Academy contracts

[blingo]

Should we make them sign eight year contracts with the option of annuling it every two years?

[Somerset Fulham]

It's not allowed, which is the problem.

[blingo]

That's wrong because without that academy there's a good chance they wouldn't make it, and secondly, it's unfair that we can't make a proper return on our investment of time and money.

[Stoneleigh Loyalist]

Tell Exeter City with Stansfield, Raith Rovers with Bowie and the others we have picked up in the past. It is not a fair system but we are stuck with it.

[blingo]

Then why bother with it when we can just go back to the old way of doing it, using scouts.

[Carborundum]

Should we make them sign eight year contracts with the option of annuling it every two years?

If the option for annulment is only held by the club, that's asking a 16 year old to sign away their choices until the age of 24, with pay at the age of 23 set when 16.  If the option for annulment sits with the player or with both parties, that's basically a two year contract. 

[WestSussexWhite]

Can only offer 2 year deals

[Montague]

That's wrong because without that academy there's a good chance they wouldn't make it, and secondly, it's unfair that we can't make a proper return on our investment of time and money.

There's a need to understand that the Academy system exists to raise the overall standard of 'home grown' players entering the system and it exists not just for the sole purpose of recruitment for the club that is running the Academy (hope that makes sense).

The advantage of having an Academy is if the club manages to push through an Academy player to the first team then the value to the club (if they had to replace with a bought player or the players resale value)  far outweighs the cost of the player's development over the years - Think of the £25M Fulham got for RS - the club can also develop a player in their own culture, ethos and playing style.

The cost of running the Academy is part funded by the PL / EFL to develop youth players which won't necessarily end up playing for that club.
If a player is not offered a scholarship at 16 it's quite common for the club to pass on the player to other clubs who may be interested in signing them for scholarship or have positions they want to fill.

This link gives an indication of the £ funded by the PL /EFL (2019/2020 data) and it's interesting to see Fulham's funding v Brentford (who don't run an academy anymore)

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1939288

This also gives some interesting background reading into the system for those interested.

https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/youth-alliance/efl-youth-development-charter-for-players-and-parents-guide-2020-21-e-book.pdf 

[Mokes]

Should we make them sign eight year contracts with the option of annuling it every two years?

If the option for annulment is only held by the club, that's asking a 16 year old to sign away their choices until the age of 24, with pay at the age of 23 set when 16.  If the option for annulment sits with the player or with both parties, that's basically a two year contract. 

They could bring in a system similar to what they have in American sports where they have an arbitration system, where players on their rookie contracts are awarded a salary based on level of play. Each year the club puts forward an offer, the agent puts forward a demand and an independent third party judges what is fair based on what the player is producing.

if they made it so that arbitration contracts were not considered in the FFP numbers it would give clubs incentive to focus on their academies and producing their own talent. Knowing that they are not going to be screwed by a Harvey Elliot type situation

Football doesn't have the draft system so it can't be an exact replica, but if they made those contracts mandatory from say the age 16 to 22 season it would give the players and their families an opportunity to see what clubs have scouted them are interested in developing them further. its much less of a gut punch for the clubs to lose a 15 year old kid who is still an unknown, then to lose a first team regular.

The clubs would still have the option loan out or buy/sell players as they do now if they choose to, but its the club that owns the contract that is in the box seat for the price they set and cant be lowballed .


The way it is now is a joke. It rarely works out for the club or the player. Imagine how different the league would look if players were able to be developed to their full potential and the club that did it made that profit. Grealish is a rare example of a player who was fully developed at a club and the club was able to sell him on at full market value. Imagine how different the league would be if that became the norm rather then the exception.

If Fulham were able to have made full market value on players like Dembele & Elliot or had the opportunity to fully develop Sess and Roberts, the finances brought in from those sales could have made a huge difference. The FFP system is so unbalanced when smaller clubs have to sell their talent for peanuts, while the bigger clubs can stockpile the youth

[Motspur Park]

This is what makes me laugh about the criticism of the club. People come on here ridiculing the club for not putting young players on long contracts. The club isn't allowed to but why let the facts get in the way of another rant against the club? Talented players hold the cards.

