Youth Player discussion

[pineapple stu]

I don’t agree because look at Portugal,England,France,Italy in recent years compared to 10-15 years ago.
I'm not quite sure what your point is here?


I think getting the top prospects abroad is the right idea as if you look at other nations who wouldn’t be considered top nations, most of their players go abroad when they are 16-17 years old, what’s key is they open their horizon and go to a place where they will develop.
I don't think this is correct. Take the countries at Euro 2016 - we were significantly behind every other country (except NI) in terms of players who made their senior debut in their domestic league. I think every one of the Iceland squad started off in their league for example. Most countries had 16+ of their 23-man squad start domestically (and some of the others were foreign-born of course). So I don't think it's correct at all to say that most European nations (let's say, as it's what we're particularly focused on) have their young players go abroad at young age. The evidence doesn't seem to back that up.

[CSAD]

I'm not quite sure what your point is here?


I don't think this is correct. Take the countries at Euro 2016 - we were significantly behind every other country (except NI) in terms of players who made their senior debut in their domestic league. I think every one of the Iceland squad started off in their league for example. Most countries had 16+ of their 23-man squad start domestically (and some of the others were foreign-born of course). So I don't think it's correct at all to say that most European nations (let's say, as it's what we're particularly focused on) have their young players go abroad at young age. The evidence doesn't seem to back that up.

What I’m getting at is looking at the
Major nations they definitely have improved their youth development even just looking at the countries mentioned.


If you look at for example Denmark who I think have put together a pretty good team over the past 4-5 years let’s look at their top players such as Schmichael, Christiansen,J.Andersen,Eriksen,Hojbjerg,Dolberg, these players all left Denmark between 14-18 years old and only Dolberg has played in Denmark (only 3 games when he was a teenager). I always think that our top players should be encouraged to go abroad as they will gain valuable experience playing a big football culture country, however the be all and end all shouldn’t be England it should be anywhere that helps the player so even look at mainland Europe and see if that helps.

Staying at home will be beneficial for players who don’t stand out as much at the moment as here they can progress at their own pace and don’t have to spend time catching up in an environment that they are just not ready for like in England for example. Whereas if you are Ferguson,Zefi,Nzingo etc where you are clearly a big talent from a young age and if they are mentally ready (as that can very from person to person) you should take the opportunity like Ferguson at Brighton’s u23s already, Zefi supposedly moving to Inter when he turns 16 and Nzingo who reportedly is signing for United.

For example in Denmark’s case it might help us discover a Thomas Delaney who really was a late bloomer, only moving to a top 5 league at the age of 26 and 2 years later signs for Dortmund!

[CSAD]

Evan Ferguson might also get injured, or stall badly. In short he's as likely to be the next Richie Partridge as he is the next Damien Duff. I hope it's the latter obviously but I just think it's stretching optimism to breaking point to think that we can predict with any sense of authority which pathway he eventually takes. And even if he escapes the Partridge route and becomes the next Anthony Stokes I don't think that necessarily improves us either. We're in agreement though that making predictions of where a player will be in the future is, while fun, somewhat of an exercise in imagination.



I went back to check because, to be fair, I was very much paraphrasing. So the original post said the following:

"a list of players who I would consider realistic young candidates to be playing at a high enough level in a year and a half to be considered for the national team. I based it on a number of loose and probably imperfect criteria: Under 25; Playing for, or being included in, first-team squads at League One or above in England, SPL in Scotland or a top European league (plus young players in lower divisions on loan from bigger clubs); Playing U23 but having made a quick jump recently from U18s or having skipped that level altogether."

and

" I know a lot of these lads will not become Premier League stars in the next 18 months, but hopefully a significant number of them will establish themselves in the top two tiers in England, or equivalent, allowing us to have a significantly stronger squad by then."

Now I'm not naturally the most optimistic of individuals and I'll cheerfully acknowledge that I've somewhat overstated the scope of the original claim in my previous post but I can't see a situation where even half of that list are established in the top two tiers in England or at a similar standard (and even if they are that leaves us in more or less the same boat that we're in at the moment anyway). Or course there's every reason to believe that some of them will. And even numbers alone suggest that you're right in thinking that a dozen or so will become regular members of the international squad. I don't doubt that a handful or so will become really good players. And I'm not aiming to be the ghost at the feast either, I just feel that there's a bit of people assuming that just because we're sitting in a restaurant and we know it has a kitchen that the food is going to be delicious.

Exactly, he might although touch wood let’s hope not! Anyone who tries to predict anything is a spoofer really because even the player doesn’t know where he’ll be in a years time and if he doesn’t then we sure as hell don’t know. If they have talent and a good attitude then all we can do is just sit back and watch the show and whatever will be will be.

[SkStu]

I went back to check because, to be fair, I was very much paraphrasing. So the original post said the following:

"a list of players who I would consider realistic young candidates to be playing at a high enough level in a year and a half to be considered for the national team. I based it on a number of loose and probably imperfect criteria: Under 25; Playing for, or being included in, first-team squads at League One or above in England, SPL in Scotland or a top European league (plus young players in lower divisions on loan from bigger clubs); Playing U23 but having made a quick jump recently from U18s or having skipped that level altogether."

and

" I know a lot of these lads will not become Premier League stars in the next 18 months, but hopefully a significant number of them will establish themselves in the top two tiers in England, or equivalent, allowing us to have a significantly stronger squad by then."

Now I'm not naturally the most optimistic of individuals and I'll cheerfully acknowledge that I've somewhat overstated the scope of the original claim in my previous post but I can't see a situation where even half of that list are established in the top two tiers in England or at a similar standard (and even if they are that leaves us in more or less the same boat that we're in at the moment anyway). Or course there's every reason to believe that some of them will. And even numbers alone suggest that you're right in thinking that a dozen or so will become regular members of the international squad. I don't doubt that a handful or so will become really good players. And I'm not aiming to be the ghost at the feast either, I just feel that there's a bit of people assuming that just because we're sitting in a restaurant and we know it has a kitchen that the food is going to be delicious.

Yeah, fair enough, i didnt look back until now either but had more focused in on this being the main thrust of the post which, again, i think is pretty reasonable (I dont think it constitutes the giddiness that some get unfairly accused of round here):


But looking at that list of over 70 players, I think there is still reason to be optimistic about the future of the National Team, even if the present kind of sucks.

With that being said, i do agree that it would be an absolute anomaly if anything close to half of that list were playing and performing in the top two tiers. It would be more on par with previous experience if the region of 10 - 20 came through over the next 5 years to be fully established performers at those levels. The ceiling looks to be lower too (hard to pick a Duff or a pair of Keanes from that list - Ferguson perhaps). That is the dash of realism that applies to the fact that the list is larger than usual and a good chunk of the 70ish names are considered legitimate prospects by their current or parent clubs.

In any event, it will be fun to bookmark this thread (and that list) and check against it in a few years.

[pineapple stu]

What I’m getting at is looking at the
Major nations they definitely have improved their youth development even just looking at the countries mentioned.


If you look at for example Denmark who I think have put together a pretty good team over the past 4-5 years let’s look at their top players such as Schmichael, Christiansen,J.Andersen,Eriksen,Hojbjerg,Dolberg, these players all left Denmark between 14-18 years old and only Dolberg has played in Denmark (only 3 games when he was a teenager).
But you could flip that and say that Erling Haaland, Martin Odegaard, Alexander Sorloth and Jens Petter Hauge all started their senior careers in Norway, and are now at some of the top clubs in Europe.

It's why I'd prefer to look at a larger data sample and see the trends there - hence 86% of the 552 players at Euro 2016 started their senior careers in the country they were raised in. That rises to 89% once you take out Ireland and Northern Ireland, the two lowest-percentage nations.

Of course, that was five years ago, and with a then 35-year-old, that stat looks back 20 years now. It'd be interesting to re-run the data for Euro 2021. Still, I don't think it can stack up that you absolutely have to leave Ireland at 16 in order to make it as a top pro, or even that it should be actively encouraged. (And that's before you consider those who leave at 16 and get released at 19 - what happens them; are their education options hamstrung? Have they a life Plan B?)

Of course, the LoI doesn't offer a great alternative to going to England at 16, and that's a big problem.

[EalingGreen]

I don't think this is correct. Take the countries at Euro 2016 - we were significantly behind every other country (except NI) in terms of players who made their senior debut in their domestic league. I think every one of the Iceland squad started off in their league for example.
You could turn that round, by arguing that NI (esp) and ROI overperformed in getting to the Euro's, despite having low-ranked domestic leagues/populations.

For which the explanation could be that we both make up for that by having early and ready access for our best kids to professional clubs across a range of standards in England and Scotland.

Meanwhile, the waters may be muddied further by the fact that the oldest squad in 2016 was ROI, just ahead of NI. In other words, having a settled squad of tried and tested internationals (a Golden Generation?) probably contributed as much to our qualification as how we develop our youth generally.

Which may also explain why we've both slipped back somewhat in the 5 years since i.e. we don't have the same quality of 20-somethings following through to replace the 30-somethings who subsequently retired, rather than having poor quality teenagers further down the line. (Though that latter may count against us in future years).

Finally, we shouldn't necessarily draw direct comparisons with Iceland, notwithstanding that they're obviously getting a lot of things right in what they do.

For it may be that not being in the EU means that their 16 and 17 y.o.'s cannot be signed in Europe (unsure), meaning that more have to wait until they're 18, meaning that more play in their domestic league in the meantime.

