Punishing the Providers of Opportunity

“By fining us this amount the EFL is effectively saying that promoting young talent is only acceptable if they’re with an EPPP (top-tier youth set-up) club, and they are depriving their own member clubs’ young player access to first-team football”  

Gary Sweet, Luton Town’s chief executive

Last week talksport’s Kick Off show had a "youth development evening". This usually coincides with moments of downtime in the football world, which while not meant as a criticism, does feel like ‘youth development’ is used as a nice gesture to show interest, or a stick to beat the England team with when a result goes badly. But in fairness this show was pretty good. 

They invited on Ged Roddy, one of the key developers of the EPPP for Academies in England and Wales, Chris Casper who is the club support manager for the Premier League and Andrew Mills, previously chief executive of Brentford, who admitted that he wasn’t sold on the new EPPP guidelines and vision and advised Brentford to consider closing a few years back, a decision they have now done (check out this article I wrote about the implications of a decision like this.)

A system for good players, or developing great one's?

Roddy spent a lot of time talking about the importance of making sure the players within the environment of Academies are well prepared for when they leave the game, at whatever point that is. As we know the chance of becoming a professional, and one who plays past 3-4 years after becoming a professional, is not high. Therefore he wants to consider what happens to the thousands of lads who don’t make it. While he was genuinely thoughtful and sincere in his wish to make sure the Academies help all it’s players, there was a sense that he cared more about those who don’t make it, then producing players who do. 

If you have a system where 1% of 10,000 makes it, there’s something seriously wrong surely? So you either cut the numbers in the system, or produce better players or better pathways? And before we look at those possibilities, if you’re wanting a better future for young players when they come out the game, why not promote scholars to take A Levels and not the B-Tech in sport which they do now. And why not make sure young pro’s are given the choice at least to join a university course and gain a degree. I’m sure then when these players are 21 years old, they have a greater chance of making something for themselves out the game? Unfortunately for all the talk of education being important for these young players, it’s still not valued highly enough. And that is a real shame and failing of clubs and the EPPP.

Now in terms of helping players becoming professional’s. Yes the EPPP has certainly sought to raise standards and organisational aspects in Academies. It has certainly become more professional, and that is a good thing. Truth is there’s some very talented players in the Academy system, where clubs from Cat 1-3 are producing some very good talent. Yet there’s a ceiling issue. That when players get to 17 years of age, the progression upwards becomes harder. Some players aren’t ready for that step to senior football, and the U21/23 development squads help them ‘stay in the system’, which is a massive thing for a lot of young players. Deciding to take just 1 or 2 players from your U18's each year seems very limiting for your chances of producing players. What if this was 5, 6 or 7 each time? Whereas it seems crazy to judge a player at U16, it's the same at U18. So it promotes those players who are early developers, leaving those with great potential often behind (as I've written about here). Dropping out the system makes it very hard to get back in. Of course for some players dropping into semi-pro football may be just what they need and they propel themselves back to the pro game through this route. But for the majority keeping these players in the system will give them a chance to keep improving. 

Bridging the gap between youth and senior football

One of the major problems however is that many of these young players could play senior football and do well within that environment. Yet they are being denied these opportunities and are being 'stored' and 'hoarded' in these development squads, which I believe on the most part is stunting their development. It’s not just the top clubs who are doing this but they have a lot of players on their books who they are just ticking along. These players may be doing good things and their youth sides may be winning trophies. But these are very talented youngsters who aren’t playing senior football. And this is the problem with the EPPP and why so many aren’t making the grade. 

We appear to struggle to turn good into great in England, the lack of world class players we have highlights this. However it’s because of a lack of opportunity where very talented young players just aren’t playing enough senior level games at that window between 17-21 to help them push further forward. 

The EPPP’s problem is that it sought to categorise the Academies, based mainly on finances and facilities more so than actual development of players. The hope was to funnel the best players from cateogory 2 and 3 Academies up the pyramid where the best rise to the top together, playing and working with the ‘best’ "developers" of talent in the country. On paper it makes sense. Yet when these so called ‘best’ developers are the clubs where players are struggling to find a way into senior football, how does this make them the best? Because they aggressively recruit young players? Hoard them in their development squads and win youth cups? That’s not development is it? But there is real talent within these squads, yet they are not getting the chance. 

So who is then? The clubs who either 1) value youth development and want to make sure they see their Academy players progress. For example Southampton. Or 2) the clubs that need to produce players because they don’t have the money to buy in quality and if they can produce some good players they could make some good money for the club to keep going. Examples Birmingham City, MK Dons, Charlton and Crewe to name a few. What’s the link between these clubs? They are Football League clubs. 

When Southampton were producing and bringing through Bale, Oxlade-Chamberlain and Lallana they were a League One side. Coincidence? Those players made the club over £40m. Not a bad investment in young players is it? 

Two of the brightest talents in the Premier League right now are Nathan Redmond and Demarai Gray, both come through Birmingham City who were willing to give these ‘kids’ a chance at 16/17 years of age. And now look at them. 