For the life of me, I cannot see why a young guy would not sign a contract with Fulham which is lucrative and will set the guy up for life. He will be playing alongside seasoned internationals and many premier league players. I get that with a manager not giving them opportunities, they may just as well move, but in a club with such a great academy, it would be foolish to have a manager not prepared to give young guys a chance.

Of course, they believe they are good enough to make it at a top club, but the reality is that very few will make it.

[bobby01]

Overall I understand the idea that academies are there to produce home grown talent, and in theory a good idea.

However until a system is introduced that stops the big clubs stockpiling these players with no intention of playing them it makes it all a bit pointless.

How many young players careers have Chelsea ruined by snapping them up and putting them out on loan, the amount of Chelsea players out on loan every year is unbelievable.

[filham]

Then why bother with it when we can just go back to the old way of doing it, using scouts.

Brentford have made a success of doing just that. And remember our last really successfull home grown talent was Sean Davis and he was pre Academy.

[Bassey the warrior]

It works both ways. If the clubs have the power to tie down young players for such long contracts, they are effectively holding them to ransom with no guarantee of game time.

I think the right thing to do is for tribunals to build in more performance and appearance related bonuses so the academy club gets a fair deal when the player makes it.

[Sting of the North]

Then why bother with it when we can just go back to the old way of doing it, using scouts.

Brentford have made a success of doing just that. And remember our last really successfull home grown talent was Sean Davis and he was pre Academy.

I seem to remember someone called Ryan Sessegnon that made over 100 first team appearances for us, being named Championship player of the season, being instrumental in our promotion to the PL and netting us a profit of 20-25 million or so. I would say that is at least moderately successful, but we may have different opinions on what constitutes a success. That is without discussing the Rodak's and , Woodrows, Christensens and Carvalho's and such.

[Jim©]

Then why bother with it when we can just go back to the old way of doing it, using scouts.

Brentford have made a success of doing just that. And remember our last really successfull home grown talent was Sean Davis and he was pre Academy.

I seem to remember someone called Ryan Sessegnon that made over 100 first team appearances for us, being named Championship player of the season, being instrumental in our promotion to the PL and netting us a profit of 20-25 million or so. I would say that is at least moderately successful, but we may have different opinions on what constitutes a success. That is without discussing the Rodak's and , Woodrows, Christensens and Carvalho's and such.

I agree, I'd say that our academy has produced a very high number of good senior players in the last 10 years:
Kerim Frei
Neil Etheridge
Pat Roberts
Cauley Woodrow
Tankovic
LVC
Dan Burn
Moussa Dembele
Ryan Williams
Jesse Joronen
Emerson Hyndman
De La Torre
Tayo Edun
Ryan & Steven Sessegnon
Marek Rodak
Matt O Reilly
Harvey Elliott
Stansfield, Francois and Carvalho in the current set up.

There's also those playing that we had a hand in but didn't give a debut to (all of those above, we did).

[bobbo]

answer to OP . i think we should be able to hold on to players more easily than we are . there would be many legal strings to it . but with young cav not signing at the moment i start to think  " whats the point "   . its become a very unlevel playing field , money is the root of the problem clubs like us suffer. 

[blingo]

Exactly how I see it Mr Bobbo. What's the point? 25m for one player but lose out on ten

[Deeping_white]

Then why bother with it when we can just go back to the old way of doing it, using scouts.

Brentford have made a success of doing just that. And remember our last really successfull home grown talent was Sean Davis and he was pre Academy.

I seem to remember someone called Ryan Sessegnon that made over 100 first team appearances for us, being named Championship player of the season, being instrumental in our promotion to the PL and netting us a profit of 20-25 million or so. I would say that is at least moderately successful, but we may have different opinions on what constitutes a success. That is without discussing the Rodak's and , Woodrows, Christensens and Carvalho's and such.