Also, it would be interesting to know at what age they break through at home. With a smaller overall talent pool to select from, it may be that the top kids get to play for their local league clubs at an even lower age (15? 16? 17?) than in ROI/NI, by which time our kids are already on the boat across the water, where they will be playing Academy football?

[Finally, if I may deviate off topic a bit to one other comparison which often gets drawn on this forum. People often relate Stephen Kenny's start in the job to Michael O'Neill's with NI. I think it bears pointing out that for all Michael's early struggles in the job, nonetheless the performances were generally MUCH better than the results. Which is a major reason why we stuck with him - that and the fact we could hardly afford to sack him!
Therefore if SK's performances are ok, then the FAI might follow the IFA's example and stick. But if/when it should become apparent that the performances simply aren't coming, then that may be the time to twist.
I'm in no position to offer an opinion on that one.]

[CSAD]

But you could flip that and say that Erling Haaland, Martin Odegaard, Alexander Sorloth and Jens Petter Hauge all started their senior careers in Norway, and are now at some of the top clubs in Europe.

It's why I'd prefer to look at a larger data sample and see the trends there - hence 86% of the 552 players at Euro 2016 started their senior careers in the country they were raised in. That rises to 89% once you take out Ireland and Northern Ireland, the two lowest-percentage nations.

Of course, that was five years ago, and with a then 35-year-old, that stat looks back 20 years now. It'd be interesting to re-run the data for Euro 2021. Still, I don't think it can stack up that you absolutely have to leave Ireland at 16 in order to make it as a top pro, or even that it should be actively encouraged. (And that's before you consider those who leave at 16 and get released at 19 - what happens them; are their education options hamstrung? Have they a life Plan B?)

Of course, the LoI doesn't offer a great alternative to going to England at 16, and that's a big problem.

But how many of them went straight into big teams? Only Hauge really and even he was just a gamble as he impressed AC Milan when he played against them in the EL when he played for Bode/Glimt At the end of the day there is no direct evidence that a players game time in their own country made them into a top player and this proves it as almost all these players went to a big team that developed them into the player they are today. Most players have to leave their country to be a top pro, if you want to be a good player and have a good career then maybe if we can create a system in Ireland like even a top 25 league it could be an option but in reality we will still be in the same position bar having some nice numbers in regards to home based players. What’s best is we prepare the players as best we can so they leave at 18 years old prepared.

What your example and mine does show is there is more than one way to skin a cat, you can go down the Norway route or the Denmark route and either one can work.

The LOI can provide some good alternatives at an early stage of a players career as it can offer players a chance to play senior football in their own country hell it certainly didn’t harm Coleman, it may not be the same standard as the Norwegian league but ultimately it’s in the same boat as in it just won’t prepare you for football at the highest level. What Norway does show is our players should go to places where they will develop rather then what looks good and I do think that’s happening as a lot of players go to places like Norwich,Brighton,Derby,Southampton where they are better at bringing through youngsters But it would be nice if they looked at Europe aswell.

[CSAD]

Yeah, fair enough, i didnt look back until now either but had more focused in on this being the main thrust of the post which, again, i think is pretty reasonable (I dont think it constitutes the giddiness that some get unfairly accused of round here):



With that being said, i do agree that it would be an absolute anomaly if anything close to half of that list were playing and performing in the top two tiers. It would be more on par with previous experience if the region of 10 - 20 came through over the next 5 years to be fully established performers at those levels. The ceiling looks to be lower too (hard to pick a Duff or a pair of Keanes from that list - Ferguson perhaps). That is the dash of realism that applies to the fact that the list is larger than usual and a good chunk of the 70ish names are considered legitimate prospects by their current or parent clubs.

In any event, it will be fun to bookmark this thread (and that list) and check against it in a few years.

The only dash of realism there is is that you really don’t know where the players will end up and already picking out a star at 16-19 is pointless, not every kid is going to be like Keane and Duff and ready kill it in the PL at 17, a lot more goes into football than just ability it’s things like maturity and attitude for example.

[pineapple stu]

But how many of them went straight into big teams?
You're going to have very very few 18-year-olds going straight into big teams regardless. I don't think that's too relevant. But they're all young enough still (25 tops) and starting at top clubs.


At the end of the day there is no direct evidence that a players game time in their own country made them into a top player and this proves it as almost all these players went to a big team that developed them into the player they are today.
I don't think your proof stacks up. Of course Dortmund have helped Haaland get to where he's at now. But the point is did playing for Molde in a professional senior league benefit him more than playing for Dortmund's U21s in empty stadia? I think it has to have.


The LOI can provide some good alternatives at an early stage of a players career as it can offer players a chance to play senior football in their own country hell it certainly didn’t harm Coleman
I think you're missing an important point here. The LoI right now is struggling to provide a good alternative. The players who came through - Coleman, McClean, Long, Murphy, etc, etc - by and large came through when the top flight was mostly professional. That's not been the case for ten years though, and the players have dried up. You need a professional environment - at home or abroad - at the age of, say, 18-21, and the LoI is a big failing in that regard; it can't really offer that.

Bottom line - we can't keep relying on other countries to develop our players. It's a busted flush and it's not the route other countries are going down. Yes, some top top players will still leave at 16, but it can't be our Plan A. Partly because we're just hamstringing ourselves, and also, again, because of the negative impact it can have on those who are out of the system by 19/20

[pineapple stu]

You could turn that round, by arguing that NI (esp) and ROI overperformed in getting to the Euro's, despite having low-ranked domestic leagues/populations.

For which the explanation could be that we both make up for that by having early and ready access for our best kids to professional clubs across a range of standards in England and Scotland.
But we know that Irish players are going across to England in record low numbers. So that route is being closed to us. We can't just sit there and say "Ah sure it's still the best way" while almost every other country is using its domestic league to bring players through.

I think there's an argument that old - settled - national team helped us in Euro 2016 alright, but that's a very short-term view. Ultimately it was a symptom of the really poor youth options coming through, and that's now coming home to roost with us. I don't think there's anything to be gained from trying to look for the silver lining as a consolation.

[CSAD]

You're going to have very very few 18-year-olds going straight into big teams regardless. I don't think that's too relevant. But they're all young enough still (25 tops) and starting at top clubs.


I don't think your proof stacks up. Of course Dortmund have helped Haaland get to where he's at now. But the point is did playing for Molde in a professional senior league benefit him more than playing for Dortmund's U21s in empty stadia? I think it has to have.


I think you're missing an important point here. The LoI right now is struggling to provide a good alternative. The players who came through - Coleman, McClean, Long, Murphy, etc, etc - by and large came through when the top flight was mostly professional. That's not been the case for ten years though, and the players have dried up. You need a professional environment - at home or abroad - at the age of, say, 18-21, and the LoI is a big failing in that regard; it can't really offer that.

Bottom line - we can't keep relying on other countries to develop our players. It's a busted flush and it's not the route other countries are going down. Yes, some top top players will still leave at 16, but it can't be our Plan A. Partly because we're just hamstringing ourselves, and also, again, because of the negative impact it can have on those who are out of the system by 19/20

But that’s an indication that going abroad and playing in better leagues is what got them to top teams, not playing in their domestic league.


Before Haaland was at Dortmund when he was at Red Bull Salzburg he didn’t get a sniff at all in his first season and exploded onto the scene in their second season and what helped was Dabbur was sold so he got a chance and took it with both hands. It was playing for a team like Salzburg in the CL that improved him, not playing at Molde.

But even then and now while different comparatively aren’t really that different as the gap is just as wide. Which is why they all didn’t go straight into first teams in England upon signing. Whatever the environment what’s important is playing games, it’s typical in Ireland for us to focus too much at what we don’t have rather than what we do have and what we do have is a senior game which gives a chance to play football and once they are playing football that’s all that matters. You may have a point with someone like Long or Murphy but not really on McClean or Coleman as it’s not a whole lot different then than now and they still got to where they got to.


Maybe not at 16 for most but definitely at 18 or 19, ideally when they have finished their education or they have matured a bit more. And hopefully they aren’t told to just go to England in a blindfold, hopefully they are advised to go to the best place for that individual rather than told go to the safest/ most common place, it’s nice seeing Zefi and Heffernan from our u15s looking at Italy.

[pineapple stu]

Of course the LoI isn't going to supply the national team. I'm not saying that at all.

But the players in that Euro sample I mentioned earlier typically left their domestic league around 20-22, not 16. That's a big difference development-wise and maturity-wise. And money-wise for the domestic game, which can improve the facilities for future young players. But yeah, in an ideal world, a player comes through an LoI club, gets 100 senior games (including some in Europe) by 21, and then moves abroad. And I agree, that shouldn't just be to England.

Haaland scored a goal every other game for Molde the year before joining Salzburg btw, including four in five in Europe. He improved at Salzburg, sure, but let's not say he was a nobody at Molde.

Also, I disagree that "playing football" is all that matters - playing in a professional environment (as opposed to a part-time one) is a huge factor, and it's one that we are finding much harder to offer here. The current environment is significantly different to when Coleman/McClean were here. Who's fully pro now - Rovers and Dundalk? And Dundalk are signing any random foreigner they can get their hands on. There were a lot more professional spots on offer 10-20 years ago.

[CSAD]

Of course the LoI isn't going to supply the national team. I'm not saying that at all.

