Wednesday sees Chelsea's Under-18s contest the second leg of the FA Youth Cup final against Manchester City at Stamford Bridge. At 1-1, the tie may seem evenly poised, but the home side will go into the game as hot favourites to win the trophy for the third time in succession in what is their fifth final appearance in a row.
Earlier this month, Chelsea's Under-19s became the first team to win back-to-back UEFA Youth League titles when they defeated Paris Saint-Germain 2-1 in the final in Nyon, Switzerland.
Such successes consistently fan the flames of a fiery debate that the London club has been unable to extinguish: What's the point of having such a talented, trophy-winning academy if young players who graduate from it are consistently overlooked by a procession of Blues managers in favour of transferred-in talent already boasting first-team experience?
It is an interesting fact that Premier League title-chasing Leicester City manager Claudio Ranieri is Chelsea's longest-serving manager in a single stint at Stamford Bridge in the 21st century. Ranieri oversaw 199 Blues games across four seasons during which he famously established youth product John Terry in the first team.
The start of Italian's last year at the Bridge dovetailed with Roman Abramovich buying Chelsea in July 2003, resulting in transfer funds being made available on a scale previously unseen in the English game. The pressure on Ranieri, who had no proven pedigree for success, to deliver results was immediate -- and with the Russian seeking a "name" manager to lead his quest for silverware, the writing was on the wall.
Since Ranieri's sacking in May 2004, Abramovich has hired and fired Jose Mourinho (twice), Avram Grant, Luiz Felipe Scolari, Carlo Ancelotti, Andre Villas-Boas and Roberto Di Matteo, while also turning to Guus Hiddink (twice) and Rafael Benitez to fill the breach on an interim basis.
In the intervening years, Chelsea have certainly won trophies -- 15 of them, including four Premier Leagues, four FA Cups and the Champions League -- but with the exception of Terry, the star players involved arrived at the Bridge for lofty transfer fees. Chronologically, Petr Cech, Damien Duff, Claude Makalele, Paulo Ferreira, Ricardo Carvalho, Didier Drogba, Michael Essien, John Mikel Obi, Ashley Cole, Florent Malouda, Branislav Ivanovic, Jose Bosingwa, David Luiz, Fernando Torres, Gary Cahill, Thibaut Courtois, Eden Hazard, Oscar, Cesar Azpilicueta, Kurt Zouma, Cesc Fabregas and Diego Costa all merit mentions and this collection is just scratching the surface.
Simply-speaking, the turnover of almost 250 players (104 in, 139 out) since Abramovich arrived at the Bridge is unwieldy given the lack of longevity of Chelsea managers, each of whom has had a different take on the way football should be played and which players are capable of playing that way. What has unified them all is the immediate pressure to secure results.
Earlier this month, Chelsea's Under-19s became the first team to win back-to-back UEFA Youth League titles when they defeated Paris Saint-Germain 2-1 in the final in Nyon, Switzerland.
Such successes consistently fan the flames of a fiery debate that the London club has been unable to extinguish: What's the point of having such a talented, trophy-winning academy if young players who graduate from it are consistently overlooked by a procession of Blues managers in favour of transferred-in talent already boasting first-team experience?
It is an interesting fact that Premier League title-chasing Leicester City manager Claudio Ranieri is Chelsea's longest-serving manager in a single stint at Stamford Bridge in the 21st century. Ranieri oversaw 199 Blues games across four seasons during which he famously established youth product John Terry in the first team.
The start of Italian's last year at the Bridge dovetailed with Roman Abramovich buying Chelsea in July 2003, resulting in transfer funds being made available on a scale previously unseen in the English game. The pressure on Ranieri, who had no proven pedigree for success, to deliver results was immediate -- and with the Russian seeking a "name" manager to lead his quest for silverware, the writing was on the wall.
Since Ranieri's sacking in May 2004, Abramovich has hired and fired Jose Mourinho (twice), Avram Grant, Luiz Felipe Scolari, Carlo Ancelotti, Andre Villas-Boas and Roberto Di Matteo, while also turning to Guus Hiddink (twice) and Rafael Benitez to fill the breach on an interim basis.
In the intervening years, Chelsea have certainly won trophies -- 15 of them, including four Premier Leagues, four FA Cups and the Champions League -- but with the exception of Terry, the star players involved arrived at the Bridge for lofty transfer fees. Chronologically, Petr Cech, Damien Duff, Claude Makalele, Paulo Ferreira, Ricardo Carvalho, Didier Drogba, Michael Essien, John Mikel Obi, Ashley Cole, Florent Malouda, Branislav Ivanovic, Jose Bosingwa, David Luiz, Fernando Torres, Gary Cahill, Thibaut Courtois, Eden Hazard, Oscar, Cesar Azpilicueta, Kurt Zouma, Cesc Fabregas and Diego Costa all merit mentions and this collection is just scratching the surface.
