Dire Mebude Leaves for Manchester City

[Blues Brother 1,147]

5 minutes ago, British_Empire said:

Danny Wilson isn't a watershed moment for our academy & the difference between turning a profit the last 10-12 (and not) tbh. 

We could have got upto 2-million for him, dependant on x-amount of Liverpool targets being met (which he didn't meet) - he'd have had to have been sold for 10-million or something for the sums to stack up (on the assumption that it does cost upto 2-million a year to run our youth set-up's)

Assumption gets you into trouble I tell you. 
 

maybe get your facts correct first. Then we can talk. 
Things to find out are..

1 How much it has cost to run youth set up for last ten years.

2 How much money has been brought in through the sale of players brought through youth ranks.

Cheers 

[British_Empire 9,648]

8 minutes ago, Laudrupsleftfoot said:

You haven't to be fair. A couple of others did before you, then you've taken the debate about the worthiness of it further or lack thereof.

Our club will always have a responsibility to the community and to football whether as supporters we like that or not. I'm not sure that's even a debatable point, although I agree with you on why you'd be against that.

We need to find better people to better bridge the gap between youth football and the first team, but to a degree it's almost inevitable the truly elite level players will be taken by EPL or big European clubs unless they're a really late developer.

Posted in another thread there's a good article on Bergkamp on the BBC where he talks about this being what his passion is as a coach. Some really good insight, and as a club we need to get better at it.

Aye, I'm just leading the debate on a bit playing devil's advocate.  I don't really know either way because I do see a heafty financial case for discontinuing it and ploughing the extra resources into the first team instead, but something about that doesn't seem right either because it seems like a serious downsizing mission and a club our size, for our stature to be taken seriously shouldn't be doing it.

I'd get the woman's football so far to fuck tbh, but let's be honest - there's no way that will take up that much in resources. It wouldn't make a scratch on the accounts in the grand scheme of things so doing that would be suicide in this climate where everything has to be 100% inclusive and things like woman's football is getting pushed in everyone's faces (rightly or wrongly).

The right people to bridge is the gap is the million dollar issue. I've said it myself. Guys like Mulholland and Murty are fantastic, but for that youth-level performance alone. That's their field of speciality. If we had that key person who can link it seamlessly he wouldn't be with us very long and he'd be head hunted by Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Man City on millions per year contract.

This is why I've never rated our DOF's either and think they're frauds. Surely that's in their remit to facilitate and make more of an effort in that department too to try and bridge things or come up with a technical programe to enable it. 

[RockwellGers 15,306]

Hoping we got around £30m

[British_Empire 9,648]

23 minutes ago, Blues Brother said:

Assumption gets you into trouble I tell you. 
 

maybe get your facts correct first. Then we can talk. 
Things to find out are..

1 How much it has cost to run youth set up for last ten years.

2 How much money has been brought in through the sale of players brought through youth ranks.

Cheers 

1) I've told you what I believe to be the cost. Somewhere in the region of between 1.5 and 2-million a year. You sound like you don't want to believe it, that's upto you. I don't think it's an unrealistic number in all honesty.

2) Take it from last ten years as we need a modern cut-off point that we can relate to (and since we've not won a trophy in that time - more or less) it seems like a good cut-off point for discussion or else we'd be going back 25-years or something.

Here's what I've got, If I've missed anyone out feel free to tell me :

Danny Wilson - Upto 2-million, but targets not met - will we say a conservative 1-million? 
Dylan McGeough - 100k Development fee.
Billy Gilmour - 500k Development dee.
Charlie Telfer - 270k Development fee (although Wiki says it was just over 200k)
Lewis MacLeod - 1.2 million (although Wiki says it was 850k).
David Bates - Undisclosed development fee.
Ryan Hardie - Undisclosed development fee.
Andrew Dallas - Undisclosed development fee.
Serge Atakai - Undisclosed development fee.
Zak Rudden - Undisclosed development fee.
Jordan Houston - Undisclosed development fee.

Bates might have been in the 500k region to be fair but no-one knows, but Hardie went to Blackpool, Dallas went to Cambridge, Atakai to a mid-tier Finnish team, Rudden to Thistle and Houston to Ayr - so let's be honest, they aren't going to have gone for anything close to semi-substantial. It will be nominal fee's here and there with maybe some sell-on's attached just incase.

The sums just don't go.

Unless you don't think the 1.5-2 million per year is correct. Even if it's not, at a guess, the youth/academy set-up's would only need to cost about 300 thousand a year to be around the break-even point over the last ten years - which it doesn't - so let's not pretend.
 