But the players in that Euro sample I mentioned earlier typically left their domestic league around 20-22, not 16. That's a big difference development-wise and maturity-wise. And money-wise for the domestic game, which can improve the facilities for future young players. But yeah, in an ideal world, a player comes through an LoI club, gets 100 senior games (including some in Europe) by 21, and then moves abroad. And I agree, that shouldn't just be to England.

Haaland scored a goal every other game for Molde the year before joining Salzburg btw, including four in five in Europe. He improved at Salzburg, sure, but let's not say he was a nobody at Molde.

Also, I disagree that "playing football" is all that matters - playing in a professional environment (as opposed to a part-time one) is a huge factor, and it's one that we are finding much harder to offer here. The current environment is significantly different to when Coleman/McClean were here. Who's fully pro now - Rovers and Dundalk? And Dundalk are signing any random foreigner they can get their hands on. There were a lot more professional spots on offer 10-20 years ago.

But even when it comes to players hitting their potential, Haaland became the star he was from what he did at RB Salzburg, not at Molde. Almost all the players mentioned became the players they were at decent leagues such as the Eredivisie, Pro League, A-Bundesliga etc, not their own league.

You’ll have to give some examples as it’s tricky to talk about when I don’t know which team is which in this argument.

But despite that he still didn’t get a sniff which indicates that RB didn’t think he was ready for that level bare in mind it wasn’t even a massive step up comparatively.

If you play for Shamrock Rovers, Bohemians, Dundalk etc I don’t think it’s that much of an issue at a young age, maybe somewhere like Waterford or Finn Harpes etc it may be a problem but the three I mentioned at professional enough, it doesn’t have to be ground breaking it just needs to have a process similar to what you’d get in professional leagues. It really isn’t, I’ve been watching closely since 2010 and it really hasn’t changed that much, maybe since 2005 but definitely not since I’ve been watching which was about 2010. Certainly not at Sligo rovers, maybe you could have a case at somewhere like Shamrock Rovers but definitely not at Sligo or even Derry.

[pineapple stu]

Haaland wasn't given the chance to do what he did at Salzburg at Molde in fairness. Molde are a step below Salzburg, sure, but they've gone a reasonable way in Europe before and are no minnows. No particular reason Haaland couldn't have continued to improve at Molde. He would have to move on eventually of course.

I don't know what you mean by this bit -


You’ll have to give some examples as it’s tricky to talk about when I don’t know which team is which in this argument.

The league is a lot weaker now than it was in 2010. Only Dundalk's very fortunate EL group stage qualification kept the LoI from dropping to 45th or so in the UEFA rankings this year (and we start next year 46th) We were 29th in 2010. That's a big drop off.

Derry are bottom of the league this year. Technically that's better than where they were in 2010 when they were dumped down to the First Division, but there's no way you can make an argument that Derry haven't disimproved markedly in recent years.

[CSAD]

Haaland wasn't given the chance to do what he did at Salzburg at Molde in fairness. Molde are a step below Salzburg, sure, but they've gone a reasonable way in Europe before and are no minnows. No particular reason Haaland couldn't have continued to improve at Molde. He would have to move on eventually of course.

I don't know what you mean by this bit -



The league is a lot weaker now than it was in 2010. Only Dundalk's very fortunate EL group stage qualification kept the LoI from dropping to 45th or so in the UEFA rankings this year (and we start next year 46th) We were 29th in 2010. That's a big drop off.

Derry are bottom of the league this year. Technically that's better than where they were in 2010 when they were dumped down to the First Division, but there's no way you can make an argument that Derry haven't disimproved markedly in recent years.


Because there is difference between looking good in the Norwegian league and the Austrian league, pretty clear. He could have improved, no way he would have got to where he is now though. Just like Odegaard and Sorloth wouldn’t have.

I don’t know what teams you are referring to.

The UEFA ranking is meaningless in this regard as all it does it calculate ranking based on how teams have done in Europe from each country. A lot of it is subjective. I’ve actually watched the league closely for a decade so I would know that there isn’t much difference between now and 2010 and if there is any change it’s pretty insignificant.

Put it this way, are you saying Coleman had more professional treatment at Sligo Rovers than the current Rovers,Dundalk,Bohemians players have now? Not a chance in hell yet look at him now, same can be said for McClean.

I don’t know what you are trying to say with Derry.

[CraftyToePoke]

If you play for Shamrock Rovers, Bohemians, Dundalk etc I don’t think it’s that much of an issue at a young age, maybe somewhere like Waterford or Finn Harpes etc it may be a problem but the three I mentioned at professional enough, it doesn’t have to be ground breaking it just needs to have a process similar to what you’d get in professional leagues. It really isn’t, I’ve been watching closely since 2010 and it really hasn’t changed that much, maybe since 2005 but definitely not since I’ve been watching which was about 2010. Certainly not at Sligo rovers, maybe you could have a case at somewhere like Shamrock Rovers but definitely not at Sligo or even Derry.

I differ here, I think meeting other elite emerging players ( or not if LOI based ) is a huge hindrance developmentally. The three sides you pick out, fair enough but they play well within themselves most of the time in the league. That high standard week in week out honing / improving competition isn't here. You get the odd one beat the odds, Manning is one, but they generally seem to be finding their level as Championship squad filler or L1

[CSAD]

I differ here, I think meeting other elite emerging players ( or not if LOI based ) is a huge hindrance developmentally. The three sides you pick out, fair enough but they play well within themselves most of the time in the league. That high standard week in week out honing / improving competition isn't here. You get the odd one beat the odds, Manning is one, but they generally seem to be finding their level as Championship squad filler or L1

What I meant was as a club as a whole, if you are playing outside this group you’ll tend to be more part time where in this group you’ll tend to get more professional training, enough for the players to develop before leaving for England or Europe at 17/18. It’s not something sustainable and in reality our best players who are mentally ready should go earlier if possible but the ones who aren’t ready and may need to fill out abit of mature abit can stay abit longer maybe finish their leaving very etc before going. Coleman beat the system and arguably has been the best player we have produced over the last decade, it’s ideal if they stay here if they get senior level games or are involved in the senior set ups, the youth side I agree as it is a shallow pool here in terms of good teams and outside of Dublin there really isn’t much competition but if you are someone like Coleman and playing senior football week in week out it can be a huge benefit before heading over.

[CraftyToePoke]

What I meant was as a club as a whole, if you are playing outside this group you’ll tend to be more part time where in this group you’ll tend to get more professional training, enough for the players to develop before leaving for England or Europe at 17/18. It’s not something sustainable and in reality our best players who are mentally ready should go earlier if possible but the ones who aren’t ready and may need to fill out abit of mature abit can stay abit longer maybe finish their leaving very etc before going. Coleman beat the system and arguably has been the best player we have produced over the last decade, it’s ideal if they stay here if they get senior level games or are involved in the senior set ups, the youth side I agree as it is a shallow pool here in terms of good teams and outside of Dublin there really isn’t much competition but if you are someone like Coleman and playing senior football week in week out it can be a huge benefit before heading over.

I don't see evidence of this in terms of providing players who will improve our national side though, do you ? There are lads in and around the squad because we have nothing else, who in years past wouldn't have been in the conversation internationally at all but that is not indicative of a system or quality within a system functioning in this respect IMO. Coleman and Keane before him are a once on a blue moon lucky swing example but overall, how many lads from Bohs / Rovers / Dundalk have gone over and given us international options ?

Clarke / Bolger / McGrath / McMillan / Towell / Boyle / Grant ( a development signing at a struggling Huddersfield which the first team manager wasn't even directly involved in ) / Burke / Horgan ( yes he is in our squads but he has hardly flourished UK side ) all off the top of my head stuck around at those clubs.

Cork before their most recent implosion had a few go over too I think in recent times but I cant remember their names, one to Hull who was on loan in Scotland maybe. Limerick while briefly doing an impression of competence had Ogbene ( ex Cork TBF ) / O'Connor / Cotter & Gaffney go over. The first three got decent Championship moves to Brentford, Leeds & Ipswich but none made it stick at that level.

This is where a relatively small top division of an AIL might in time remedy this or begin to, which I am guessing is why its potentially of interest to both the FAI and IFA because we both have the same problem facing us, diminishing returns from crops sent to England and the leagues as they are, falling short of requisite quality and numbers to improve the two teams on the island.

But that is a whole other conversation :)

[pineapple stu]

Because there is difference between looking good in the Norwegian league and the Austrian league, pretty clear. He could have improved, no way he would have got to where he is now though. Just like Odegaard and Sorloth wouldn’t have.
But you're still not really addressing my point. I don't deny that you have to move on to improve. But I'm saying starting at home - in Haaland's case with a full season and a European campaign at Molde - is better than being stuck in a meat-factory academy in terms of development at, say, 16-19.

The difference between the Norwegian league and the Austrian league isn't massive btw; you can't attribute all Haaland's improvement to suddenly moving to Austria. He was on a curve anyway.


I don’t know what teams you are referring to.
I don't know what you're referring to though when you say you don't know what I'm referring to. I can't clarify the point because I don't know what you're pointing at.


