Buying talent

[BlueLyon 9,359]

Just recently we were linked with another u-21 player, Van Ginkel.

I personaly love the new transfer policy of buying young players like Kdb, Courtois, Hazard,...and making academy players like Chalobah or Ake.

But our team has no coach to give these players a real chance. Why do we buy Ginkel if there is Kdb who is (possibly) going to be loaned again? The loans are good but players need to grow together and if these players are ever going to be starters, they need to get into team fast. We will then have like 10 under 21 talents and how will team work?

On other side all these players from Lukaku, Ginkel or Kdb mean nothing if we will buy Bender, Cavani or Modric. They wont get real chance until age 25 and they will leave.

We might not going to buy top players (likeCavani) and these talents will actualy get chance. An exciting project indeed. But that will end our title chances for at least a year.

My point is that why we buy such talents if they never get real chance and we keep loaning them?

[Jase 43,479]

This is something that bothers me TBH. I know the club is now adopting the policy of buying young and upcoming talents but at times looking through all the transfer stories, it feels as though we are just buying them for the sake it as opposed to have any real actual planning behind buying these players to form a proper squad. At the moment, our team has so many youngsters and we continue buy even more without looking to have a right balance of youth and experience in them. Been saying this numerous times, we need to get the more senior (and quality) players, like 25 to 30 y/o, who can come in and straight away do the job for us especially in key areas of the team that needs to be fixed but isn't exactly been done right now. Also through this way, it will lead to us a smooth path that by the time those players reach their 30s or around that, the young players we have now can come in and take their place for the team. Continuing to buy tons of youngsters will lead us to nowhere next time. Most of them probably won't be happy being rotated with others, especially when they need to play week in week out to develop, and would want to leave.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

I would prefer 2-3 talents that will suceed instead of 10 from which more than half wont even get a chance...

[dumps 284]

I totally agree. we arent good with youth. and you cant even say we are doing it for buisness because we are paying top dollar for these young players that we most likely wont make back.

you're right about the loaning system. maybe one full season is good for development, but ideally maybe half a season loaned out, then used off the bench or in rotation will really help settle them in to the TEAM rather than just develop them as an individual. We have never really been that good at getting youth in to our team. Maybe its hte pressures managers feel from Roman - he always wants a top performance, playing a youngster adds a risk as they are not going to be consistent. Unless tehy are a really talented player like Hazard, they dont really stand much of a chance and thats a real shame. players like KdB, Lukaku and Piazon have real promising talent that should see them having a part in our current squad, but who is going to risk taking out some of our bigger names to give them a chance?! frustrating as funk!

[Reddish-Blue 2,341]

It's great to see the club invest into youngsters in the 20-23 age group...but they all need regular football to develop their skill sets...and I doubt we're gonna give all of them a chance at the same time.

As other posters in this thread have mentioned, we lack the more experienced players in the 26-29 age group..which is generally the age where players start to fully understand their game..and 1-2 of them begin showing leadership on the pitch.

Also, by signing players like van Ginkel...doesn't that effect the mindset of our own youngsters like Chalobah or RLC...as they know another youngster is blocking their path to the first team.

Eventually the youngsters will get frustrated with a lack of opportunities/too many loan spells...and they will ask to leave...particularly when they see their mates of a similar age playing fairly regularly at other clubs.

[Tomo 21,733]

Also, by signing players like van Ginkel...doesn't that effect the mindset of our own youngsters like Chalobah or RLC...as they know another youngster is blocking their path to the first team.

No, if players are good enough, they make it, simple.

When Iniesta was 20, he was still to properly break into the Barca team and saw them sign Deco, in theory that should have blocked his path, but did it?

[English Freak 456]

No, if players are good enough, they make it, simple.

When Iniesta was 20, he was still to properly break into the Barca team and saw them sign Deco, in theory that should have blocked his path, but did it?

Iniesta was highly regarded in the La Masia setup...and due to Barca's strong youth policy, they elevated him to the first team. Iniesta was also helped by the fact that Rijkaard put faith into youngsters.

[Strike 7,212]

A problem with continously buying young players is that each player needs a transition time before hitting peak performance level. That is lesser in the case of 24-28

[nono 791]

This is one of the more depressing aspects of the club.

[nono 791]

Hazard and Oscar are very young too, and they can both be with us for at least 8 years or so. We have done a poor job though of getting players from the academy into the first team. Don't see that getting any better with Mourinho coming in. I remember he used to play the first team in the Carling Cup. *shudders*

[Spike 12,049]

The gamble and pay off could be fantastic. Keep buying 20 year olds and eventually one is going to break through to the first team. That's over 10 years of playing time. Whereas a 28 year old can give about 5 years.

