Was wondering where he was last week. Didn’t know if he was still recovering from injury or just out of favour?
Miscellaneous Reserve/Youth News
- Thread starter Cevno
- Start date
Was wondering where he was last week. Didn’t know if he was still recovering from injury or just out of favour?
@Mods
Ethan Wheatley and Ethan Williams trained with the first team today. For Wheatley I believe it was the first time.
Saw the lesser-spotted Dermot Mee was in the training photos today as well.
Can anyone with more knowledge provide some insight on Lawrence and Drury please? Are these seen as positive changes?
Interesting approach to take.
Comparing with Dampsey everything is positive change. Both has been working with that generation before, so I guess it is smart to stay with them and change other coaches around that they can benefit from.
This was the consensus that I was getting from the general chit chat on here, so hopefully your right and we show development. The familiarity can only help.
Charlie Savage linked to Reading in a permanent move.
Would be good for him and for us. Sadly, I don't think he quite has what it takes to be a United 1st team player.
It seems like we're taking a different direction with academy players, i.e., allow them to move to another team early on if they won't make it here, which am happy to see.
Can we provide tweets or a source when writing posts like these?
Source is Sun, so not really that reliable. They are quoting Reading, but also interest from Cardiff, Roterham and Portsmouth
The thing is that while The Sun are absolute scum, they do tend to break some legit news when it comes to academy signings etc.
Fair enough, if he's not going to make it better to let him go, hopefully with a sell on clause. Probably going for less than Zidane, if not a free transfer.
How much are we getting for these transfers? Chelsea and City seem to sell academy kids regularly for decent sums doing great business, but get the feeling ours going for peanuts? Maybe winning things at academy level whilst not necessarily producing players for 1st team, inflates sale prices, so winning at youth level is worthwhile from that perspective?
Thing with the guys City are getting big money for is they're generally some of their better prospects but in positions where they don't really have a path to the first team (although still not sure how they're getting quite such high fees for some of them). The guys we've been moving on are generally guys who aren't going to make it here and so it's a mixture of getting a fee and some future control (buy-backs and sell-on fees) and clearing the decks a bit for the next crop to move up.
Can’t start hyping them too early, right? 
Already the same size as Shola
Might be something in that but I do like the new approach of selling early and including sell on clauses. Too often we have had players go out on loan 2 or 3 times and ended up running down their contracts and it hurts them as much as it does us. Selling them gives their new club a stake in developing them further and I feel more of them will make it at the pro level and we will stand a better chance of realizing a decent profit long term on the kids we have been developing.
Agree to some extent, but it feels like a bit of humility from those in power to admit they could learn from the neighbours wouldn’t do any harm. Imagine adding 50m to the transfer kitty every summer and how that would help ETH. When you read about who they have sold, they also were not considered first team level, are around 19 years old, and have buy backs and sell on clauses, and have been handed a great opportunity to start careers elsewhere. If you watched there U21 team against ours last year the gulf was huge, and despite reports they were a younger team.
saving grace this years intake look more like it, and in Lacey we seem to have best U17 talent in Manchester, and probably country.
What does that terminology actually mean about United being able to "match any bid". Presumably it means any bid that Reading accept, not just any random ones they receive, but then we or any other club can do that without any agreement anyway - and it's then still up to the player where he prefers to go, isn't it? I'm struggling to work out what the agreement is that gives us the advantage in being able to sign him back (not that I imagine it'll be all that relevant in the case of Savage).
I think I remember us matching the bid that Spurs made for Bale back in the day, but Southampton rejected ours.
I'm assuming it's just so we can pay tbe same same as any other club rather than getting fleeced or priced out.
Basically yeah. If Reading accept a bid for him, we can then match that bid and have it accepted without having to improve on it. Still ultimately up to the player, but that’s the case for every single prospective transfer.
Remember Daishawn Redan, the Dutch talent that we were close to signing and who eventually chose Chelsea?