The UEFA ranking is meaningless in this regard as all it does it calculate ranking based on how teams have done in Europe from each country. A lot of it is subjective. I’ve actually watched the league closely for a decade so I would know that there isn’t much difference between now and 2010 and if there is any change it’s pretty insignificant.
Hold on - the UEFA ranking isn't meaningless or subjective. It's based on factual club results in European campaigns. Yes, you could say you can get one bad draw and your points in a tie won't reflect your standing and maybe an Elo-style rating would be more accurate, but over a long time period - I've taken ten years - that all roughly balances out, and a drop from 29th to 46th is very significant. Also, the 29th was a collective effort across a lot of teams as the league had strength in depth; our current ranking of 37th is boosted by Dundalk reaching the EL group stages twice (once quite luckily). Now one of those is dropping off, we're dropping to 46th. So the strength in depth in the league is much less, and increasingly we've become a 2/3-team league. Which domestic results over the past five years have shown.

I've also "actually watched" the LoI closely over the past decade and the standard has definitely dropped. Which stands to reason given (a) less transfer fee income, (b) the country went backrupt in the meantime and other income streams were hit and (c) 3 extra teams to field at a cost of €25k or so a pop. Ultimately, less money will have a big hit on a club's first-team.

The Derry point is fairly clear - you're saying they're around about their 2010 level, but I'm seeing them bottom of a poor league and not unexpectedly so. How can they be similar to 2010 in that case?


Put it this way, are you saying Coleman had more professional treatment at Sligo Rovers than the current Rovers,Dundalk,Bohemians players have now? Not a chance in hell yet look at him now, same can be said for McClean.
I don't think you can use the words "professional" and "Dundalk" in the same sentence at the moment!

More professional than Shamrock Rovers? No. More professional than Bohs, a part-time team? Of course. And the strength in depth point above comes back into it as well. In the 2000s there were several clubs who could offer a professional setup - Shels, Drogheda, Cork, Derry, etc. It wasn't sustainable of course, but they could do it at the time and they produced national team players. They can't do that now, and it's to the detriment of the players at those clubs now.

So for now, most ambitious players do have to go abroad at 16, but I've shown that 90% of top European players don't do that. I've shown that fewer and fewer of our players are getting the chance to go abroad (because English clubs can sign players from anywhere in the world now). We need to stand up on our own two feet - like every other country in Europe - and offer our players the chance to develop in a professional environment here. While we don't do that, we'll continue to see national squads as weak as we see now.

[pineapple stu]

overall, how many lads from Bohs / Rovers / Dundalk have gone over and given us international options ?

Clarke / Bolger / McGrath / McMillan / Towell / Boyle / Grant ( a development signing at a struggling Huddersfield which the first team manager wasn't even directly involved in ) / Burke / Horgan ( yes he is in our squads but he has hardly flourished UK side ) all off the top of my head stuck around at those clubs.
That's certainly the case now alright. In part because the league has declined in quality, probably also not helped by underage coaching continuing to fall behind standard norms as well.

Go back to the 2000s and you had Hoolahan, McClean, Fahey, Murphy, Quinn, Long, Ward, Meyler, Sammon, etc Fahey is the only one who went to England at 16, but he came back here at 20 to rebuild. The others had careers of varying length in the LoI, but none of them left before 18/19 at the earliest.

There were failures too of course - there always will be; it's a numbers game. But those players 10 years ago would all make the current national squad (yes, even Sammon). Is it a coincidence that a largely pro league had its best ever output to the national team, markedly better than the 90s and than the 2010s, when in both cases the league was much poorer? I don't see how it can be.

[Charlie Darwin]

That's certainly the case now alright. In part because the league has declined in quality, probably also not helped by underage coaching continuing to fall behind standard norms as well.

Go back to the 2000s and you had Hoolahan, McClean, Fahey, Murphy, Quinn, Long, Ward, Meyler, Sammon, etc Fahey is the only one who went to England at 16, but he came back here at 20 to rebuild. The others had careers of varying length in the LoI, but none of them left before 18/19 at the earliest.

There were failures too of course - there always will be; it's a numbers game. But those players 10 years ago would all make the current national squad (yes, even Sammon). Is it a coincidence that a largely pro league had its best ever output to the national team, markedly better than the 90s and than the 2010s, when in both cases the league was much poorer? I don't see how it can be.
Sammon was pro (well actually probably semi-pro after being amateur) for, what, six months before he went to Scotland though? Don't think it explains it fully either.

[CSAD]

I don't see evidence of this in terms of providing players who will improve our national side though, do you ? There are lads in and around the squad because we have nothing else, who in years past wouldn't have been in the conversation internationally at all but that is not indicative of a system or quality within a system functioning in this respect IMO. Coleman and Keane before him are a once on a blue moon lucky swing example but overall, how many lads from Bohs / Rovers / Dundalk have gone over and given us international options ?

Clarke / Bolger / McGrath / McMillan / Towell / Boyle / Grant ( a development signing at a struggling Huddersfield which the first team manager wasn't even directly involved in ) / Burke / Horgan ( yes he is in our squads but he has hardly flourished UK side ) all off the top of my head stuck around at those clubs.

Cork before their most recent implosion had a few go over too I think in recent times but I cant remember their names, one to Hull who was on loan in Scotland maybe. Limerick while briefly doing an impression of competence had Ogbene ( ex Cork TBF ) / O'Connor / Cotter & Gaffney go over. The first three got decent Championship moves to Brentford, Leeds & Ipswich but none made it stick at that level.

This is where a relatively small top division of an AIL might in time remedy this or begin to, which I am guessing is why its potentially of interest to both the FAI and IFA because we both have the same problem facing us, diminishing returns from crops sent to England and the leagues as they are, falling short of requisite quality and numbers to improve the two teams on the island.

But that is a whole other conversation :)

I’m not really disagreeing with any of that, I’m just seeing an argument that the league has changed in standard in 10 years significantly which from my own viewing I don’t really see much difference if any at all. I’ve always said that the best players who are ready mentally for the challenge should go to England or Europe but maybe the ones not quite ready yet who need to fill out more can stay a little longer before heading over.

[seanfhear]

I’m not really disagreeing with any of that, I’m just seeing an argument that the league has changed in standard in 10 years significantly which from my own viewing I don’t really see much difference if any at all. I’ve always said that the best players who are ready mentally for the challenge should go to England or Europe but maybe the ones not quite ready yet who need to fill out more can stay a little longer before heading over.
Maybe standards in other places have accelerated away from the LOI. Standards in such a competitive field such as professional football are always improving and more and more so the higher up you go. The top level is always improving and many Countries haves also improved ~ ~ Its a tough old game as can be seen on the strains / pressures on some young Irish lads in Britain. Even being the Great Hope of your own family can be a hell of a strain. Sure some of the family relations / friends are going to lose the run of themselves with their dreams / hopes / what have ya !

[CSAD]

Maybe standards in other places have accelerated away from the LOI. Standards in such a competitive field such as professional football are always improving and more and more so the higher up you go. The top level is always improving and many Countries haves also improved ~ ~ Its a tough old game as can be seen on the strains / pressures on some young Irish lads in Britain. Even being the Great Hope of your own family can be a hell of a strain. Sure some of the family relations / friends are going to lose the run of themselves with their dreams / hopes / what have ya !

The big difference now is money, if you look at for example Cyprus,Azerbaijan,Kazakhstan etc they have brought in a lot of foreigners which help drive the league forward but then you see countries like Turkey and Greece where the league seems to be decreasing in standard when the money isn’t flowing as much!

[CSAD]

That's certainly the case now alright. In part because the league has declined in quality, probably also not helped by underage coaching continuing to fall behind standard norms as well.

Go back to the 2000s and you had Hoolahan, McClean, Fahey, Murphy, Quinn, Long, Ward, Meyler, Sammon, etc Fahey is the only one who went to England at 16, but he came back here at 20 to rebuild. The others had careers of varying length in the LoI, but none of them left before 18/19 at the earliest.

There were failures too of course - there always will be; it's a numbers game. But those players 10 years ago would all make the current national squad (yes, even Sammon). Is it a coincidence that a largely pro league had its best ever output to the national team, markedly better than the 90s and than the 2010s, when in both cases the league was much poorer? I don't see how it can be.

But again where is the evidence for this? Also if the underage coaching is poorer why are our underage teams playing better than before?

Of those players you mentioned how many played for Ireland while they were here?
Excuses won’t get us anywhere.

[CSAD]

But you're still not really addressing my point. I don't deny that you have to move on to improve. But I'm saying starting at home - in Haaland's case with a full season and a European campaign at Molde - is better than being stuck in a meat-factory academy in terms of development at, say, 16-19.

The difference between the Norwegian league and the Austrian league isn't massive btw; you can't attribute all Haaland's improvement to suddenly moving to Austria. He was on a curve anyway.


I don't know what you're referring to though when you say you don't know what I'm referring to. I can't clarify the point because I don't know what you're pointing at.


Hold on - the UEFA ranking isn't meaningless or subjective. It's based on factual club results in European campaigns. Yes, you could say you can get one bad draw and your points in a tie won't reflect your standing and maybe an Elo-style rating would be more accurate, but over a long time period - I've taken ten years - that all roughly balances out, and a drop from 29th to 46th is very significant. Also, the 29th was a collective effort across a lot of teams as the league had strength in depth; our current ranking of 37th is boosted by Dundalk reaching the EL group stages twice (once quite luckily). Now one of those is dropping off, we're dropping to 46th. So the strength in depth in the league is much less, and increasingly we've become a 2/3-team league. Which domestic results over the past five years have shown.

