03 Jul 2015 12:19:18
With the signing of yet another promising foreign youngster in Bobby Adekanye, it made me think, why hasn't any of the foreign youngster we've signed over the last 15 years made it? Are our foreign scouts just poor at finding the right players, are the people making the decision to sign the recommended players poor at judging these players, or are we just poor at developing these talents. I'm leaning more towards the scouts because we seem to be fairly good at developing the British talent. The list of foreign talents we've signed for the academy that we all get excited about only for them to be released 3-4 years later is staggering and surely someone at the club at some point has to take a step backwards and say, what the hell are we doing wrong?
{Ed001's Note - it is the development, they are not getting the support they need. It is impossible to compare it with how British talent gets on as they are not moving to a completely new culture.}
03 Jul 2015 12:53:50
Yea ok fair comment about comparing them to British talent, I can fully appreciate that moving to a new country, with different culture, weather, food, etc, etc is very difficult. So every coach we've had over the last 15 or so years (or since Wenger set the trend of buying young foreign talents and developing them) has been useless at this? What are we doing so wrong that Wenger and his coaches do so right? Given our poor record of developing these foreign talents is it really worth us bothering, should we just concentrate on British talent?
03 Jul 2015 13:46:06
I can't think of too many young talents arsenal have done that with in 15 years? Fabregas? Szcheney? Persie maybe? Given wenger had loads of connections in France when he came on board he was well positioned to poach there's not a vast amount. Most of big success were bought.
03 Jul 2015 14:31:39
I think you are doing Mr Wenger and his coaches a massive disservice in stating that he has only developed Fabregas, Szcezny and Van Persie. How about Vieira, Anelka, Clichy, Denilson, Diaby Bendtner, Flamini, Fabianski and currently Coquelin, Bellerin and Gnabry. Now ok not all of them have been amazing or world beaters (injuries and poor attitudes have played their part with some) but that is vastly better than us!
We had a French manager who had better connections to the French youth than Wenger, remember Gerard Houllier, he worked with the France National squad at virtually every level and played a major role in setting up the Clairefontaine academy which was rather successful.
03 Jul 2015 14:36:11
Scratch that persie definitely wasn't!
03 Jul 2015 14:57:35
Scarface nearly every player you named were bought at a decent age 18 +. Most of them had already been developed to a high level elsewhere. They had already made first team appearances for their prior clubs.Fabregas is the only 'youngster' that I can think of which was actually developed from a young age. The likes of coutihno was bought at the same age as Viera so why not give us credit for him then??
03 Jul 2015 14:59:15
And are you joking about Bender? Lol most clubs he played for will claim they had never heard of him rather than hold there heads in shame for having him!
03 Jul 2015 15:11:04
If I were advising any youngster about joining the academy, I'd strongly advice them not to join Liverpool. The club is so cluelessly managed, it is unbelievable that at such a level of football it is allowed to happen. Instances like not following up youngster's development and not looking for suitable clubs to send them on loan are really curious at such a level. Fitness also seems to be an issue given the number of serious injuries at the academy. Add to that the fact that the manager does not seem to have a clue about giving youngsters a chance as part of their development.
03 Jul 2015 15:23:59
I don't think Bendtner is a good player, but hey, the man is a professional football player and has played for Arsenal, Wolfsburg, Juventus, Sunderland, Birmingham and the Denmark national team, so he must be doing something right? A much better career than some of the talent we have signed and over the years that were supposed to be the next blah blah blah and the future of our club!
The point I am trying to make is that our record of signing and developing young foreign talent (15-20) years old is very poor, and I can't help but wonder if that volume of money and time would have been better spent developing British talent.
03 Jul 2015 15:27:49
I agree to a point Kawabanga. I was just stating that you can't compare what wenger did in buying 20 year old first team players with developing a 15 year old.
03 Jul 2015 17:02:22
He did not develop Vieira in any way. Vieira was already a beast as a teenager at AS Cannes, the same academy that gave us Zizou and one of the best academies in France at the time. He signed at AC Milan for big money but couldn't get a game so Wenger brought him over and gave him his chance. That's all.
03 Jul 2015 17:57:31
Absolute nonsense Redohio, yes Vieira was a very talented youngster at Cannes hence why AC Milan signed him, but he was very raw and far from the finished article he ended up as. There has never been a finished article at 20 years old, and there never will be, you are still learning and developing at that age and to suggest that Wenger and his coaching staff played no part in developing him into the immense player he became is farcical!
03 Jul 2015 20:25:55
Wrong again, genius! He was already a very good player way beyond his years. All he couldn't do was get a game at Milan because of the big stars ahead of him in a pretty poor team at the time. His talent was never in doubt. All he needed was a chance and a run of games which he got with Wenger, just as Studge who was already a very good player, needed games and a coach's confidence to flourish which he has gotten with BR. So is BR responsible for Studge's development the? NO! So Wenger cannot be given credit for that, either. Get it? Good! I respect your opinion and I agree to disagree.
03 Jul 2015 21:18:29
Dear God redohio you don't half spout some nonsense! So everyone knew Vieira was one of the best midfielders in waiting and that all he needed was first team football. Total nonsense yet again GENIUS! So he'd have become one of the best midfielders in the world if he'd moved to let's say Blackpool under Sam Allardyce in 1996! No of course he wouldn't, he developed into one of the best midfielders in world football because yes he had natural ability and was built like a proverbial, but it took Arsene Wenger and his coaching staff to mould him and harness all the raw potential he had. To say anything else is pathetic!
If everyone knew Vieira was going to become one of the best midfielders in the world regardless of coaching then please explain to me why AC Milan let him go for just £3.5m and why it was only Arsenal and Ajax that were interested in him?
Comparing developing a 20 year old Vieira with only 51 first team games under his belt to a 23 year old Sturridge with 96 first team games under his belt (in the Prem) is absolutely stupid and pointless! Though I'm sure if you asked Sturridge he'd probably say that Rodgers has helped his development, if anything in that he's shown faith in him when others haven't!
03 Jul 2015 21:39:43
Also just realised you called AC Milan's 1995/96 team pretty poor! Oh dear you really are clueless! AC had a midfield of Albertini, Savicevic, Donadoni, Lentini, Locatelli, Ambrosini and Zvonomir Boban! Not to mention Rossi in goal, Panucci at RB, Maldini at LB, Desailly and Baresi at CB and Weah and Baggio up front!
P.S. They won the Serie A that year too, not bad for a pretty poor team!
GENIUS!