Join TSR now and chat about whatever you’re intoSign up now
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Chelsea should walk the league next year and I think they will.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    No, we really won't.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sevchenko)
    I didn't say you did. I just asked a simple question.
    Lukaku might be the rest aren't.
    I'm not sure if the rules are the player must have been here for 3 whole years before they're 21. I.E between the age of 18-21. Or if it is 3 seasons. Of which this will be his third.

    But we have the home grown Chelsea players in Terry/Betrand/Blackmand (assume will be 3rd choice) and a few other younger player.
    Then Cole/Lampard and any other youth team player will meet home grown.

    Think Piazon could make home grown status. Ake will, obviously neither of these two will yet but in a year or two. Expect Ruben Loftus-Cheek to be named in the 25 man squad too to meet the demands but Lukaku wouldn't have to be named.

    I have no concerns about HG players now or in the future.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PotPon)
    Chelsea should walk the league next year and I think they will.
    That's not going to happen. I expect the title next season but I don't think it'll be that easy. Can see us, city and united getting around 85-95 points.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tweek)
    Lukaku might be the rest aren't.
    I'm not sure if the rules are the player must have been here for 3 whole years before they're 21. I.E between the age of 18-21. Or if it is 3 seasons. Of which this will be his third.

    But we have the home grown Chelsea players in Terry/Betrand/Blackmand (assume will be 3rd choice) and a few other younger player.
    Then Cole/Lampard and any other youth team player will meet home grown.

    Think Piazon could make home grown status. Ake will, obviously neither of these two will yet but in a year or two. Expect Ruben Loftus-Cheek to be named in the 25 man squad too to meet the demands but Lukaku wouldn't have to be named.

    I have no concerns about HG players now or in the future.
    English homegrown is a player that has spent 3 years an english club between the age of 16-21.

    Club trained homegrown is a player that has spent 3 years at Chelsea between the age of 16-21, excluding loan periods.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tweek)
    Lukaku might be the rest aren't.
    I'm not sure if the rules are the player must have been here for 3 whole years before they're 21. I.E between the age of 18-21. Or if it is 3 seasons. Of which this will be his third.


    But we have the home grown Chelsea players in Terry/Betrand/Blackmand (assume will be 3rd choice) and a few other younger player.
    Then Cole/Lampard and any other youth team player will meet home grown.


    Think Piazon could make home grown status. Ake will, obviously neither of these two will yet but in a year or two. Expect Ruben Loftus-Cheek to be named in the 25 man squad too to meet the demands but Lukaku wouldn't have to be named.


    I have no concerns about HG players now or in the future.

    Ofc Chelsea have no problem meeting the home grown quota, its the quality of the home grown talent which says alot about what's going on at Chelsea.


    Chelsea are an top English team, they have a duty to produce top English talent, all English clubs do but Chelsea have the money to provide top quality coaching and facilities for English youth players. We'll never see another "Mr. Chelsea" from Chelsea's academy. Most Chelsea fans are begging for a top quality English player from the start of their academy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Assassin)
    English homegrown is a player that has spent 3 years an english club between the age of 16-21.

    Club trained homegrown is a player that has spent 3 years at Chelsea between the age of 16-21, excluding loan periods.
    Is it 3 whole years then and not seasons?
    We bought Lukaku when he was 18 did we not. So he wouldn't be eligable?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sevchenko)
    Ofc Chelsea have no problem meeting the home grown quota, its the quality of the home grown talent which says alot about what's going on at Chelsea.


    Chelsea are an top English team, they have a duty to produce top English talent, all English clubs do but Chelsea have the money to provide top quality coaching and facilities for English youth players. We'll never see another "Mr. Chelsea" from Chelsea's academy. Most Chelsea fans are begging for a top quality English player from the start of their academy.
    2 fa cup youth finals recently (2010/2012)
    Finalists in Nextgen series. Should have won having a far superior team. Youth team manager really needs to leave, abysmal tactics. I think we have a few promising youngsters.

    Hardly any of the top Clubs are bringing through top English talent. Southampton puts all the top clubs to shame with their youth products.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tweek)
    Is it 3 whole years then and not seasons?
    We bought Lukaku when he was 18 did we not. So he wouldn't be eligable?
    Sorry, misread.

    A Home Grown player will be defined as one who, irrespective of his nationality or age, has been registered with any club affiliated to the Football Association or the Football Association of Wales for a period, continuous or not, of three entire seasons or 36 months prior to his 21st birthday (or the end of the season during which he turns 21).
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tweek)
    2 fa cup youth finals recently (2010/2012)
    Finalists in Nextgen series. Should have won having a far superior team. Youth team manager really needs to leave, abysmal tactics. I think we have a few promising youngsters.