I've also "actually watched" the LoI closely over the past decade and the standard has definitely dropped. Which stands to reason given (a) less transfer fee income, (b) the country went backrupt in the meantime and other income streams were hit and (c) 3 extra teams to field at a cost of €25k or so a pop. Ultimately, less money will have a big hit on a club's first-team.

The Derry point is fairly clear - you're saying they're around about their 2010 level, but I'm seeing them bottom of a poor league and not unexpectedly so. How can they be similar to 2010 in that case?


I don't think you can use the words "professional" and "Dundalk" in the same sentence at the moment!

More professional than Shamrock Rovers? No. More professional than Bohs, a part-time team? Of course. And the strength in depth point above comes back into it as well. In the 2000s there were several clubs who could offer a professional setup - Shels, Drogheda, Cork, Derry, etc. It wasn't sustainable of course, but they could do it at the time and they produced national team players. They can't do that now, and it's to the detriment of the players at those clubs now.

So for now, most ambitious players do have to go abroad at 16, but I've shown that 90% of top European players don't do that. I've shown that fewer and fewer of our players are getting the chance to go abroad (because English clubs can sign players from anywhere in the world now). We need to stand up on our own two feet - like every other country in Europe - and offer our players the chance to develop in a professional environment here. While we don't do that, we'll continue to see national squads as weak as we see now.

He was in a meat factory at RB though, wnt over and got little to no game time until his second season.

Wait so a gap of 2,000 coefficient points is huge in comparing the LOI in 2010 to now but a gap of 21,050 co efficient points in comparing the Austrian league and Norwegian league isn’t much of a gap? You can because it took him a a season to break into the RB team which wouldn’t be the case if the standard was similar.

Again like I said you can’t use the rankings to comparing the LOI then to now and then ignore it in comparing the Austrian and Norwegian league. Also Dundalks 2 EL count next season as it’s the 2015-2016 that is being removed next season.


Derry weren’t even in the league in 2010 so even being last is an improvement surely.


It’s a circus at the minute but the Dundalk players are technically professional and far more so than the environment Coleman was in when he came through yet he came good. What did they though so that made professional can you tell me just so I can go and fact check it as I’m not convinced.

Hasn’t hurt Denmark sending so many players abroad as kids so it’s not really a valid excuse.

[seanfhear]

Maybe we have DNA problems = = We don’t get very big on average. I reckon that the size of players in to top league in Britain has increased by a huge amount even in the last 20 years. Remember when a lot of the midfielders were the average height of Irish Men.

[CSAD]

Maybe we have DNA problems = = We don’t get very big on average. I reckon that the size of players in to top league in Britain has increased by a huge amount even in the last 20 years. Remember when a lot of the midfielders were the average height of Irish Men.

Collins, Omobamidele,Bazunu,Idah,Parrott to name afew are pretty big, don’t think it’s that much of a factor tbh.

[seanfhear]

Collins, Omobamidele,Bazunu,Idah,Parrott to name afew are pretty big, don’t think it’s that much of a factor tbh.
Cullen, Knight are very small for Midfielders in the British Premiership for example. Brady is small. Hourihane is slight. I have probably left out a few more. An Irish team would probably be on average much smaller physical specimens that a premiership team for example. Even the Spanish in performance are not what they were.

Actually three of the five you mention have other DNA that makes them bigger and maybe stronger.

[elatedscum]

Maybe we have DNA problems = = We don’t get very big on average. I reckon that the size of players in to top league in Britain has increased by a huge amount even in the last 20 years. Remember when a lot of the midfielders were the average height of Irish Men.

Really not an issue. Footballers are always smaller than you imagine in person. Irish footballers aren’t small. Height wise as a nation, we’re very much on the taller end of the spectrum anyway.

[Charlie Darwin]

Ireland would be fairly mid-range for height in European terms, certainly we don't have a disadvantage size-wise but obviously Germans, Serbs, etc are bigger on average.

[CraftyToePoke]

Maybe we have DNA problems = = We don’t get very big on average. I reckon that the size of players in to top league in Britain has increased by a huge amount even in the last 20 years. Remember when a lot of the midfielders were the average height of Irish Men.

No its not the size of us seanfhear, we're just not very good at the moment and all ways of getting better include things we're also traditionally not very good at.

[seanfhear]

I walked behind Gary Pallister in London once = = I felt like a bit of a vertically challenged person.

[CSAD]

Cullen, Knight are very small for Midfielders in the British Premiership for example. Brady is small. Hourihane is slight. I have probably left out a few more. An Irish team would probably be on average much smaller physical specimens that a premiership team for example. Even the Spanish in performance are not what they were.

Actually three of the five you mention have other DNA that makes them bigger and maybe stronger.

They come in different shape and sizes like most countries, tbh I’m shocked this is even being discussed as an issue.

[CSAD]

Ireland would be fairly mid-range for height in European terms, certainly we don't have a disadvantage size-wise but obviously Germans, Serbs, etc are bigger on average.

The tallest country in Europe you have 3 which are Netherlands,Montenegro,Bosnia&Herzegovina

And then you have the next bracket which Ireland would be in on average. Size is a complete non issue.

[seanfhear]

Your average midfielder in the Premiership is considerably taller than they were 20 / 30 years ago. Back then there were far more English / Irish / Scots / Welsh players playing in those positions and playing generally in the top league.

[CSAD]

True but at the same time there are still plenty of smaller players. Our team man for man hasn’t got an issue with size so it’s a complete non issue for us. If we were Indonesia or someone like that you could blame size but not for us.

Our issues right now is we neglected an entire generation of footballers form 1993-1997 and that right now should be the group driving us and because of that neglect we are in the mess we are in. Things have gotten better at underage level atleast for our age groups since the 1999 age group atleast so when they become our 24-28 year old group we will reap the rewards but sadly til then we have to reap what we sow and just try out youngsters and hope they are ready to step up earlier.

[EalingGreen]

So for now, most ambitious players do have to go abroad at 16, but I've shown that 90% of top European players don't do that. I've shown that fewer and fewer of our players are getting the chance to go abroad (because English clubs can sign players from anywhere in the world now). We need to stand up on our own two feet - like every other country in Europe - and offer our players the chance to develop in a professional environment here. While we don't do that, we'll continue to see national squads as weak as we see now.
I fear you may be confusing the cause of the problem with its symptoms.

I'm sure everyone agrees that as a youngster progresses through the age groups, he needs to get the modern coaching and development which is appropriate to his stage of development.

And traditionally in Ireland (NI and ROI), upon reaching 15/16/17 that meant going to GB .

Now it's clear that fewer are going that route than previously, but I suspect that these days this only partly derives from GB clubs signing ever greater numbers from around the world. Equally relevant is that Irish teenagers aren't being well prepared for the move by having previously received progressive coaching between the ages of 6 and 16.

For it's still really only the very top clubs in England who are signing from all around the world, while many Championship, even Lge One, clubs are developing ever better academies of their own, using youngsters drawn from closer to home. Why aren't Irish kids going to those clubs instead?

In other words, these are symptoms of a bigger problem, not the cause. Which means that promising 16 y.o's now getting their next development at home in the LOI isn't going to work either, at least unless/until LOI clubs can provide coaching and development of their own to a standard comparable to that in GB (or continental Europe).

Meaning the answer is to improve the set-up at a much earlier age, so that youngsters don't suddenly find they've nowhere suitable to go by the time they reach 16, either in GB or with the LOI.

Btw, I'm only interested in this because the problems are very similar to what we face in NI. We do seem to be trying to address this with our Club NI:

"The new IFA Elite Programme has been branded CLUB NI. The programme aims to prepare our young players for the professional game and ultimately representing Northern Ireland at Senior International level."
https://www.irishfa.com/ifa-international/club-ni

I hear good things about this (though I'm not sure how much of this is genuine and how much is PR spin). Anyhow, this is where IFA coaches provide specialised coaching to the very best kids from a very early age, to prepare them for an eventual move over the water as teenagers, rather than to the IL.

And coincidentally it was as the IFA's Elite Performance Director, Jim Magilton, who was in charge of this before he joined Dundalk:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/23004002

P.S. I don't think there's anything to be drawn from the example of a prodigy like Erling Haaland - with his talent and family background, he was always going to get to the top, regardless of what route he took.

[CSAD]

I fear you may be confusing the cause of the problem with its symptoms.

I'm sure everyone agrees that as a youngster progresses through the age groups, he needs to get the modern coaching and development which is appropriate to his stage of development.

And traditionally in Ireland (NI and ROI), upon reaching 15/16/17 that meant going to GB .

Now it's clear that fewer are going that route than previously, but I suspect that these days this only partly derives from GB clubs signing ever greater numbers from around the world. Equally relevant is that Irish teenagers aren't being well prepared for the move by having previously received progressive coaching between the ages of 6 and 16.

For it's still really only the very top clubs in England who are signing from all around the world, while many Championship, even Lge One, clubs are developing ever better academies of their own, using youngsters drawn from closer to home. Why aren't Irish kids going to those clubs instead?

In other words, these are symptoms of a bigger problem, not the cause. Which means that promising 16 y.o's now getting their next development at home in the LOI isn't going to work either, at least unless/until LOI clubs can provide coaching and development of their own to a standard comparable to that in GB (or continental Europe).

Meaning the answer is to improve the set-up at a much earlier age, so that youngsters don't suddenly find they've nowhere suitable to go by the time they reach 16, either in GB or with the LOI.