[Laudrupsleftfoot 12,245]

3 minutes ago, British_Empire said:

Aye, I'm just leading the debate on a bit playing devil's advocate.  I don't really know either way because I do see a heafty financial case for discontinuing it and ploughing the extra resources into the first team instead, but something about that doesn't seem right either because it seems like a serious downsizing mission and a club our size, for our stature to be taken seriously shouldn't be doing it.

I'd get the woman's football so far to fuck tbh, but let's be honest - there's no way that will take up that much in resources. It wouldn't make a scratch on the accounts in the grand scheme of things so doing that would be suicide in this climate where everything has to be 100% inclusive and things like woman's football is getting pushed in everyone's faces (rightly or wrongly).

The right people to bridge is the gap is the million dollar issue. I've said it myself. Guys like Mulholland and Murty are fantastic, but for that level alone. That's their field of speciality. If we had that key person who can link it seamlessly he wouldn't be with us very long and he'd be head hunted by Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Man City on millions per year contract.

This is why I've never rated our DOF's either and think they're frauds. Surely that's in their remit to facilitate and make more of an effort in that department too to try and bridge things or come up with a technical programe to enable it. 

I can't see myself ever having an interest in it either but you're spot on about us needing to have a women's team with the way it's been pushed. Give it a year or two though and they'll be demanding equal funding and pay as the men. I do like that it gives a generation of young girls into football role models to look up to and being able to aspire to play for the club they love.

Re: bridging the gap, ultimately if the player is good enough and obsessed enough with proving they're good enough they'll play. Barry Ferguson was probably the last player who had that obsession that Gerrard has talked about of himself having to shift Ince or whoever out of the Liverpool team. Which is sad when you realise that's going back >20 years! Hutton was a late developer. Others flitted in and out. Gilmour strikes me as someone who is a carbon copy of Ferguson in terms of his desire to make it, and has the ability to match.

Too many of the others over recent years seem happy enough to show they can hold their own rather than prove once they get a chance the player ahead of them will have to rip the shirt off their back to get it off them. Either that or they really just haven't been good enough (for some that won't change and for others hopefully that's 'yet').

[G.E.C. 19,594]

25 minutes ago, OhW said:

Do you mean Serge Atakayi? 

That’s the one 

[Blues Brother 1,147]

1 minute ago, British_Empire said:

1) I've told you what I believe to be the cost. Somewhere in the region of between 1.5 and 2-million a year. You sound like you don't want to believe it, that's upto you. I don't think it's an unrealistic number in all honest.

2) Take it from last ten years as we need a modern cut-off point that we can relate to (and since we've not won a trophy in that time - more or less) it seems like a good cut-off point for discussion or else we'd be going back 25-years or something.

Here's what I've got, If I've missed anyone out feel free to tell me :

Danny Wilson - Upto 2-million, but targets not met - will we say a conservative 1-million? 
Dylan McGeough - 100k Development fee.
Billy Gilmour - 500k Development dee.
Charlie Telfer - 270k Development fee.
Lewis MacLeod - 1.2 million.
David Bates - Undisclosed development fee.
Ryan Hardie - Undisclosed development fee.
Andrew Dallas - Undisclosed development fee.
Serge Atakai - Undisclosed development fee.
Zak Rudden - Undisclosed development fee.
Jordan Houston - Undisclosed development fee.

Bates might have been in the 500k region to be fair, but Hardie went to Blackpool, Dallas went to Cambridge, Atakai to a mid-tier Finnish team, Rudden to Thistle and Houston to Ayr - so let's be honest, they aren't going to have gone for anything close to semi-substantial. It will be nominal fee's here and there with maybe some sell-on's attached just incase.

The sums just don't go.

Unless you don't think the 1.5-2 million per year is correct. Even if it's not, at a guess, the youth/academy set-up's would only need to cost a couple of hundred thousand a year to be around the break-even point - which it doesn't - so let's not pretend.
 

Haha fair do’s. You have missed a fair few but fair play.

What about players who do make the grade and play for the 1st team. How do you evaluate them? 
Speaking mainly about McGregor over the 2 spells with us. 
 

He has been vital, especially in euro runs or would you just put that down as doing his job so doesn’t count? 

[British_Empire 9,648]

5 minutes ago, Blues Brother said:

Haha fair do’s. You have missed a fair few but fair play.