He's 22 now, went to Hertha after Chelsea, had a few unsuccessful loans in the Netherlands before moving to Venezia (Serie B) in January. They've no loaned him to Triestina in Serie C, with an option to buy. Declared for Suriname but no caps so far.
Numbers in first team football so far:
56 matches
3375 minutes (37,5 full matches)
7 goals
3 assists
He's 22 now, went to Hertha after Chelsea, had a few unsuccessful loans in the Netherlands before moving to Venezia (Serie B) in January. They've no loaned him to Triestina in Serie C, with an option to buy. Declared for Suriname but no caps so far.
Numbers in first team football so far:
56 matches
3375 minutes (37,5 full matches)
7 goals
3 assists
Thanks.
So, yeah, not much of an advantage to put into the contract - just ensuring that we have to pay the same as any other accepted bid, not any more but not any less either (such as a pre agreed 'buy back fee' between the clubs).
Thanks.
So, yeah, not much of an advantage to put into the contract - just ensuring that we have to pay the same as any other accepted bid, not any more but not any less either (such as a pre agreed 'buy back fee' between the clubs).
Probably to avoid the “United tax” if we ever wanted to buy him back…
Last edited:
It is adventage, as basically the selling club have to disclose the price they are getting for the player. In reality, player needs to want to sign for us and we need to want player, and in that case we would know the price, just the club will now have to sell for that price.
I still think loan for a season is good option, but after first loan if player is not ready for the squad, we should sell him and for the start percentage of next fee is good option. Later on, when we have a few players that prove themselves earning better contracts down the road, not necessary at our level, but for example level below, we can raise fees. In the last 10 years we did not produce a lot of players that proved as top class players for other clubs. Beside those we kept like Rashford, I can remember Pereira and Januzaj, probably a few more but not much and not at the top level. Recently we had Garner, Gomes, Chong, Ramazani that all earned better position on the market or got sales, so we are going in the right direction I think. Recent loans of Amad, Hannibal, Fernandez, Fish, Oyedele even Laird, Williams and Tuanzebe have been good, but in those situations we had to sell after good loan if decision is that they are not ready for serious chance in the first team. I think it is the same for those 4-5 now. If we will not play Hannibal, sell him, get value for him but keep some buy back clause in the case he make the name in the next few seasons.
I still think loan for a season is good option, but after first loan if player is not ready for the squad, we should sell him and for the start percentage of next fee is good option. Later on, when we have a few players that prove themselves earning better contracts down the road, not necessary at our level, but for example level below, we can raise fees. In the last 10 years we did not produce a lot of players that proved as top class players for other clubs. Beside those we kept like Rashford, I can remember Pereira and Januzaj, probably a few more but not much and not at the top level. Recently we had Garner, Gomes, Chong, Ramazani that all earned better position on the market or got sales, so we are going in the right direction I think. Recent loans of Amad, Hannibal, Fernandez, Fish, Oyedele even Laird, Williams and Tuanzebe have been good, but in those situations we had to sell after good loan if decision is that they are not ready for serious chance in the first team. I think it is the same for those 4-5 now. If we will not play Hannibal, sell him, get value for him but keep some buy back clause in the case he make the name in the next few seasons.
I would definitely say perception has a part to play in fees paid and how we see them too. Teams see certain academy’s reputations and I think that other factors like international youth caps and titles won as a a marker.
I think our academy is also seen similarly but maybe the view that we had stagnated as a club is affecting all levels.
Can’t start hyping them too early, right?
Never!
I like the little turn though, reminded me of a skill I saw Ravel pull off.
I've been reflecting on some of the big academy 'misses' of the last few years; those players who fans, and sometimes staff, were convinced would establish themselves as first teamers. I've been a huge proponent of the academy, and I always will be, but I'm aware the last few years have been a bit of a gut punch to those who follow and those in and around the academy. So I'm going to try to briefly breakdown where I believe United have gone wrong recently.