Btw, I'm only interested in this because the problems are very similar to what we face in NI. We do seem to be trying to address this with our Club NI:

"The new IFA Elite Programme has been branded CLUB NI. The programme aims to prepare our young players for the professional game and ultimately representing Northern Ireland at Senior International level."
https://www.irishfa.com/ifa-international/club-ni

I hear good things about this (though I'm not sure how much of this is genuine and how much is PR spin). Anyhow, this is where IFA coaches provide specialised coaching to the very best kids from a very early age, to prepare them for an eventual move over the water as teenagers, rather than to the IL.

And coincidentally it was as the IFA's Elite Performance Director, Jim Magilton, who was in charge of this before he joined Dundalk:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/23004002

P.S. I don't think there's anything to be drawn from the example of a prodigy like Erling Haaland - with his talent and family background, he was always going to get to the top, regardless of what route he took.

Irish players are going to those clubs though, it’s noticeable that more are signing for Brighton,Norwich,Derby for instance which are clubs that are good at bringing through youth.

It’s actually not a huge problem having the players at home at 16 though as at that age it’s all about education more than anything, it worked for someone like Sinclair Armstrong who left at 17 and has been going very well in England. Even listening to interviews from players like Nzingo who it’s rumored is going to Man United this summer from St Pats (plenty of clubs are after him though) he was even saying when he goes over to trial in England he doesn’t find it that difficult to adapt, even listening to someone like Adaramola from Crystal Palace who left Ireland at a very young age before the underage leagues became a thing and left mainly because at that point there wasn’t a good pathway for him but obviously afew years later he got picked for Ireland U17s and he even said he was very surprised at how good the Irish based players were, it was noticeable in the u17 matches aswell as all the LOI based players looked very good and were playing good/progressive attacking football. Overall I don’t think it’s really an issue for u18s at this point because it’s more important they are getting a good footballing education but I think once you get to 18/19 you need to probably think about moving up a level or two as that’s the point where the next stage of your development is required which would be best served at a better level like England for instance but even mainland Europe.

Haaland was always going to make it ofcourse but it shows even a player of his ability it took him a season to adapt.

[elatedscum]

FYI

Picked a random example and tested it:

England 1998 squad average height 5’11.73
England 2018 squad average height 6’0.04

Average height of the two squads was less than 1cm different from each other.

Thinking back to the midfielders in the premier league, you had Scholes at 5’6 and Viera at 6’4. You’ve got a David Silva today at 5’7 or a Bernardo Silva 5’8 and Phil Foden at 5’7 if you want to use younger examples. Meanwhile you’ve got Pogba at 6’3. Most really, both back then and now, have tended to be in the 5’10 to 6’1 range

[samhaydenjr]

Now I'm not naturally the most optimistic of individuals and I'll cheerfully acknowledge that I've somewhat overstated the scope of the original claim in my previous post but I can't see a situation where even half of that list are established in the top two tiers in England or at a similar standard (and even if they are that leaves us in more or less the same boat that we're in at the moment anyway). Or course there's every reason to believe that some of them will. And even numbers alone suggest that you're right in thinking that a dozen or so will become regular members of the international squad. I don't doubt that a handful or so will become really good players. And I'm not aiming to be the ghost at the feast either, I just feel that there's a bit of people assuming that just because we're sitting in a restaurant and we know it has a kitchen that the food is going to be delicious.

Challenge Accepted! OK here goes
Group 1: Players who have already made a significant breakthrough in the Premier League or equivalent:
Caoimhin Kelleher, Aaron Connolly, Michael Obafemi, Will Smallbone, Adam Idah, Dara O'Shea, John Joe Patrick Finn, Jimmy Dunne

Group 2: Players who have started showing up regularly on EPL benches recently:
Ademipo Odubeko, Will Ferry, Conor Coventry, Lewis Richards

Group 3: Current regular Championship players:
Nathan Collins, Jason Knight, Jayson Molumby, Danny McNamara, Jordan Shipley, Ryan Manning, Chiedozie Ogbene

Group 4: Players who have made recent breakthroughs into Championship teams:
Andrew Omobamidele, Festy Ebosele, Louie Watson, Alex Gilbert

Group 5: League One players who could well be playing Championship level or above because a) they are loanees returning to a parent club or b)they could well be promoted:
Troy Parrott, Conor Masterson, Olamide Shodipo, Mark McGuinness, Peter Kioso, Gavin Bazunu, Dan Crowley, Anthony Scully, Sean Roughan

Group 6: Wildcards
Evan Ferguson - Senior debut at 14, doing well at U23 level while still 16 - senior breakthrough beginning to seem imminent
Ethon Varian - scoring regularly for the U23s at a club who basically will have dead rubbers until the end of the season
Luca Connell - Broke through at Championship level aged 17, made a horrible move, but at least is back playing senior football on loan
Connor Ronan - Difficult to judge the levels of his loan clubs, but should be close to League One level and seems to be doing well - could go higher next season

So there you go - my original list was "71 players under 25 who are on a pathway where there's a reasonable possibility that they will be playing at Championship level or above by March 2023." This list is "36 players under 25 with at least a decent chance of playing at Championship level or above by the end of 2020" - OK, my headlines need some work

[CraftyToePoke]

Challenge Accepted! OK here goes
Group 1: Players who have already made a significant breakthrough in the Premier League or equivalent:
Caoimhin Kelleher, Aaron Connolly, Michael Obafemi, Will Smallbone, Adam Idah, Dara O'Shea, John Joe Patrick Finn, Jimmy Dunne

Group 2: Players who have started showing up regularly on EPL benches recently:
Ademipo Odubeko, Will Ferry, Conor Coventry, Lewis Richards

Group 3: Current regular Championship players:
Nathan Collins, Jason Knight, Jayson Molumby, Danny McNamara, Jordan Shipley, Ryan Manning, Chiedozie Ogbene

Group 4: Players who have made recent breakthroughs into Championship teams:
Andrew Omobamidele, Festy Ebosele, Louie Watson, Alex Gilbert

Group 5: League One players who could well be playing Championship level or above because a) they are loanees returning to a parent club or b)they could well be promoted:
Troy Parrott, Conor Masterson, Olamide Shodipo, Mark McGuinness, Peter Kioso, Gavin Bazunu, Dan Crowley, Anthony Scully, Sean Roughan

Group 6: Wildcards
Evan Ferguson - Senior debut at 14, doing well at U23 level while still 16 - senior breakthrough beginning to seem imminent
Ethon Varian - scoring regularly for the U23s at a club who basically will have dead rubbers until the end of the season
Luca Connell - Broke through at Championship level aged 17, made a horrible move, but at least is back playing senior football on loan
Connor Ronan - Difficult to judge the levels of his loan clubs, but should be close to League One level and seems to be doing well - could go higher next season

So there you go - my original list was "71 players under 25 who are on a pathway where there's a reasonable possibility that they will be playing at Championship level or above by March 2023." This list is "36 players under 25 with at least a decent chance of playing at Championship level or above by the end of 2020" - OK, my headlines need some work


G1 - I think saying Idah / Obafemi & Kelleher have had Premiership breakthroughs is stretching it a good bit. Idah cant get in a Championship side all season, Obafemi needs to cop on badly and Kelleher, well no his is just not a significant breakthrough at PL level, it may become one but he's not there yet.

G2 - Lot of smoke around the Mipo flight risk to England fire. Will believe it when I see him in green, wouldn't be too hopeful atm.

G3 - Moulmby isn't playing regularly, he can't get in at Preston. Shipley has played less and less as the season has progressed and Ogbene isn't a regular, no.

In G5 you forgot Jack Taylor who's club went eight points clear in the automatic places with five to play this weekend and he is a key player there. Crowley is heading in the wrong direction divisions wise and is not featuring at Hull regularly. Neither is Parrott as his difficult first season keeps getting worse.

[CSAD]

It’s pointless making predictions about where a player will be in the future because players take different lengths of time to find their feet, some are brilliant as a teenager and hit the ground running but that’s very rare and especially in Ireland as we seem to have a tendency across all sports to be late bloomers. There is reason for optimism looking at the list but making predictions on how any of them will do is like ****ing in the wind, all that matters is the destination not the journey.

[seanfhear]

FYI

Picked a random example and tested it:

England 1998 squad average height 5’11.73
England 2018 squad average height 6’0.04

Average height of the two squads was less than 1cm different from each other.

Thinking back to the midfielders in the premier league, you had Scholes at 5’6 and Viera at 6’4. You’ve got a David Silva today at 5’7 or a Bernardo Silva 5’8 and Phil Foden at 5’7 if you want to use younger examples. Meanwhile you’ve got Pogba at 6’3. Most really, both back then and now, have tended to be in the 5’10 to 6’1 range
11 centimetres can be very useful.

[pineapple stu]

Sammon was pro (well actually probably semi-pro after being amateur) for, what, six months before he went to Scotland though? Don't think it explains it fully either.
True, and he's an exception, though he was playing in a tougher league (mostly pro) and that would have helped improve his game as well.


But again where is the evidence for this? Also if the underage coaching is poorer why are our underage teams playing better than before?

Of those players you mentioned how many played for Ireland while they were here?
You quoted my initial evidence. You can challenge it if you want, but you can't ask where it is while quoting it.

I think it's generally acknowledged that the national underage leagues in the past few years have been some help in terms of improving coaching quality and improving the standard of matches in general. There's a lot more to be done, but it's a starting point and we're maybe seeing some improvements coming through there. Early days yet though.

