and we lack the control over their coaching.
Its more a case of creating half a dozen decent players, making a bit of money from them and every now and then a real gems emerges who is more easily brought into the first team squad.
What i also do not like is there is a reluctance to sell HG players just because they are HG. I often switch it around in my head and think, if we wanted a 4 choice CM, would we go out and buy Skipp. We wouldn't yet we are willing to hang on to him just because he is an academy player. We see lots of names, seem to loan them out endlessly but rarely do the make the break through.
Nice OP - where did you get that link?
Wonder if loan moves are included. God knows how much we've made from that.
Brighton tend to make good money on players they bought in on the cheap rather than academy products.
——
This for RB Leipzig as well (to OP’s surprise to them not being on top of academy players sold. Thinking about most of their young players they usually bring them in very young, as opposed to academy products
I saw another article recently also essentially highlighting how much we’ve made from academy sales. €335m in last 10 years, out of €1.3b in player sales. That €335m is more than some PL clubs have made from sales overall in same period.
At an average of €8m per academy player sold, a poster above is right..it’s not just the big players sold although we have a few of them it’s also a lot of the ones you can at least produce to a half decent standard to still sell on at 5-10m, which of course is still 5-10m of pure profit. The Chelsea academy graduates of 2014-2019 are still underrated / understated just how many of them have made it into top flight football.
comment by Vorsprung durch Poch (U1641)
posted 3 hours, 48 minutes ago
Brighton tend to make good money on players they bought in on the cheap rather than academy products.
——
This for RB Leipzig as well (to OP’s surprise to them not being on top of academy players sold. Thinking about most of their young players they usually bring them in very young, as opposed to academy products
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember the RB structure means players and their values can be manipulated across the family of clubs. No specific accusation, just saying.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Academies
Page 1 of 1
posted on 5/2/24
Chelsea have long used their academy as a source or revenue. They had a very strong stable of youth, few of which got a chance but a lot sold on to generate decent revenue.
I think it is the sale of the masses from the academy, rather than the odd individual quality HG player, that is the most important function of the academy. The aim might to make 11 Harry Kanes, but the reality is that such successes are very rare at PL level.
If you cannot produce a star, at least produce half a dozen decent players who other teams will pay good money for.
posted on 5/2/24
Brighton tend to make good money on players they bought in on the cheap rather than academy products.
A youngster getting a bit of game time for a big club increases their value a lot, as long as the hype can be produced. Also getting the loans right. Look at Rhian Brewster, a couple of cup games and a half decent spell in the championship and they mugged Sheffield United off for a fortune.
posted on 5/2/24
Our youth academy has been poor for years but finally we seem to have turned a corner. Top of the U21s and U18's league. A couple of youth trophies last season. Quite a few players are representing England at youth level.
I hope next season we start to see some lads getting more chances in the 1st team. Or continue to develop with good loans like Phillips and Devine.
posted on 5/2/24
I think that for bigger clubs, the academies become more about making money than finding talent.
It is very difficult to introduce kids into a team if you want to also be successful.
Players often do not get the game time in a pressurised league situation to truly develop, while loans are hit and miss and we lack the control over their coaching.
Its more a case of creating half a dozen decent players, making a bit of money from them and every now and then a real gems emerges who is more easily brought into the first team squad.
What i also do not like is there is a reluctance to sell HG players just because they are HG. I often switch it around in my head and think, if we wanted a 4 choice CM, would we go out and buy Skipp. We wouldn't yet we are willing to hang on to him just because he is an academy player. We see lots of names, seem to loan them out endlessly but rarely do the make the break through.
posted on 5/2/24
Nice OP - where did you get that link?
posted on 5/2/24
Wonder if loan moves are included. God knows how much we've made from that.
posted on 5/2/24
Brighton tend to make good money on players they bought in on the cheap rather than academy products.
——
This for RB Leipzig as well (to OP’s surprise to them not being on top of academy players sold. Thinking about most of their young players they usually bring them in very young, as opposed to academy products
posted on 5/2/24
I saw another article recently also essentially highlighting how much we’ve made from academy sales. €335m in last 10 years, out of €1.3b in player sales. That €335m is more than some PL clubs have made from sales overall in same period.
At an average of €8m per academy player sold, a poster above is right..it’s not just the big players sold although we have a few of them it’s also a lot of the ones you can at least produce to a half decent standard to still sell on at 5-10m, which of course is still 5-10m of pure profit. The Chelsea academy graduates of 2014-2019 are still underrated / understated just how many of them have made it into top flight football.
posted on 5/2/24
comment by Vorsprung durch Poch (U1641)
posted 3 hours, 48 minutes ago
Brighton tend to make good money on players they bought in on the cheap rather than academy products.
——
This for RB Leipzig as well (to OP’s surprise to them not being on top of academy players sold. Thinking about most of their young players they usually bring them in very young, as opposed to academy products
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember the RB structure means players and their values can be manipulated across the family of clubs. No specific accusation, just saying.
Page 1 of 1