I agree, I'd say that our academy has produced a very high number of good senior players in the last 10 years:
Kerim Frei
Neil Etheridge
Pat Roberts
Cauley Woodrow
Tankovic
LVC
Dan Burn
Moussa Dembele
Ryan Williams
Jesse Joronen
Emerson Hyndman
De La Torre
Tayo Edun
Ryan & Steven Sessegnon
Marek Rodak
Matt O Reilly
Harvey Elliott
Stansfield, Francois and Carvalho in the current set up.

There's also those playing that we had a hand in but didn't give a debut to (all of those above, we did).

You can go even further with this list and name a number of younger players we released/sold very cheaply currently playing in the championship in Elijah Adebayo & Djed Spence, with several more like Cam Burgess, Denis Adeniran Stevie Humphreys in League 1. I'm fairly sure last season we got recognised for having the best academy in the country based on the amount of players we produce now playing professional football in the top 4 leagues of this country.

I think the problem we as a club have had since 2014 is that our league position has been unstable due to forever being in a promotion or relegation battle, which is a harder environment to bed in academy players because you want more experienced players in that situation. As a result they see their path to the first team blocked and then get their head turned by a bigger club's academy (and salary offer) or a smaller club's first team offer further down the leagues. It says a lot about the current ability and potential of Carvalho, Francois and Pajazati that they're making a name for themselves and getting into the first team in a squad that is expected to be top 2 this year (as well as a manager that thankfully has faith in them).

[BestOfBrede]

Should be a Lustrum...
Caesar and Pompey got away with it!

[Twig]

Then why bother with it when we can just go back to the old way of doing it, using scouts.

Brentford have made a success of doing just that. And remember our last really successfull home grown talent was Sean Davis and he was pre Academy.

I seem to remember someone called Ryan Sessegnon that made over 100 first team appearances for us, being named Championship player of the season, being instrumental in our promotion to the PL and netting us a profit of 20-25 million or so. I would say that is at least moderately successful, but we may have different opinions on what constitutes a success. That is without discussing the Rodak's and , Woodrows, Christensens and Carvalho's and such.

I agree, I'd say that our academy has produced a very high number of good senior players in the last 10 years:
Kerim Frei
Neil Etheridge
Pat Roberts
Cauley Woodrow
Tankovic
LVC
Dan Burn
Moussa Dembele
Ryan Williams
Jesse Joronen
Emerson Hyndman
De La Torre
Tayo Edun
Ryan & Steven Sessegnon
Marek Rodak
Matt O Reilly
Harvey Elliott
Stansfield, Francois and Carvalho in the current set up.

There's also those playing that we had a hand in but didn't give a debut to (all of those above, we did).

You can go even further with this list and name a number of younger players we released/sold very cheaply currently playing in the championship in Elijah Adebayo & Djed Spence, with several more like Cam Burgess, Denis Adeniran Stevie Humphreys in League 1. I'm fairly sure last season we got recognised for having the best academy in the country based on the amount of players we produce now playing professional football in the top 4 leagues of this country.

I think the problem we as a club have had since 2014 is that our league position has been unstable due to forever being in a promotion or relegation battle, which is a harder environment to bed in academy players because you want more experienced players in that situation. As a result they see their path to the first team blocked and then get their head turned by a bigger club's academy (and salary offer) or a smaller club's first team offer further down the leagues. It says a lot about the current ability and potential of Carvalho, Francois and Pajazati that they're making a name for themselves and getting into the first team in a squad that is expected to be top 2 this year (as well as a manager that thankfully has faith in them).

I think you and Jim make very good points and a cogent argument to persist with our academy.  I do have some sympathy for those who ague for longer contracts (althoigh the OP suggestion of 8 yrs is ridiculous).  Even a third year would be a big help.