We weren't really starting from a high point - often finishing bottom of a 21s qualifying group for example - so let's see if it can be maintained. One semi-final doesn't make a summer.

None of the players I listed played for Ireland while they were in the LoI. Why is that relevant?


Wait so a gap of 2,000 coefficient points is huge in comparing the LOI in 2010 to now but a gap of 21,050 co efficient points in comparing the Austrian league and Norwegian league isn’t much of a gap?
Well (a) the gap between Norway and Austria is 14.825, not 21.050, which is anomalously high, (b) you can't say that a gap of 14 points is 7 times the magnitude of a gap of 2 points; that's not how the UEFA coefficients work, and (c) you can't compare today's coefficients to ten years ago because teams play more matches before getting knocked out now. Dundalk are the obvious example - they were knocked out in the first round of the European Cup this year but still reached the EL group stages picking up two wins and four draws (the "second legs" were all scored as draws afaik", whereas in 2010 the defeat against Celje would have been the end for another year. That's why I compared positions, not coefficient points, and we've dropped from 29th in 2010 to 37th for next season and are provisionally 46th for the season following that as we lose Dundalk's first EL qualification.

The Austrian league is absolutely better than the Norwegian league, but not by enough to solely explain Haaland's improvement when he went there. He would have improved at Molde too.


Derry weren’t even in the league in 2010 so even being last is an improvement surely.
Ah now. That's not a great argument. They had finished fourth in 2009 and were (deservedly) relegated over a financial issue. They won the FD and were third in the Premier in 2011. So I think it's very fair to say that Derry right now aren't at their 2010 level.


Hasn’t hurt Denmark sending so many players abroad as kids so it’s not really a valid excuse.
You picked five examples. I gave 500 examples. Bigger data sets are generally better.

All I'm saying is it shouldn't be a Plan A that promising footballers leave the country at 16 to play abroad. There needs to be a viable professional option here for players to follow, and then move upwards at a more suitable age (20-22 or so)

[pineapple stu]

Now it's clear that fewer are going that route than previously, but I suspect that these days this only partly derives from GB clubs signing ever greater numbers from around the world. Equally relevant is that Irish teenagers aren't being well prepared for the move by having previously received progressive coaching between the ages of 6 and 16.
No, I completely agree with this. I won't pretend to know too much about the IL setup, but I'd say it's similar enough to here. There's a lot of work needs to be done at U16 level that the SFAI here seem to be resisting. That doesn't necessarily preclude there being a problem with the setup at ages 16-22 (give or take) as well though. Both senior setups are neglected, ours significantly more so.

[CSAD]

True, and he's an exception, though he was playing in a tougher league (mostly pro) and that would have helped improve his game as well.


You quoted my initial evidence. You can challenge it if you want, but you can't ask where it is while quoting it.

I think it's generally acknowledged that the national underage leagues in the past few years have been some help in terms of improving coaching quality and improving the standard of matches in general. There's a lot more to be done, but it's a starting point and we're maybe seeing some improvements coming through there. Early days yet though.

We weren't really starting from a high point - often finishing bottom of a 21s qualifying group for example - so let's see if it can be maintained. One semi-final doesn't make a summer.

None of the players I listed played for Ireland while they were in the LoI. Why is that relevant?


Well (a) the gap between Norway and Austria is 14.825, not 21.050, which is anomalously high, (b) you can't say that a gap of 14 points is 7 times the magnitude of a gap of 2 points; that's not how the UEFA coefficients work, and (c) you can't compare today's coefficients to ten years ago because teams play more matches before getting knocked out now. Dundalk are the obvious example - they were knocked out in the first round of the European Cup this year but still reached the EL group stages picking up two wins and four draws (the "second legs" were all scored as draws afaik", whereas in 2010 the defeat against Celje would have been the end for another year. That's why I compared positions, not coefficient points, and we've dropped from 29th in 2010 to 37th for next season and are provisionally 46th for the season following that as we lose Dundalk's first EL qualification.

The Austrian league is absolutely better than the Norwegian league, but not by enough to solely explain Haaland's improvement when he went there. He would have improved at Molde too.


Ah now. That's not a great argument. They had finished fourth in 2009 and were (deservedly) relegated over a financial issue. They won the FD and were third in the Premier in 2011. So I think it's very fair to say that Derry right now aren't at their 2010 level.


You picked five examples. I gave 500 examples. Bigger data sets are generally better.

All I'm saying is it shouldn't be a Plan A that promising footballers leave the country at 16 to play abroad. There needs to be a viable professional option here for players to follow, and then move upwards at a more suitable age (20-22 or so)

There wasn’t evidence though.

It’s not just the results but it’s even the way the way all the teams play, from keeping the ball on the deck to the quality of passing to the chances created throughout the levels has been a huge plus and crucially every team plays 4-3-3 which studies have shown is the best formation to focus on at youth level as it’s been proven to produce better attacking players, Netherlands started it off and then the likes of Belgium & Austria have implimented a method similar and have produced the best talent they have produced in donkeys years. Most of those u21 groups were the groups from the old system ie contained mostly players from our lost generation from 1993-1997.

It’s relevant because if it was the league that made a difference why didn’t they get picked for Ireland when they were home based? Even just for a friendly.

I don’t know what years you are comparing but the current one is 21,050 which is a pretty huge gulf and 14,825 is pretty massive also.

You can compare because it all adds up, you were the one that compared the league 10 years apart based on UEFA ranking. You do realize the year before 2010 we were ranked 37th right? It’s a completely pointless way of comparing leagues, you can’t use that to compare leagues but then ignore the coefficient points that determines the league because part of that also is a lot of Eastern European leagues have had money pumped into their league and as a result their ranking increased, a big difference could also simply be we have stayed practically still (which the points indicate) but other leagues such as Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan have jumped ahead due to have loads of money.

We DONT lose Dundalks first EL qualification, we lose the year before their EL qualification but also gain their most recent EL qualification meaning the LOI will shoot up next season most likely.

It’s 14,825 points better which is pretty substantial and yes it is by enough, do you watch the leagues how could you say they are similar when all the evidence proves otherwise? The team that produced Haaland also produced Szoboszlai who is now at Leipzig, Dabbur who made a move to Savilla, Sadio Mane to Southampton & Naby Keita to RB Leipzig, Dayot Upamecano to RB Leipzig, Takumi Minamino to Liverpool.

Name me a player Molde sold that is even in the same league as any of above and then I might be convinced but all the evidence points to Salzburg making Haaland the player he became rather than Molde.

Using one season when we are only 5 games in is an even worse example, the trend is Derry a top half to midtable so no different than normal.

I just focused on one country, I could throw in plenty more but all I need is a handful to prove my point that there is no one size fits all method, some cases it’s better it’s stay at home and some cases it’s better to go abroad.

While a being a teenager it’s about enjoying your footy rather than focusing on your career, if a players would prefer to go to England at the age of 16 that’s fine as that works for them, if they want to stay in Ireland to be with family or complete your education that also works but when they get to 18-19 they probably need to start thinking about moving abroad. Even with Bazunu after signing for City he wanted to stay Rovers for another year or two as he wanted to finish his leaving cert. All I’m saying is we need to stop trying to tell kids what’s best for them at a young, we need to just let them enjoy their football. Even looking at Sinclair Armstrong who went over at 17 turning 18 this year he didn’t go at 16 and only halfway through his first season he is already seen as a bigger prospect that Eze was and the QPR fans are already accepting they will lose him in the next few years so want to develop him as much as possible so they can make a big profit and ofcourse he was linked to City and CP this season after just signing after just signing for them. Players are ready at different points so while their young we should focus on what’s best for that player in the moment and not put all the attention into their future.

[pineapple stu]

It’s relevant because if it was the league that made a difference why didn’t they get picked for Ireland when they were home based? Even just for a friendly.
It's not relevant because (a) the LoI should really be a developmental one, a better step for young players than being stuck in a foreign academy before leaving for a better league in a player's early 20s and (b) the 8 players the LoI contributed to the Euro 2016 squad was really bad by the standards of almost every other league. If the LoI were improved to the level we need it to be, then yeah, you should start see players getting a couple of caps while with LoI clubs, and then quickly moving on.


I don’t know what years you are comparing but the current one is 21,050 which is a pretty huge gulf and 14,825 is pretty massive also.
I'm comparing 2020 and 2010. I don't know what years you're comparing.

But is 14.825 pretty massive? How do you even quantify it? It's not like an Elo system where 100 points of a gap means something. The Austrian league has RB Salzburg, who are way better than any club in Norway and that affects the league's coefficient. Below that, the leagues are much more comparable - as evidenced by Molde knocking Rapid Wien out of the Europa League this year and going as far as the last 16, or the two Austria v Norway ties the year before being shared (Haugasund beat Sturm Graz and LASK Linz beat Rosenborg).

So again, Haaland would have continued to improve domestically, and you can't attribute all his 2019 improvement to joining RB Salzburg. It absolutely helped, but you're trying to give Salzburg 100% credit and dismiss Molde, and that doesn't remotely stack up.


You can compare because it all adds up, you were the one that compared the league 10 years apart based on UEFA ranking.
You can compare absolute rankings (29th v 46th) across time. You tried to compare coefficients - saying we were only 2 points lower rated than 2010 - which you can't do for the reasons I gave.