    Hardly any of the top Clubs are bringing through top English talent. Southampton puts all the top clubs to shame with their youth products.
    I have always maintained Chelsea have one of the best academies in the world. Like I said before you have the money to buy the best facilities and coaching. The players in the Chelsea's academy have great potential and ability. We've seen that from the final they're in but they won't get a chance to reach their full potential because they're missing out on a key part of their development which is first team football. Youth won't be anywhere near the first 11 because of the expectation on Chelsea to win things every season, there's no point raising English talent because you can buy a ready made foreigner.

    I disagree with the last bit. The only Chelsea player remotely close to the national team is Bertrand.

    At Man U there's Phil Jones, Chris Smalling, Tom Cleverley and Danny Welbeck. They all can stake a claim to England's first 11.

    At Arsenal there's Wilshere, Theo Walcott, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Carl Jenkinson and Kieran Gibbs (Jenks and Gibbs is at the same level of Bertrand. Gibbs a little higher than both) Yes some players were bought but the move to arsenal boosted their development same for Man U
    Man City tried to get some English talent but Rodwell and Sinclair have suffered in their development as a result of their move. They should have stayed at their respective clubs.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sevchenko)
    I have always maintained Chelsea have one of the best academies in the world. Like I said before you have the money to buy the best facilities and coaching. The players in the Chelsea's academy have great potential and ability. We've seen that from the final they're in but they won't get a chance to reach their full potential because they're missing out on a key part of their development which is first team football. Youth won't be anywhere near the first 11 because of the expectation on Chelsea to win things every season, there's no point raising English talent because you can buy a ready made foreigner.

    I disagree with the last bit. The only Chelsea player remotely close to the national team is Bertrand.

    At Man U there's Phil Jones, Chris Smalling, Tom Cleverley and Danny Welbeck. They all can stake a claim to England's first 11.

    At Arsenal there's Wilshere, Theo Walcott, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Carl Jenkinson and Kieran Gibbs (Jenks and Gibbs is at the same level of Bertrand. Gibbs a little higher than both) Yes some players were bought but the move to arsenal boosted their development same for Man U
    Man City tried to get some English talent but Rodwell and Sinclair have suffered in their development as a result of their move. They should have stayed at their respective clubs.
    My point was half of those players were bought from other team.

    Sinclair was a Chelsea player, Rodwell Everton, AOC/Walcott Southampton, Jenkinson Charlton, Jones Blackburn, Smalling came from Fulham I believe, Welbeck is embarrassing.

    Chalobah is our most promising player IMO, English that is.

    Southampton also have Clyne and Shaw coming through.

    We produced Jack Cork but he never reached the heights he was touted as reaching, I expect the same to happen to McEachran now.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sevchenko)
    Ofc Chelsea have no problem meeting the home grown quota, its the quality of the home grown talent which says alot about what's going on at Chelsea.


    Chelsea are an top English team, they have a duty to produce top English talent, all English clubs do but Chelsea have the money to provide top quality coaching and facilities for English youth players. We'll never see another "Mr. Chelsea" from Chelsea's academy. Most Chelsea fans are begging for a top quality English player from the start of their academy.
    Chelsea have absolutely no duty except to the club and its supporters.

    The national team is an irrelevance and an irritant.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tweek)
    My point was half of those players were bought from other team.

    Sinclair was a Chelsea player, Rodwell Everton, AOC/Walcott Southampton, Jenkinson Charlton, Jones Blackburn, Smalling came from Fulham I believe, Welbeck is embarrassing.

    Chalobah is our most promising player IMO, English that is.

    Southampton also have Clyne and Shaw coming through.

    We produced Jack Cork but he never reached the heights he was touted as reaching, I expect the same to happen to McEachran now.
    The fact that their from other clubs is irrelevant. The coaching at Arsenal and Man Utd is better than their original clubs hence they become better players and fulfil their potential. What's the point of having an academy if none of the crop is harvested for the first team ?

    (Original post by The Rusty Spork)
    Chelsea have absolutely no duty except to the club and its supporters.


    The national team is an irrelevance and an irritant.
    Last time I checked. Chelsea are a English team not a international team, playing in English league. They should have a strong contingent of English players

    They owe it to their fans to produce English talent from the local area. This current youth policy hurts Chelsea fans. They want more John Terry's and Lampard's. They're more likely to respect the club and give 110% in matches. Chelsea providing English talent not only benefit's them it benefits the national team.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sevchenko)
    The fact that their from other clubs is irrelevant. The coaching at Arsenal and Man Utd is better than their original clubs hence they become better players and fulfil their potential. What's the point of having an academy if none of the crop is harvested for the first team ?