United saw a number of academy graduates debut during the Fergie years; some because they were extremely talented, and others because they were hard workers and/or a good fit. We've seen a host of academy players make Premier League debuts post-Fergie - but only a handful have had a significant impact. Over the last ten years, there are only eight players with with >50 United appearances: Rashford, Greenwood, Williams, Lingard, Januzaj, Pereira, McTominay and Elanga. Other than McTominay, I was certain those listed would make it. Now, if you were to survey United fans, the majority would likely only deem Rashford a success. Pereira, Lingard, Elanga and McTominay all felt the ire of the fans online and in some small pockets of OT. So, in the eyes of some, academy players are not only expected to become regular starters, they are expected to become key contributors. When United are successful, academy players can help fill holes in a squad, as was the case during the fruitful years. Academy players are not currently afforded that role.
Those of us who are invested in the academy saw what, we believed, was a golden generation circa 2018. United had Gomes, Garner, Greenwood, Mengi, Williams, Chong, Levitt, Laird and Elanga coming through in a two-three year span; whilst Tuanzebe and Henderson were slightly older and, despite not being considered in the '18 crop, were on the cusp of becoming first-teamers. People hoped the '18 crop could perhaps rival the '92 crop - and now those people, myself included, look silly. So, what went wrong with that '18 team?
Well, firstly, injuries really hampered Laird, Mengi and Axel. That triumvirate are amongst the best defenders United have produced this century. If they go on to have careers as successful as Johnny Evans and Michael Keane, that would be a great success. The Manchester United midfield has troubled every United side over the last 10 years. Instability in midfield meant that Garner, Levitt and Gomes had limited opportunities to be embedded into the team. Midfield is an extremely difficult place to play, it's even more difficult in a team that has ambitions to win the league. Levitt's strength was his range of passing and dictating the pace of play, Garner was earmarked for his defensive abilities, tenacity and passing, whilst Gomes was seen as a number 10, though I preferred him as an 8, with exceptional playmaking ability. The attributes and traits they showed, albeit at youth-level, were there for all to see. These teenagers needed time to grow and learn. They were ultimately never afforded this. Gomes was a key contributor at Lille last season and, as a 6, was one of the player's at the U21 Euro's. Elanga, Chong and Williams were exceptional in the academy sides, exuding technical ability, confidence and desire. In my opinion, all three should have had a better pathway to the first team that included sensible loans. Outside of Williams' Norwich and a few other outliers (Garner's Forest loan, Amad's Sunderland loan, and Henderson had a great loan progression), I believe United's loan system hasn't put their youngsters in the best possible position for success - often favouring prior relationships, rather than appropriate levels and/or styles for youngsters. Chong was unfortunate enough to have some terrible luck with injuries and some really ineffective loans - whilst I acknowledge the Birmingham loan and subsequent transfer worked out well for him.
So, for those keeping count, the issues of that '18 crop were injuries, opportunities and patience. Those three factors can all be mitigated by stability. Stability in results gives managers time, time for managers allows managers to trust players, trust in players enables development. Fergie would allow players to mature and expect them to make the grade at 22 or 23. This isn't unique to United. Nowadays, managers and fans don't want to wait five years for a 16 year old to mature; instead, teams like City and Chelsea - two of the best academies in England - prefer to sell their youngsters for decent fees and reinforce the first team with established players.
So what for the Class of '22? The Class of '22 managed to be the first United side to win the FA Youth Cup since 2011. That team has already begun to make waves in the senior side, as Garnacho is fully embedded into the first team; whilst Mainoo is hoping to contribute significant minutes this season. The pick of the crop on the outside looking in are Shola Shoretire, Isak Hansen-Aaroen and Dan Gore. Slightly behind this group, there is a lot of buzz around Shea Lacey, amongst others. Even with stability, there is a good chance only one or two end up making it from the class of '22. All United fans can hope for is that EtH is given the time and, consequently, gives those youngsters the time they need to develop. As I was composing this, I saw the news of Charlie leaving. Naturally, there will be times, as is the case with Savage and Iqbal, where you have to trust in the manager's decisions and accept some players won't make the grade
TLDR; the indubitable key to academy graduate success is first team stability.