When it comes down to it:
The potential of 10+ years vs The guarantee of around 5 years

[Tomo 21,733]

Hazard and Oscar are very young too, and they can both be with us for at least 8 years or so. We have done a poor job though of getting players from the academy into the first team. Don't see that getting any better with Mourinho coming in. I remember he used to play the first team in the Carling Cup. *shudders*

Because Hazard and Oscar are better than any of the players in our academy, can you imagine where we would have finished if we "gave Kakuta a chance" instead of signing Hazard?

The reason Jose used little youth last time is because they were shit, infact the one semi decent one (Robert Huth) Jose used 36 times in two season's. Now when you consider Huth isn't actually that good, had injury problems and we had arguably at the time the three best centre half's in the Premier League infront of him, i would say the fact he wrapped up those amount of appearances was a minor miracle.

Iniesta was highly regarded in the La Masia setup...and due to Barca's strong youth policy, they elevated him to the first team. Iniesta was also helped by the fact that Rijkaard put faith into youngsters.

That's because Barca have strong youth players, upto a couple of years ago we haven't had that for a long time.

[Beepu 1,714]

Chelsea has never been the club to promote youth from academy at a regular basis, but thats because as @ said, our academy were not that good.

Now we can see that our academy has come a long way and produces players that shows great potential, like Chalobah. But we still bought alot of young players and will probably keep doing that.

It's true that we need balance between youth and experience, unlike Arsenal. But buying young cheap players has lower risk than buying established players who would have higher transfer fees and wages. Young players also have resell value, someone like KDB was bought for 7m can now be sold for at least 15m(I am against selling him btw) that is double the price we bought him.

I dont mind buying young players as long as there are experience as well on the first team. And as long as those who truly shows promise to be given a chance, if they are good enough they will make it but I want them to make it in Chelsea.

[Yeboii 1,844]

Buying talent hasnt done any bad yet. We either make good money or get a new talented player to play in the first team.

Stockpiling on young talent has done worlds for Porto.

[Madmax 9,219]

It's an FFP consequence. Young players cost less in transfers and wages, they come under little pressure to succeed and the club has the bonus of selling them on at a decent price even if they don't become starters. If they do, you obviously hit the jackpot anyway.

Regarding buying youngsters instead of using ones from our academy, 2 things - in a historical sense our academy hasn't produced Chelsea calibre youngsters till the last couple of years and secondly, if they're good enough, they will get in. What I agree we can improve upon is that even if someone like Todd Kane isn't good enough to be a regular starter, he's a better rotational option than Ferreira, who pockets immense wages without providing a massive upgrade in his (rare) opportunities.

Competition is never bad, it brings out the best or worst (Stoch) in players, which is useful to know if you want to keep them around.

[DDA 9,689]

Stockpiling on young talent has done worlds for Porto

Yea but Porto push their exceptional young talents into the first team so the world can see how good they are. Then their value rises in correlation to the inflated market and Porto makes a huge profit. Unfortunately we haven't really done that yet.

Imagine if Kevin De Bruyne had played this season with us and had been as successful as he has been in Germany. He would be worth more than the reported sum's of money that Dortmund are prepared to pay for him, at least a good 5-10 million pounds more.

[The only place to be 11,313]

My point is that why we buy such talents if they never get real chance and we keep loaning them?

We bought De Bruyne for about £7 million. He's now worth at least double that and is one of the best young players in Europe.

We bought Courtois for around £8 million. He's now worth about double that and is probably the best young keeper around.

We're doing this so we have options, rather than waiting until these players are 'stars' (like Cavani, Bender or Modric) and cost four or five times as much.

Eventually the youngsters will get frustrated with a lack of opportunities/too many loan spells...and they will ask to leave...particularly when they see their mates of a similar age playing fairly regularly at other clubs.

I don't think that chimes with how footballers think in the slightest. A 17 year old's career has basically been beset by rejection and competition since he was 9. They understand that they have to claw and scratch for a shirt and that's good preparation for first-team football. I doubt very much they would throw their hands up and ask to leave, and if they do then they probably aren't the type of player we want anyway.

[SinineUltra 1,170]

A huge factor for lack of playing time and trust in our youngsters comes from the fact that we don't have a so called Chelsea B in a lower division like Barcelona, Bayern, Real Madrid have. Would the FA allow such policy, we would have a B team playing in fairly high intensity, molding them into the players who would fit the Chelsea's system. Implement the possibility of such reserve teams and English youth system would be on the rise.

I'll add one more thing. The purchases of de Bruyne, Lukaku, Courtois, Azpi, Oscar, Hazard are all successful in my eyes. Let's not jump to conclusion that the club is certain to loan the first three names out instantly again for the next season - we simply don't know what it going on behind the scenes really. Especially looking at the transfer market where every top name is rumored to be already sold to our rivals and we are left with mere scrapes.