Ollie Watkins. Matt Grimes. How many more...? | PASOTI
  • Welcome to PASOTI. Sponsored by Lang & Potter

Ollie Watkins. Matt Grimes. How many more...?

  • Thread starter Frazer Lloyd-Davies
  • Start date
F

Frazer Lloyd-Davies

Guest
City have just sold Ollie Watkins for £1.3m to Brentford and it got me wondering...

Why are City producing better youngsters than us? Assuming we're in the picture, why are kids opting to play for City over Argyle? And if we're not in the picture for these kids, why not?

I'm not a 'play the kids at all costs' sort. If they're not good enough then they shouldn't be in the team, no excuses. But if we're not producing any kids that are good enough, why not?

Is something going wrong? If so, what and how are we looking to change it?
 
Jan 16, 2010
12,974
1,680
plymouth
exeter do let their young players play despite their age.i blame previous managers for not letting our young players join in.hopefully derek will be of the same mind as the exeter manager.
 
Feb 2, 2007
4,091
0
They get a lot of publicity but we have had our fair share over the years too. I think they got more publicity because they are such a small club. It's interesting how many of them "fail" on their big money move- Grimes, Harley, Nichols, Archibald Henville, Moxey. They mostly end up back at City two years later on a free. Good business model I suppose! Depends where the development started too and obviously we haven't got the fees as well as 'Tis and Perryman do with their connections.

Here's some

Wotton, Trigger, Nelson, Hourihane, Purrington, Gosling, Reuben (lol), Vassell, Jack Stephens, Bolasie (sort of), Barnes Ash (sort of)
 

Keepitgreen

🏆 Callum Wright 23/24
🇰🇪 Welicar Donor
♣️ PACSA Member
♣️ Senior Greens
✅ Evergreen
Jade Berrow 23/24
🎫 S.T. Donor 🎫
🚑 Steve Hooper
✨Pasoti Donor✨
🌟Sparksy Mural🌟
May 12, 2008
12,458
1,534
Plymouth
Hourihane??? :shock:

He was developed at Sunderland and Ipswich before we took him as a 20 year old.
 

Cobi Budge

Auction Winner 👨‍⚖️
Apr 8, 2011
13,424
12,012
27
Plymouth
I'm not sure there is a problem, or that we're struggling in that department.

Exeter undoubtedly produce good youngsters but that's how they survive, by investing the majority of their funds into development, we have a good system as well but we probably look to invest more straight into the first team because we aren't dependent on player sales to survive.

It would obviously be good to have a few more local lads breaking through but I'm not sure why we should envy being a basement tier feeder club for the championship and premiership.
 
Apr 5, 2016
56
4
i think the main difference, in my opinion, is that the young players at exeter are allowed to just play, with no pressure. we at argyle, over the last few seasons have been desperate to get out of that league so the mistakes the young players will make learning their skill at that level of fty would cost us far more. so we never really took the risk. I mean, even when carey has a bad game the majority moan about it. Exeter will play 5 or 6 throughout a season, hoping at least one will flourish and move on to fund them for more seasons. id like to think if we could have 2 or 3 playing it could be to help us up another division, not to fund us.
 
Feb 17, 2012
184
26
The Muff
Due to a combination of lack of finances and a lower expectation than us, I think City can afford to play more youngsters at the same time. All it then takes is a couple of goals from and a stand out performance from one or two of them to get them noticed and people start talking about them.

Argyle on the other hand with our higher expectations probably can't afford to blood 3-4 younsgyers for any length of time and at the same time.

That said and as a previous poster pointed out, we have had our fair share but simply think our expectations are higher so Derick won't risk a youngster ahead of a more experienced pro.
 
T

The Grumpy Loyal

Guest
The difference isn't necessarily the ability of players we both produce. It is the ability of the Exeter administrative/coaching network to persuade the young players and their parents to sign on the dotted line for a considerable contract length, the only recent exception being Ampadu.

Two slightly different examples are Jack Stephens, ( just signed a new4 yr S'ton deal ) and Dan Gosling. We got relative peanuts for them compared to say Grimes and Watkins, yet Watkins is still untested at top level, and Grimes flopped.

The trouble isn't spotting the talent. It's the inability of the Argyle dealmeakers to nail the kids down compared to their counterparts up the road.
 
Dec 23, 2010
2,786
1,153
Plymouth
nick_PASTIE":2kvgerqq said:
They get a lot of publicity but we have had our fair share over the years too. I think they got more publicity because they are such a small club. It's interesting how many of them "fail" on their big money move- Grimes, Harley, Nichols, Archibald Henville, Moxey. They mostly end up back at City two years later on a free. Good business model I suppose! Depends where the development started too and obviously we haven't got the fees as well as 'Tis and Perryman do with their connections.