What about players who do make the grade and play for the 1st team. How do you evaluate them? 
Speaking mainly about McGregor over the 2 spells with us. 
 

He has been vital, especially in euro runs or would you just put that down as doing his job so doesn’t count? 

Yeah but the whole premise of my post (and the points) was taking it from the last ten years (which is the last season we were successful though). That was the cut-off point because it's relative, not just because it suits my argument. 

McGregor was developed in our youth ranks at what? maybe 2000 or something? 20-years. 

Who are the ones I've missed? I went through the records online and took the players out from each year/season of the last ten. 

What players have made the grade and played in the first team the last ten years? K.Naismith, Murdoch, Walsh, Aird, Crawford, Hemmings, McMillan, Perry etc? all them superstars? that there is a case for shutting the academy down tbh.

Ness played a few good games second half of season 2010-2011, Rhys McCabe played 3/4 good games, Kyle Hutton burst on the scene, looked good and toiled at Dumbarton ever since. Overall, they're hardly a glowing endorsement if you want to be honest if you take their careers/what they've done for us in an overall enterity. 

[Jb85 1,786]

I wouldn’t be playing any youngster till we’re back at the top of Scottish football. 

[Blues Brother 1,147]

3 minutes ago, British_Empire said:

Yeah but the whole premise of my post (and the points) was taking it from the last ten years (which is the last season we were successful though). That was the cut-off point because it's relative, not just because it suits my argument. 

McGregor was developed in our youth ranks at what? maybe 2000 or something? 20-years. 

Who are the ones I've missed? I went through the records online and took the players out from each year/season of the last ten. 

What players have made the grade and played in the first team the last ten years? K.Naismith, Murdoch, Walsh, Aird, Crawford, Hemmings etc? all them superstars? 

The youth setup was a farce for at least 4 of the last 10 years. 

There has been a big turnaround in the last 3 years. Which is shown a better quality of player. Hence the reason top Prem clubs are now watching and sniping our players. 

What needs to happen imo is we have to be more appealing to those players. It’s a difficult one. The glamour of the Prem is hard to complete with. But it’s something we have to do. 
 

And the better guys like gilmour do, the harder it will be.

You missed guys like John Fleck and Barrie McKay. You could also take into account McCabe and Ness who we lost for free, due to circumstances. Both were highly thought of at the time. 

[LegendofCoop 18,123]

3 hours ago, G.E.C. said:

Who was the wee Finnish player we had last year? Right back.

He's no finished....he's only 28!

[British_Empire 9,648]

3 minutes ago, Blues Brother said:

The youth setup was a farce for at least 4 of the last 10 years. 

There has been a big turnaround in the last 3 years. Which is shown a better quality of player. Hence the reason top Prem clubs are now watching and sniping our players. 

What needs to happen imo is we have to be more appealing to those players. It’s a difficult one. The glamour of the Prem is hard to complete with. But it’s something we have to do. 
 

And the better guys like gilmour do, the harder it will be.

You missed guys like John Fleck and Barrie McKay. You could also take into account McCabe and Ness who we lost for free, due to circumstances. Both were highly thought of at the time. 

Barrie McKay was signed from Kilmarnock and was into the first team squads, like Middleton from Norwich. He'd had his development. 

Fleck done nothing in the first team and we got no money for him - hence why he wasn't listed. Because he's done alright after 8-years of playing every week and further development down south is neither here nor there (other than saying he was obviously talented).

[Dickie1963 2,390]

2 hours ago, shaka said:

Just read that we got more money from Man City for him than it cost us to sign Tony Weston, Charlie Lindsay and James Graham.  Also we could potentially get more money for him in the future depending on how he does.  Sadly the academy is a business and this looks like good business at the end of the day.

I am involved with a FC that has 15 teams. Our 2004s have a young lad who has decided pro youth isnt for him. In fact he told me he knows he realises he wont make it as a pro and he wants to drop to a level where he can play every week.

 His parents are about to pay £500 to get him released. 

 

[bluenoz 32,496]

1 minute ago, British_Empire said:

Barrie McKay was signed from Kilmarnock and was into the first team squads, like Middleton from Norwich. He'd had his development. 

Fleck done nothing in the first team and we got no money for him - hence why he wasn't listed. Because he's done alright after 8-years of playing every week and further development down south is neither here nor there (other than saying he was obviously talented).

Not sure what we got for John Fleck & Ross McCormack but it would have been buttons to what they became.