United saw a number of academy graduates debut during the Fergie years; some because they were extremely talented, and others because they were hard workers and/or a good fit. We've seen a host of academy players make Premier League debuts post-Fergie - but only a handful have had a significant impact. Over the last ten years, there are only eight players with with >50 United appearances: Rashford, Greenwood, Williams, Lingard, Januzaj, Pereira, McTominay and Elanga. Other than McTominay, I was certain those listed would make it. Now, if you were to survey United fans, the majority would likely only deem Rashford a success. Pereira, Lingard, Elanga and McTominay all felt the ire of the fans online and in some small pockets of OT. So, in the eyes of some, academy players are not only expected to become regular starters, they are expected to become key contributors. When United are successful, academy players can help fill holes in a squad, as was the case during the fruitful years. Academy players are not currently afforded that role.
Those of us who are invested in the academy saw what, we believed, was a golden generation circa 2018. United had Gomes, Garner, Greenwood, Mengi, Williams, Chong, Levitt, Laird and Elanga coming through in a two-three year span; whilst Tuanzebe and Henderson were slightly older and, despite not being considered in the '18 crop, were on the cusp of becoming first-teamers. People hoped the '18 crop could perhaps rival the '92 crop - and now those people, myself included, look silly. So, what went wrong with that '18 team?
Well, firstly, injuries really hampered Laird, Mengi and Axel. That triumvirate are amongst the best defenders United have produced this century. If they go on to have careers as successful as Johnny Evans and Michael Keane, that would be a great success. The Manchester United midfield has troubled every United side over the last 10 years. Instability in midfield meant that Garner, Levitt and Gomes had limited opportunities to be embedded into the team. Midfield is an extremely difficult place to play, it's even more difficult in a team that has ambitions to win the league. Levitt's strength was his range of passing and dictating the pace of play, Garner was earmarked for his defensive abilities, tenacity and passing, whilst Gomes was seen as a number 10, though I preferred him as an 8, with exceptional playmaking ability. The attributes and traits they showed, albeit at youth-level, were there for all to see. These teenagers needed time to grow and learn. They were ultimately never afforded this. Gomes was a key contributor at Lille last season and, as a 6, was one of the player's at the U21 Euro's. Elanga, Chong and Williams were exceptional in the academy sides, exuding technical ability, confidence and desire. In my opinion, all three should have had a better pathway to the first team that included sensible loans. Outside of Williams' Norwich and a few other outliers (Garner's Forest loan, Amad's Sunderland loan, and Henderson had a great loan progression), I believe United's loan system hasn't put their youngsters in the best possible position for success - often favouring prior relationships, rather than appropriate levels and/or styles for youngsters. Chong was unfortunate enough to have some terrible luck with injuries and some really ineffective loans - whilst I acknowledge the Birmingham loan and subsequent transfer worked out well for him.
So, for those keeping count, the issues of that '18 crop were injuries, opportunities and patience. Those three factors can all be mitigated by stability. Stability in results gives managers time, time for managers allows managers to trust players, trust in players enables development. Fergie would allow players to mature and expect them to make the grade at 22 or 23. This isn't unique to United. Nowadays, managers and fans don't want to wait five years for a 16 year old to mature; instead, teams like City and Chelsea - two of the best academies in England - prefer to sell their youngsters for decent fees and reinforce the first team with established players.
So what for the Class of '22? The Class of '22 managed to be the first United side to win the FA Youth Cup since 2011. That team has already begun to make waves in the senior side, as Garnacho is fully embedded into the first team; whilst Mainoo is hoping to contribute significant minutes this season. The pick of the crop on the outside looking in are Shola Shoretire, Isak Hansen-Aaroen and Dan Gore. Slightly behind this group, there is a lot of buzz around Shea Lacey, amongst others. Even with stability, there is a good chance only one or two end up making it from the class of '22. All United fans can hope for is that EtH is given the time and, consequently, gives those youngsters the time they need to develop. As I was composing this, I saw the news of Charlie leaving. Naturally, there will be times, as is the case with Savage and Iqbal, where you have to trust in the manager's decisions and accept some players won't make the grade
TLDR; the indubitable key to academy graduate success is first team stability.