You do realize the year before 2010 we were ranked 37th right?
No, in 2009 we were ranked 30th (https://kassiesa.net/uefa/data/method4/crank2009.html).


It’s a completely pointless way of comparing leagues, you can’t use that to compare leagues but then ignore the coefficient points that determines the league
I'm not ignoring the coefficient points. I'm saying you can't compare 2010 points to 2020 like you did. And again, it's not a pointless way of comparing leagues. You suggest our fall is because other Eastern leagues have come into money, but that's not the entire reason. The LoI has also much less money in that same time, and it's worse as a result.


We DONT lose Dundalks first EL qualification, we lose the year before their EL qualification but also gain their most recent EL qualification meaning the LOI will shoot up next season most likely.
I don't know where you're looking at tbh - everything you read seems to be wrong!

We already have their most recent EL qualification for next season's coefficient. That's not what I'm talking about - here's the following season's stats (https://kassiesa.net/uefa/data/method5/crank2022.html), where the first EL is gone and we're down to 46th. We need a serious performance in Europe this year to even hold our current 37th place.


Using one season when we are only 5 games in is an even worse example, the trend is Derry a top half to midtable so no different than normal.
No it's not - because Derry were widely predicted to struggle this year, as they did last year, finishing one point above the relegation play-off. That's not a top half team.


While a being a teenager it’s about enjoying your footy rather than focusing on your career [...]All I’m saying is we need to stop trying to tell kids what’s best for them at a young
No - if you're serious about being a pro, then while you should of course always enjoy kicking a ball about, your teenage years are a hugely formative part of your career.

And I disagree with the second part I quoted here too - the FAI should absolutely have best practice in place for players to develop as best they can. It would do those players a dis-service to let them work it out for themselves as you suggest. And as 90% of players at the last Euros - a wide sample of top top players - started their senior careers domestically before moving abroad (where relevant) around 20-22, we need to have a good reason for not following suit. And given how badly our own player development has been going in the past decade or two, we can be reasonably sure that our different way of doing things isn't much good...

[CSAD]

It's not relevant because (a) the LoI should really be a developmental one, a better step for young players than being stuck in a foreign academy before leaving for a better league in a player's early 20s and (b) the 8 players the LoI contributed to the Euro 2016 squad was really bad by the standards of almost every other league. If the LoI were improved to the level we need it to be, then yeah, you should start see players getting a couple of caps while with LoI clubs, and then quickly moving on.


I'm comparing 2020 and 2010. I don't know what years you're comparing.

But is 14.825 pretty massive? How do you even quantify it? It's not like an Elo system where 100 points of a gap means something. The Austrian league has RB Salzburg, who are way better than any club in Norway and that affects the league's coefficient. Below that, the leagues are much more comparable - as evidenced by Molde knocking Rapid Wien out of the Europa League this year and going as far as the last 16, or the two Austria v Norway ties the year before being shared (Haugasund beat Sturm Graz and LASK Linz beat Rosenborg).

So again, Haaland would have continued to improve domestically, and you can't attribute all his 2019 improvement to joining RB Salzburg. It absolutely helped, but you're trying to give Salzburg 100% credit and dismiss Molde, and that doesn't remotely stack up.


You can compare absolute rankings (29th v 46th) across time. You tried to compare coefficients - saying we were only 2 points lower rated than 2010 - which you can't do for the reasons I gave.


No, in 2009 we were ranked 30th (https://kassiesa.net/uefa/data/method4/crank2009.html).


I'm not ignoring the coefficient points. I'm saying you can't compare 2010 points to 2020 like you did. And again, it's not a pointless way of comparing leagues. You suggest our fall is because other Eastern leagues have come into money, but that's not the entire reason. The LoI has also much less money in that same time, and it's worse as a result.


I don't know where you're looking at tbh - everything you read seems to be wrong!

We already have their most recent EL qualification for next season's coefficient. That's not what I'm talking about - here's the following season's stats (https://kassiesa.net/uefa/data/method5/crank2022.html), where the first EL is gone and we're down to 46th. We need a serious performance in Europe this year to even hold our current 37th place.


No it's not - because Derry were widely predicted to struggle this year, as they did last year, finishing one point above the relegation play-off. That's not a top half team.


No - if you're serious about being a pro, then while you should of course always enjoy kicking a ball about, your teenage years are a hugely formative part of your career.

And I disagree with the second part I quoted here too - the FAI should absolutely have best practice in place for players to develop as best they can. It would do those players a dis-service to let them work it out for themselves as you suggest. And as 90% of players at the last Euros - a wide sample of top top players - started their senior careers domestically before moving abroad (where relevant) around 20-22, we need to have a good reason for not following suit. And given how badly our own player development has been going in the past decade or two, we can be reasonably sure that our different way of doing things isn't much good...

If the league was much better then than it would have been providing NT players, that’s the only way you’ll convince me of this because right now no evidence points to it.

It’s pretty massive if you are saying that a gap of 2,000 in the LOI 2010-2020 comparison is huge, if you want to compare the ranking you must first compare the points involved. The only difference in the Rapid v Molde game is Molde winning one and drawing the other in 2 one off matches, that doesn’t make the leagues similar in quality, that’s like you saying the Czech league is on par with the Premier league just because Slavia Prague knocked out Leicester city. I’d also compare the fact that Austria had 4 teams in Europe and Norway only having 1 as an indication of who has the stronger competition.

He may have improved, he wouldn’t have reached the level he’s at if he stayed at Molde, he would have needed to go abroad to reach the heights he reached. It does stack up because if the Austrian and Norwegian league are of a similar standard than he would have seamlessly brought his form for Molde over to RB which he didn’t.

If you want to dismiss the co efficient you can’t compare the ranking that decides to co efficient. In 2009 the LOI ranking was 37th...


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009–10_UEFA_Europa_League

See 35th


Yes you can compare because if you lose games the points are taken away also, that’s the only fair way you can compare using ranking is pointless is all that shows is many leagues have bumped ahead like the examples I gave. And again where’s the evidence as a result? Going by Europe also the LOI has had 3 qualifications this decade compared to 0 before that, where’s the results to back it up bar nostalgia.

For the 2021-2022 season the ranking is based on results from the 2015-2016 season to the 2019-2020 season.

The ranking you are using is for the 2022-2023 season. Next season we are ranked 37th which is the same as 2009 which by you’re metric means we are the same standard as 2009.

So wait until the season is done to analyze where they are and not 5 matches.

If you talking about being a pro at 16 you have already failed the child, it’s all about enjoying your football at that age, it’s just about doing what suits the player. Some want to go at 16 like Parrott and some rather wait until they are 18 like Bazunu but it doesn’t decide where you are in your career.

They should but they should do it based on what’s best for that specific individual, not what’s best for all kids at a certain age. Parrott went at 16 that doesn’t mean it’s best for Bazunu to go at 16, he stayed and got himself a European campaign at Shamrock rovers.
And once again you are comparing countries in Eastern and Central Europe with ours which is a totally different culture all together. It’s been terrible in the past but as improved recently so it’s a whole other ball game now, even our 2 previous u17s were pretty much all home based bar maybe 5-6 in the squad and the home based players didn’t look much worse than the English/German based players, he’ll we even left English based players on the bench in these matches in favor of LOI based players.

[pineapple stu]

If the league was much better then than it would have been providing NT players, that’s the only way you’ll convince me of this because right now no evidence points to it.
Well that's not a very logical viewpoint. The league was better in the 2000s than in the 2010s because it did provide players for the national team. However, to provide players for the national team while they were still with LoI clubs would have meant the league being even stronger again, which it wasn't. But we need it to be.


It’s pretty massive if you are saying that a gap of 2,000 in the LOI 2010-2020 comparison is huge
I'm not saying that. I'm saying a drop of 17 places is pretty sizeable.

I'm also not saying that the Norwegian league is equal to the Austrian league - just that it's not that far behind that it accounts for Haaland's improvement. I'll say it again - Haaland would have continued to improve at Molde. I am not arguing against the idea that he needed to move abroad to improve - my point all along is that you can start domestically and move abroad at 20-22 sort of age (Haaland was 19 I think) into a first-team squad (not an academy). I'm arguing most players in fact do this and it is to our detriment that Irish players don't really have that option.


In 2009 the LOI ranking was 37th... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009–10_UEFA_Europa_League
(a) that's 35th, not 37th and (b) that's the ranking two seasons before the season I quoted, not the season before.


Yes you can compare because if you lose games the points are taken away also
What are you talking about? No points are taken away for losing games.


And again where’s the evidence as a result? Going by Europe also the LOI has had 3 qualifications this decade compared to 0 before that, where’s the results to back it up bar nostalgia.
It is far easier to qualify for the EL group stages now, starting from 2011/12 when CL qualifying round teams could drop down to the EL. I've shown you the evidence that the LoI is weaker than now in showing you the ranking. Your counter-argument is to entirely ignore the wholescale format changes which made it easier for champions of smaller leagues to reach the groups. That's not a valid argument.


So wait until the season is done to analyze where they are and not 5 matches.
Why are you happy to ignore last season?

Derry are not the club they were ten years ago, and they will probably be the first to acknowledge it.


If you talking about being a pro at 16 you have already failed the child
It's a lovely sentiment, but not borne out in reality. There's footballers turning pro at 16, so if you want to be serious about having a shot of joining them, you have to be taking the game seriously at 16.