    Last time I checked. Chelsea are a English team not a international team, playing in English league. They should have a strong contingent of English players

    They owe it to their fans to produce English talent from the local area. This current youth policy hurts Chelsea fans. They want more John Terry's and Lampard's. They're more likely to respect the club and give 110% in matches. Chelsea providing English talent not only benefit's them it benefits the national team.
    On what basis should they? They owe the national team nothing. The club exists to win for its supporters not practice affirmitive action for below average players.

    If the best players are English Chelsea will try and buy them but they aren't so why should they bother rather than to just pad the squad out. The Arsenal English experiment didn't work out well, neither did Liverpools'
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sevchenko)
    The fact that their from other clubs is irrelevant. The coaching at Arsenal and Man Utd is better than their original clubs hence they become better players and fulfil their potential. What's the point of having an academy if none of the crop is harvested for the first team ?
    Then surely you'd argue the same about Lampard. He Hadn't really hit anywhere near his full potential at West ham so we brought him through too?
    Because I'd certainly say he's a West Ham Youth product. He's no more a Chelsea Youth product than Jones and Zaha are Uniteds.

    Don't see why we should 'have' to bring through and play English talent anyway. The vast majority are no where near as good as players from other nations. So why should Chelsea suffer a detriment for the sake of the national team who I couldn't care less about.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Rusty Spork)
    On what basis should they? They owe the national team nothing. The club exists to win for its supporters not practice affirmitive action for below average players.

    If the best players are English Chelsea will try and buy them but they aren't so why should they bother rather than to just pad the squad out. The Arsenal English experiment didn't work out well, neither did Liverpools'
    How did it not seeing as wilshere, gibbs, ox, jenkinson and walcott are turning into great players and plus you can't say its failed when the oldest out of them 5 is 24
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sevchenko)
    The fact that their from other clubs is irrelevant. The coaching at Arsenal and Man Utd is better than their original clubs hence they become better players and fulfil their potential. What's the point of having an academy if none of the crop is harvested for the first team ?



    Last time I checked. Chelsea are a English team not a international team, playing in English league. They should have a strong contingent of English players

    They owe it to their fans to produce English talent from the local area. This current youth policy hurts Chelsea fans. They want more John Terry's and Lampard's. They're more likely to respect the club and give 110% in matches. Chelsea providing English talent not only benefit's them it benefits the national team.
    So that means playing players that are not good enough. If they're good enough they'd play for chelsea. We produced players like sinclair and cork, where are they now? Ones doing alright for himself at southampton and could play for a big club in the future while the other one is rotting on man city's bench, he could do decent in the future but I see him as becoming a mid-table player at best for the sunderlands and villa's.

    Arsenal have produced 2 english players that are still in the arsenal squad right now. Chelsea have produced 2. We owe **** all to england. How about the FA making it better for english players at grassroots level, teaching them tactics and having a defined style of play from all the age groups and allowing B teams for clubs like chelsea/man city/liverpool who have many promising youngsters who struggle to get consistent gametime to get regular football at a club and not relying on the loan system which depends on many more factors.

    Finally, it's not like england haven't got good quality players, England have had a squad good enough to win an international trophy for the past 12 years, but the FA stupid decisions on management(mclaren and hodgson specifically) have been costing them dearly. It's ridiculous that pretty much every player in the first 11 of england's team have won either a CL or a league title or consistently play football for top 4 teams but can't get past the quarter final stages of a competition. Absolute nonsense.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tweek)
    Southampton also have Clyne and Shaw coming through.
    Clyne actually came from the Palace academy and only moved to Southampton following their promotion considering the great season he had. He made somewhere around 150 appearances for them.

    (Original post by sevchenko)
    The fact that their from other clubs is irrelevant. The coaching at Arsenal and Man Utd is better than their original clubs hence they become better players and fulfil their potential. What's the point of having an academy if none of the crop is harvested for the first team?
    This is contradicting yourself; you asked what's the point in having an academy if the players don't make it, yet you endorse clubs not using their own academy's for raising players - instead stealing others.

    Last time I checked. Chelsea are a English team not a international team, playing in English league. They should have a strong contingent of English players

    They owe it to their fans to produce English talent from the local area. This current youth policy hurts Chelsea fans. They want more John Terry's and Lampard's. They're more likely to respect the club and give 110% in matches. Chelsea providing English talent not only benefit's them it benefits the national team.
    They may be an English team, but - with the current state of our international football - they have no need to focus upon anything other than their own fortunes. Look at the Brazil team now; the majority of them play outside of Brazil - or are moving very soon - yet they have a fantastic squad and an even better team spirit. The England team is entirely devoid of any spirit. Honestly, if it was announced tomorrow that the England team was being disbanded it wouldn't have any impact upon me.