Last edited:
Great post. One of the important issues I think is that time has changed and there is not enough patience from players point of view as well. One loan is OK from that point of view, the second one is already too much as at age of 19-20, you think you are capable to get regular 90 minutes every week, if not with United than somewhere else. So, if you are talented like some of them, lets say Hannibal, you have to decide between getting a few minutes now and than with United, or to play 90 minutes every week with some other league 5 sides, maybe not on the top level, but again 90 minutes, experience and development. And it is usually the last year of the contract they sign as 17 years old, so it is the time to make decision. United until now, did not have good plan with that. Like they have been afraid to miss the next big thing, or to let player go and than look stupid 2 years later when the player develops into the world class one. I think that was the case with for example Januzaj earlier, or Macheda. So, the ultimate problem is how to decide at age of 18-19 if the player will be that good in 3-4 years. And even if you think that he will be, how to develop him without games. If it is loan, how to find the team willing to let the playing making mistakes at that age that could possible cost them promotion/relegation, while on the other hand they are not getting any fee later on from that player.
What I noticed now, hopefully, we decided to let them go at the age of 19-20, after one loan or one year training with the first team, and take low fee, but getting percentage of next sale and buy back option. And it is good choice I think, only that fees are pretty low at the moment which is normal as we did not produce great prospects in the last 10 years or so comparing with City or Chelsea. So, this is the start and hopefully in a few years it can bring some fruits. I think deals for Laird, Chong, now Iqbal, Hardley and Savage are good ones. They would not play in our team, let them be the asset of some other club that will push them to maybe earn on them later on, and we will be able to get them back if needed, or get some more money later on. Now, we just need to push more of them on good loans and sales, faster not keeping them to 22 like Galbraith and Bernard recently.
Little bit of chatter around of us signing two more City players for academy who are potentially u16 or less. Anyone have any idea if this is true?
Can those who follow the academy's work more than me comment on why there's only Garner (now ex-Red) as a Utd representative in the England U-21 squad?
Have Utd been more focused on bringing in young foreign players? Have we lost out to City in local youth recruitment? Have our English youngsters just been unlucky with injuries (e.g. Mengi. Laird - now also an ex-Red)?
This summer there's a possibility Maguire, Henderson, Williams, Heaton and Bishop will leave. Greenwood's status is uncertain. Jones, Tuanzebe, Butland (loan expired), Bernard, Savage and Laird have already left.
So at the senior level we could be left with just AWB, Shaw, Rashford and Mount as English players. Amongst the youth, I guess Shoretire, Mengi, Gore and Mainoo look the most promising.
Maybe these things just go in cycles, but should we be concerned by how few quality English players we have in our ranks?
Have Utd been more focused on bringing in young foreign players? Have we lost out to City in local youth recruitment? Have our English youngsters just been unlucky with injuries (e.g. Mengi. Laird - now also an ex-Red)?
This summer there's a possibility Maguire, Henderson, Williams, Heaton and Bishop will leave. Greenwood's status is uncertain. Jones, Tuanzebe, Butland (loan expired), Bernard, Savage and Laird have already left.
So at the senior level we could be left with just AWB, Shaw, Rashford and Mount as English players. Amongst the youth, I guess Shoretire, Mengi, Gore and Mainoo look the most promising.
Maybe these things just go in cycles, but should we be concerned by how few quality English players we have in our ranks?
It was not only Garner, but also Gomes as former youth. Most of the players in the squad are playing in PL, and our other youth players are not playing in PL beside Greenwood who would be probably in the senior squad if he is not a maniac. Also, Laird is the one who would probably be in contention if he did not have injury problems, maybe Brandon Williams if he did not lose the whole year cause we did not loan him out or sell to Saints last summer. Mengi was another one who had potential and played in England national team before with some of those, but injuries killed his career for now.
And yes, we have lost to City in youth development, not sure about local youth development but City has better youth teams recently.