 

[Blues Brother 1,147]

1 minute ago, British_Empire said:

Barrie McKay was signed from Kilmarnock and was into the first team squads, like Middleton from Norwich. He'd had his development. 

Fleck done nothing in the first team and we got no money for him - hence why he wasn't listed. Because he's done alright after 8-years of playing every week and further development down south is neither here nor there (other than saying he was obviously talented).

We got money for Fleck. He was always going to be a very good player. He’s another who left due to circumstances. 
 

[British_Empire 9,648]

Just now, bluenoz said:

Not sure what we got for John Fleck & Ross McCormack but it would have been buttons to what they became.

 

Zero for Fleck and I think it was about 300k for McCormack (was he part of the Blue Heaven documentary about 2004?) but just because they went on to become good players (after years being away from us, playing down south) doesn't mean anything in regards to cost to value ratio for the Academy.

To me anyway, it indicates that some of these players actually have ability - but need to leave us for them to realise it because we don't have the coaches and managers to bring them on, or they don't have the mentality to cope with the pressures and demands of playing for us. 

I watch a lot of us at youth level and trust me, watching them play they all have good ability - so if some go on to have a career away from us (even though it's literally 1 in every hundred - for each guy mentioned on this thread, there's 100 that fade into obscurity) but it's the age-old problem of that bridging-gap/set-up. It needs sorted or I think the voices that are growing saying close the place down as the value isn't there will become louder and louder.

[British_Empire 9,648]

2 minutes ago, Blues Brother said:

We got money for Fleck. He was always going to be a very good player. He’s another who left due to circumstances. 
 

Not according to both Wiki and Transfermarkt we didn't. He rejected his contract being transferred across. 

[OhW 4,695]

40 minutes ago, G.E.C. said:

That’s the one 

Back playing in Finland now. Was a real shame when he got injured on his debut for us. 

[Blues Brother 1,147]

Just now, British_Empire said:

Not according to both Wiki and Transfermarkt we didn't. He rejected his contract being transferred across. 

That’s correct to a extent, but Coventry paid a small fee. Similar to what Southampton did when they signed Davis.

Doesnt really matter anyway 

[British_Empire 9,648]

Just now, Blues Brother said:

That’s correct to a extent, but Coventry paid a small fee. Similar to what Southampton did when they signed Davis.

Doesnt really matter anyway 

To be fair, next to Steve Davis and Edu is says 800k and 300k respectively - so if Fleck was the same, why would it not say it?

Maybe you're right - I don't think it matters (agreed) because a couple of hundred k for Fleck won't prove or disprove the point in the grand scheme of things.

[Blues Brother 1,147]

6 minutes ago, British_Empire said:

To be fair, next to Steve Davis and Edu is says 800k and 300k respectively - so if Fleck was the same, why would it not say it?

Maybe you're right - I don't think it matters (agreed) because a couple of hundred k for Fleck won't prove or disprove the point in the grand scheme of things.

How long has there been a proper youth academy in place at Rangers?

[British_Empire 9,648]

Just now, Blues Brother said:

How long has there been a proper youth academy in place at Rangers?

That would be a matter of opinion rather than matter of fact IMO because it's highly subjective. 

But a proper youth academy, with the foundations laid and decent folk in place, I'd say 6-years. 

[Blues Brother 1,147]

4 minutes ago, British_Empire said:

That would be a matter of opinion rather than matter of fact IMO because it's highly subjective. 

But a proper youth academy, with the foundations laid and decent folk in place, I'd say 6-years. 

So if the foundations of the Academy were build 6 years ago. Would you not say it’s been relatively successful?

As we have found players and improved them to a standard potentially good enough for top premier league clubs in England. Albeit they have left before reaching potential with us.

And including guys like Paterson and Mccrorie brothers. Then surely it’s worth continuing with it. And finding a way of keeping the most promising players. 

[British_Empire 9,648]

Just now, Blues Brother said:

So if the foundations of the Academy were build 6 years ago. Would you not say it’s been relatively successful?

As we have found players and improved them to a standard potentially good enough for top premier league clubs in England. Albeit they have left before reaching potential with us.

And including guys like Paterson and Mccrorie brothers. Then surely it’s worth continuing with it. And finding a way of keeping the most promising players. 

Tbh - no (based on either criteria of profits made on players or producing decent first team players).

Could it be though? - absolutely. 

[The Librarian 234]

2 hours ago, .Williamson. said:

Gerrard is our manager now and this is relative to now

My point is we've been doing it long before he got here.