    And for the second point regarding players giving 110% in matches; David Luiz and Mata give their all every match and they are from different countries, let alone different areas of England. It shouldn't matter where you come from apropos putting in 110% every match - you should love the club you play for and a lot of the Chelsea squad - even the foreigners - apparently do.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TH3-FL45H)
    How did it not seeing as wilshere, gibbs, ox, jenkinson and walcott are turning into great players and plus you can't say its failed when the oldest out of them 5 is 24
    I think the english thing is working out well for arsenal so far, I'd say the same for liverpool tbh but it's a process that takes time and costs results while we're at it. They have good quality young players in sterling, henderson, wisdom and kelly who could all nail a starting spot at the club in the future and you've already mentioned the arsenal players.

    Take it this way, luis van gaal's job was to start the blooding of youth players at bayern munich, he did it eventually but it costed him his job playing the likes of toni kroos, badstuber and thomas muller week in week out when he could have just bought another player that would have done better than them in the 10-11 season.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Rusty Spork)
    On what basis should they? They owe the national team nothing. The club exists to win for its supporters not practice affirmitive action for below average players.

    If the best players are English Chelsea will try and buy them but they aren't so why should they bother rather than to just pad the squad out. The Arsenal English experiment didn't work out well, neither did Liverpools'
    Who responsibility is it to raise English talent for the national team? The FA right? Why do you think things like home grown players were introduced into the PL. Its because teams like Chelsea aren't producing enough top quality English talent. Yet Chelsea have the best facilities and coaching to make English youngsters the best they can be. I personally don't think Arsenal English talent scheme has failed. We have an established British core who are involved with the NT side. I can't speak for Liverpool

    (Original post by Tweek)
    Then surely you'd argue the same about Lampard. He Hadn't really hit anywhere near his full potential at West ham so we brought him through too?
    Because I'd certainly say he's a West Ham Youth product. He's no more a Chelsea Youth product than Jones and Zaha are Uniteds.

    Don't see why we should 'have' to bring through and play English talent anyway. The vast majority are no where near as good as players from other nations. So why should Chelsea suffer a detriment for the sake of the national team who I couldn't care less about.
    Yes Lamps was made a better by Chelsea and he became a key England player as a result. Why? Because Chelsea have better coaching and facilities than West Ham and the same can be said for Gary Cahill, the experience of being at a top club and playing in the CL has help him to become a better tool for Chelsea and the national side. Chelsea could offer him more for his development than Bolton ever could.

    Its up to top teams to take the best English talent and make them better. This benefits the clubs who have top quality English players and the National side who have a better pool of players to choose from. Clubs should prioritise English talent.

    (Original post by jam277)
    So that means playing players that are not good enough. If they're good enough they'd play for chelsea. We produced players like sinclair and cork, where are they now? Ones doing alright for himself at southampton and could play for a big club in the future while the other one is rotting on man city's bench, he could do decent in the future but I see him as becoming a mid-table player at best for the sunderlands and villa's.

    Arsenal have produced 2 english players that are still in the arsenal squad right now. Chelsea have produced 2. We owe **** all to england. How about the FA making it better for english players at grassroots level, teaching them tactics and having a defined style of play from all the age groups and allowing B teams for clubs like chelsea/man city/liverpool who have many promising youngsters who struggle to get consistent gametime to get regular football at a club and not relying on the loan system which depends on many more factors.

    Finally, it's not like england haven't got good quality players, England have had a squad good enough to win an international trophy for the past 12 years, but the FA stupid decisions on management(mclaren and hodgson specifically) have been costing them dearly. It's ridiculous that pretty much every player in the first 11 of england's team have won either a CL or a league title or consistently play football for top 4 teams but can't get past the quarter final stages of a competition. Absolute nonsense.
    Ofc majority of youth players will not make the cut especially for a top quality first 11 like Chelsea but youth players are missing out on first team football, a key part of their development . IIRC it was Middlesbrough vs Chelsea in the FA cup and Ake was playing, he put in a decent shift that game and there should have been more youth players in that side. First team Experience is vital just sending them on loan every season to Championship won't help their development. Yes the FA need to improve grass roots football and coaching but then top clubs need to do their part and offer the best youth talent experience in top sides.

    I agree out National team is good on paper but poor tactics have lead to poor tournaments. I'm looking at the U21 and U20 the players need PL first team experience and we need a better crop of youth player for England. In the past it was a sign of prestige to bring up local English talent and it's still the same today. All Chelsea fans would agree its an area where they need to improve
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: January 11, 2014
Poll
Which pet is the best?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.