Simply-speaking, the turnover of almost 250 players (104 in, 139 out) since Abramovich arrived at the Bridge is unwieldy given the lack of longevity of Chelsea managers, each of whom has had a different take on the way football should be played and which players are capable of playing that way. What has unified them all is the immediate pressure to secure results.
A starting XI is just that. Eleven players. A team that needs to be fully equipped to not only compete at the highest level, but also to win. Under Abramovich, it's truly questionable whether or not managers have lasted long enough to get a full appreciation of the junior talent at their disposal. Each manager has spoken about it, but none has genuinely committed themselves to fielding academy players. When winning is everything, including keeping your job, why take a risk on a kid?
Such psychology is easy to understand, especially when there is a bottomless pit of money available to sign players. Curiously though, while supporters remain frustrated, citing Ruben Loftus-Cheek as the latest example of a young player given a first team chance only to be benched when big-name stars are available, there is a growing sense of wonder if these Chelsea youngsters are more interested in money than being concerned about breaking through at the Bridge.
In February, Loftus-Cheek signed a new five-year contract with Chelsea worth a reported £60,000 per week. The 20-year old midfielder was already on a deal worth £32,000 per week. Prolific academy striker Dominic Solanke, yet to start a first team game for Chelsea, has spent this season on loan at Vitesse Arnhem where he has scored seven goals in 24 games. The 18-year old Solanke, who scored in the finals of last year's FA Youth Cup and UEFA Youth League, is currently embroiled in contract negotiations, as he seeks to improve £7,000 a week terms to a staggering £50,000 per week.
To put the above salaries in perspective, In February, established England and Tottenham Hotspur star Harry Kane signed a new £45,000 per week five-and-a-half year deal at White Hart Lane. The emergence of prodigious Manchester United striker Marcus Rashford draws parallels with the initial impact Kane made at Spurs. What is truly remarkable about the 18-year old Rashford is that his wages of £500 per week as a Red Devils youth player pale into insignificance compared to what Solanke earns at Chelsea. The incentive-based salary scheme at Old Trafford could limit Rashford's earnings to £15,000 per week when he signs his next United contract -- a fact that the club might need to address to avoid seeing the youngster have his head turned by the wages on offer elsewhere.
Chelsea's willingness to pay phenomenal salaries to academy players based on potential could be viewed as self-harming to all parties. The possibility of earning more money playing for the Blues youth side or while on loan or sitting on the bench at the Bridge than the likes of Kane and Rashford, who see their names up in lights every week, has to challenge the motivations of young men growing up in the cash-inflated bubble of football.
At Stamford Bridge, where the supporters will continue to clamour for the youth to be given a chance, it may well be the case that the youth are quite happy with life the way it is.
Such psychology is easy to understand, especially when there is a bottomless pit of money available to sign players. Curiously though, while supporters remain frustrated, citing Ruben Loftus-Cheek as the latest example of a young player given a first team chance only to be benched when big-name stars are available, there is a growing sense of wonder if these Chelsea youngsters are more interested in money than being concerned about breaking through at the Bridge.
In February, Loftus-Cheek signed a new five-year contract with Chelsea worth a reported £60,000 per week. The 20-year old midfielder was already on a deal worth £32,000 per week. Prolific academy striker Dominic Solanke, yet to start a first team game for Chelsea, has spent this season on loan at Vitesse Arnhem where he has scored seven goals in 24 games. The 18-year old Solanke, who scored in the finals of last year's FA Youth Cup and UEFA Youth League, is currently embroiled in contract negotiations, as he seeks to improve £7,000 a week terms to a staggering £50,000 per week.
To put the above salaries in perspective, In February, established England and Tottenham Hotspur star Harry Kane signed a new £45,000 per week five-and-a-half year deal at White Hart Lane. The emergence of prodigious Manchester United striker Marcus Rashford draws parallels with the initial impact Kane made at Spurs. What is truly remarkable about the 18-year old Rashford is that his wages of £500 per week as a Red Devils youth player pale into insignificance compared to what Solanke earns at Chelsea. The incentive-based salary scheme at Old Trafford could limit Rashford's earnings to £15,000 per week when he signs his next United contract -- a fact that the club might need to address to avoid seeing the youngster have his head turned by the wages on offer elsewhere.
Chelsea's willingness to pay phenomenal salaries to academy players based on potential could be viewed as self-harming to all parties. The possibility of earning more money playing for the Blues youth side or while on loan or sitting on the bench at the Bridge than the likes of Kane and Rashford, who see their names up in lights every week, has to challenge the motivations of young men growing up in the cash-inflated bubble of football.
At Stamford Bridge, where the supporters will continue to clamour for the youth to be given a chance, it may well be the case that the youth are quite happy with life the way it is.
0 comments:
Post a Comment