What about Dele Alli? Came through MK Dons, debut at 16 years of age and played 60+ games for the club by the time he was 18. Now he’s regarded as England’s brightest young talent. I don’t hear Loftus-Cheek or Lewis Baker at Chelsea being regarded as such? Even though their potential a few years ago seemed higher. Opportunity is key. 

Credit to van Gaal and Man United for pushing Rashford into the side at 18, who has paid back that opportunity. Whether because of need or want is irrelevant, he took his chance and hasn’t looked back since. 

I do think that the top clubs have such big squads and so many young players in their books, that sometimes they have too much to choose from. It also means that when an opportunity comes up, they don’t get the chance as someone else will fill in due to squad size. Smaller squads would provide more chances for young players. As Gary Neville said, he was fortunate that the team needed a right back to cover the injured Paul Parker, and he took that chance 100%. Had he not been given the chance who knows what would have happened. 

What's happened with Isiah Brown at Chelsea? He was on the brink of becoming a regular in West Brom’s 1^st team yet the allure of moving to Chelsea meant he became slighter richer, yet his progression as a player, playing senior football has diminished  He's now on loan at Rotherham. Who knows what he could have been doing he had stayed at West Brom. 

Moving too soon can come at a cost

And this is where the issue of moving too soon comes up. Had Dele Alli moved as a young teenager to a Chelsea, Man City or Arsenal, like many young players do now, would he be the player we see today? I don’t think so. And yet so many are leaving Football League Academies, or even mid-level Premier League clubs and joining the ‘big boys’ at a young age. Yet is this helping them? Short term perhaps. 

Short term they get boot deals, their families are given houses. It’s hard to resist offers half a million plus when your son is just 13 or 14 years old. These players are offered pro deals at that age also, guaranteeing them a career at least until their 18-20. It must be hard to resist and say no to. And they will experience great facilities, play with really good players, be very well looked after. 

But when you look at it, it seems that the route to becoming a regular professional player playing every week, is to come in through a Football League side. Why? Because they need to produce players as their squads are smaller and the financial incentives of producing a player are higher and necessary. There's that word "need" again. These clubs have the 'need' and 'want' aspect, which the top clubs just don’t have. The rich Premier League clubs don’t need to produce young players. They want more finished products, who most often are ready at 23+. And the irony is that when a young player who has come through a top club's Academy gets to 23, he hasn't experienced enough football to be at the level where he can now play for that club. Look at the development of Josh McEachran at Chelsea and what happened to him between 17-21. So much was expected of him yet in those key years he suffered. 

So why be a young player at a top club? Yes the money may be good and tempting. But go and play between the ages of 17-22. Become a regular for a lower league side. Move abroad and play. And then see what happens when they come in for you after you’ve proved yourself at senior football. That’s what Alli did. Even De Bruyne did that, who would not be the player he is now had he stayed at Chelsea. 

Players need to play, they need to do to progress and improve. And senior football and experience is different to the world of U18/21/23. It’s ‘real’. The expectations, playing, learning and listening to experienced pro’s and the demands and pressures from the fans on a daily and weekly basis. That is where you’ll find out if a young player has what’s needed. Not just with what he does with the ball but the mentality and strength of character. The Academy world in the 17-21 phase is too safe for the players, not demanding enough and not enough pressure on these players. We wonder why we aren’t producing enough players. That’s why. 

Punishing the providers of opportunity 

And then we see that the Football League fine and critique our their own clubs for playing young players in a cup compeititon? A competition which you’ve allowed Category 1/Premier League sides to enter U23 sides? Yet when a Football League does it they are fined? And it’s not like they embarrassed themselves is it? Luton progressed out their group and their ‘young’ side beat Gillingham and West Brom’s U23’s. And instead of praising them for giving their young players a chance, instead they are fined? Ridiculous! 

The same for Portsmouth who were fined £15k, while Bradford, Blackpool, Bristol Rovers, Charlton, Fleetwood, MK Dons, Millwall, Peterborough, Sheffield United and Southend were given a £3k fine. Talk about double standards. 

The EPPP may think that "elite development" will happen at the Premier League sides and in the Category 1 clubs, and while I’m not saying quality young players aren’t coming out of these Academies, the opportunities to progress in the key years where a young player needs consistent senior football to push on, are minimal. 

It’s the Football League where youth development will continue to ‘work’ and produce. However when clubs are fined for giving youth a chance, or clubs in the Football League think that closing down their Academies is the best solution, then you have to wonder if the EPPP creators really thought this through. 

The way it is now doesn’t represent value for money. Due to the limited compensation which is offered when a Cat 1 or 2 come in for a player it makes the whole development aspect frustrating. The EPPP is simply a model for the richer Cat 1’s to come and get the best players at lower Academies for minimal amounts. Surely it should be more the case that the rich clubs compensate more to these clubs? Enabling them to remain financial stable, to justify their work in developing young players and to see a benefit of keeping your Academy doors open. 

The fact it doesn't work like this makes you wonder if the creators of the EPPP wanted clubs to shut their doors, to reduce the numbers of players 'in the system'. On one hand they have a point, but their actions and decisions looks like they may be killing the lifeblood of England’s youth development pathway. And that is not good for England's future. 

The Whitehouse Address @The_W_Address