Here's some

Wotton, Trigger, Nelson, Hourihane, Purrington, Gosling, Reuben (lol), Vassell, Jack Stephens, Bolasie (sort of), Barnes Ash (sort of)

How did we develop Vassell? He left, joined Truro, was brilliant and then Luton spotted him and moved for him. If anything it shows how poor our youth team management are to let a talented lad go. We did not develop Bolasie or Hourihane neither.
 
Aug 17, 2011
8,830
686
57
Kings Tamerton
The Grumpy Loyal":1hbs7cbt said:
The difference isn't necessarily the ability of players we both produce. It is the ability of the Exeter administrative/coaching network to persuade the young players and their parents to sign on the dotted line for a considerable contract length, the only recent exception being Ampadu.

Two slightly different examples are Jack Stephens, ( just signed a new4 yr S'ton deal ) and Dan Gosling. We got relative peanuts for them compared to say Grimes and Watkins, yet Watkins is still untested and top level, and Grimes flopped.

The trouble isn't spotting the talent. It's the inability of the Argyles dealmeakers to nail the kids down compared to their counterparts up the road.


Which is a failure to show them they can play first team football at Argyle. In recent times, only Ben Purrington got himself anywhere near the first team on a regular basis whereas Harvey, Rooney and Allen all showed they may make it without being given the confidence to make their way.

With only 3 subs being made in each game (possibly) why not have 1 or 2 fringe players that can be tried for 5-10 minutes if possible leading to more time for the ones that show they can make it.
 
Mar 21, 2008
1,768
20
For me it's not the willingness to play the youngsters, it's the fact that their youngsters have been of a much higher standard (presumably more successfully recruited). If we'd had an Ollie Watkins or Matt Grimes they'd have made it into our team, OR, they would've been successful after leaving us, whereas the youngsters that we've released have, as far as I know, not 'made it big' since
 
Feb 2, 2007
4,091
0
LeonTheGreen":zp0hclng said:
nick_PASTIE":zp0hclng said:
They get a lot of publicity but we have had our fair share over the years too. I think they got more publicity because they are such a small club. It's interesting how many of them "fail" on their big money move- Grimes, Harley, Nichols, Archibald Henville, Moxey. They mostly end up back at City two years later on a free. Good business model I suppose! Depends where the development started too and obviously we haven't got the fees as well as 'Tis and Perryman do with their connections.

Here's some

Wotton, Trigger, Nelson, Hourihane, Purrington, Gosling, Reuben (lol), Vassell, Jack Stephens, Bolasie (sort of), Barnes Ash (sort of)

How did we develop Vassell? He left, joined Truro, was brilliant and then Luton spotted him and moved for him. If anything it shows how poor our youth team management are to let a talented lad go. We did not develop Bolasie or Hourihane neither.

I know some of them are tenuous but so are City's- all clubs have that with their "youngsters" Nelson started elsewhere as did McCormick and Connelly but they all got their "break through" at Argyle- Noone too- they are not necessarily Plymouth lads, developed from the age of 8 through the academy but nor are the City lads. They have been "forced" to put faith in youngsters and often get better fees and publicity. City may attract youngsters to as they know they are more likely to geta game, especially if they are happy with a fiver and a bag of chips.

I understand Ampadu is son of Kwame Ampadu, who had a loan spell with Argyle in the 90s, could have all turned out so differently but he ended his career at City. Now coaches at Arsenal but Ethan signed for Chelsea!

Anyway tonight Brunt Nd Tyler finished leading the City forward line and they lost 1-0 to..... Weymouth!! :funny:
 
Mar 15, 2007
5,191
3,276
Plymouth
I genuinely believe there is no grounds for the argument that Exeter produce better young players that ours.

A quick look at how many ex-Argyle youth are plying their trade higher up the league vs how many former Exeter youth are tells you everything you need to know. If we're talking about current football league players who are playing at the same level or higher than the club then:

Ampadu, Seabourne Nichols, Grimes (flopped) & Watkins.

vs

Stephens, Gallagher, Barnes, Mason, Walton, Purrington, Gosling, Nelson, Jones, Laird, McCrory...

Admittedly, I may have missed a few but still... Argyle's academy does better than given credit for.
 
Aug 5, 2016
5,100
1,408
Some of the best Argyle development prospects for years got taken off us during administration. That didn't help.

There is no doubt however that Exeter look to force youth development more than we do. They literally bank on it. Argyle use youth either as back up for senior players, or expect the youngster to overtake senior pros in quality without match experience. Highly unlikely. It is worth noting that when Argyle were broke, we tried the Exeter model of banking on kids coming through, and in the cases of Tyler Harvey and Luke Young, it didn't really work. They didnt turn into prodigious talents and no-one was bidding £1.8m to take them off our hands.

Adams looks like he's turned a corner with the young contracts we have offered. We have some potential in the ranks coming through. It will be interesting to see how much football they get. Rooney it has to be said, didn't get a lot out of Argyle - I hope the others get more.