Stam, Blomqvist, Yorke...

veron004

Guest
Are these a cautionary tale...?

Each of these signings sparked the treble year but each faded badly through injury or loss of form very quickly afterwards. The most durable & consistent players have been the home grown ones promoted through the ranks.

Just a thought as UTD seem prepared to bust the bank again.
 
You can't lump them into the same category because each had unique problems which led to them leaving. Stam (book), Yorke (too much partying), Blom (Injury), Schmikes (Bored) etc.
 
Originally posted by veron004:
<strong>Are these a cautionary tale...?

Each of these signings sparked the treble year but each faded badly through injury or loss of form very quickly afterwards. The most durable & consistent players have been the home grown ones promoted through the ranks.

Just a thought as UTD seem prepared to bust the bank again.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Mmmmm, I don't buy into this thing about seeing relevant lessons in events that are, in all probability, mere coincidence.

That the most durable/consistent have been promoted through the ranks holds true. But then, it holds true of a unique generation. It's not like it will just happen over and over again. :(
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>You can't lump them into the same category because each had unique problems which led to them leaving. Stam (book), Yorke (too much partying), Blom (Injury), Schmikes (Bored) etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>

True you can't lump them together, but there is a worrying trend among a number of UTD fans that the answer is to "splash the cash" whenever (rare in recent years)we have a poor season. UTD's dominance was founded on discovering and developing young raw talent into world class superstars.

Is it still feasible now that five youth players could fight their way into the side a la class of '92? Even the ones and twos are struggling to make it (e.g. Chadwick). Are we now perceived by young propsects as an unwise career move due to lack of potential first team opportunities? It just seems UTD are abandoning (or playing lip service) to the approach that saw them rise to their current domination.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by antohan:
<strong>

Mmmmm, I don't buy into this thing about seeing relevant lessons in events that are, in all probability, mere coincidence.

That the most durable/consistent have been promoted through the ranks holds true. But then, it holds true of a unique generation. It's not like it will just happen over and over again. :( </strong><hr></blockquote>

Except the notion of buying success is not new and most of the time ends in short term gain, long term failure (e.g. Blackburn Rovers or even more spectacularly Lazio who invested £80 million in one season!!)

Truthfully, even if there was a class like '92 is it feasible they could break in en masse in the current situation?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by veron004:
<strong>

True you can't lump them together, but there is a worrying trend among a number of UTD fans that the answer is to "splash the cash" whenever (rare in recent years)we have a poor season. UTD's dominance was founded on discovering and developing young raw talent into world class superstars.

Is it still feasible now that five youth players could fight their way into the side a la class of '92? Even the ones and twos are struggling to make it (e.g. Chadwick). Are we now perceived by young propsects as an unwise career move due to lack of potential first team opportunities? It just seems UTD are abandoning (or playing lip service) to the approach that saw them rise to their current domination.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I agree with you, but it should be noted that we will probably never have a group like Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, Butt again in the future. It was a one off situation that allowed us to dominate for much of the 90s. Secondly, the new player model is rapidly changing from a youth focus, to one that signing foreign players and domestic players from other clubs. Most clubs would rather buy instant success by way of new players with proven track records at other clubs, instead of waiting for players to develop for years in the youth system.

Look at Arsenal, United, Leeds, & Liverpool's aquisitions over the past 5 years. Most if not all have been from outside sources. Same applies to the Spanish and Italian clubs. Most clubs who still primarily rely on their youth systems do so because they don't have the funds to buy players like the biggers clubs, hence in that regard, football is rapidly becoming a globaled version of the haves and have nots.
Click to expand...
 
But how many of those who broke the bank have really achieved the success they crave? Lazio? Chelsea? Even Real Madrid finished 4th (3rd?) in their league after spending idiotic amounts on Zidane and Figo.

Liverpool. Arsenal and Leeds haven't just relied on breaking the bank. Liverpool have produced Owen and Gerrard and Carragher. Arsenal produced Cole and bought Ljungberg cheap. Leeds have Kewell, Harte, Smith for what we would call small change.

We bought OGS cheap in 1996 and since then all we have to show are O'Shea, who many are optimistic might make a first team player and Brown who many are pessimistic won't.
 
Excellent points.

Don't get me wrong, I'm as excited as the next fan at the possibility of world class players arriving at UTD, but there is the nagging fear that when the backbone of our side (Giggs, Scholes, Butt, Beckham, G. Neville, etc.)is gone in the next five or so years we will potentially end up as Chelsea Mk11 - a lot of foreign imports who blow hot and cold and flatter to deceive.
 
Breaking the bank isn't really the issue. Bayern seem to buy very good players at decent prices. They just picked up Ballack, Deisler, and Ze Roberto from other clubs this year. Real is not only the most successful club in terms of Champions League success, and they have just made the two most expensive signings in football history within the past 12 months. The future of football is globalization, and the clubs who do the best job of expanding their scouting base around the world will be the ones who do the best. The ones that don't will be the Forrests, Sampadorias, and Eintrach Frankfurts of tomorrow.
 
1. Brown won't be a first team player next season. But when Blanc retires, Wes would have gained the neccesary experienced to become better than Rio. Hence he will make our first team . You bet on it.
2. Same goes for O'shea.
3. You talked about producing players? Where do you think Giggs, Becks, Phil and Gary Neville, Buut came from. What of Keane. Ruud was cheap for that matter. In todays market we would have forked out 40m for him. Stam? He was cheap too. He was worth at least 20m.
4. The key to breaking the bank is to :
i. Buy quality.
ii. Quality that has longevity.
iii. Increase squad strength and qualty to make a team better than it has ever been
iv. Only spend on arears that need strengthening.

Not a cluster of star like Lazio and Barca have done in recent seasons.
v. Merge the new stars into the team. Else the
will bring the team down.
5. The reason why our youngters don't break into our first eleven from midfield upwards is that trying to break into a team with Giggs, Becks, Scholes, Veron, Butt, Ruud, Ole, Yorke and Forlan is a thankeless and hard task. That is why the Fortunes and Chadwicks suffer. Those like Healy couldn't simply stand the wait. Idon't blame them either.
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>Breaking the bank isn't really the issue. Bayern seem to buy very good players at decent prices. They just picked up Ballack, Deisler, and Ze Roberto from other clubs this year. Real is not only the most successful club in terms of Champions League success, and they have just made the two most expensive signings in football history within the past 12 months. The future of football is globalization, and the clubs who do the best job of expanding their scouting base around the world will be the ones who do the best. The ones that don't will be the Forrests, Sampadorias, and Eintrach Frankfurts of tomorrow.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Bayern paid "top dollar" (in terms of their league which doesn't have the same level of money sloshing about as the prem or spanish leagues)for those players who, incidentally, all came from other German sides. Bayern do most of their business buying other German teams' top players.

Real are an anomaly. They were bankrupt until bailed out by the government to the tune of £250 million. It has been their cavalier spending (hey, it's someone elses money after all) which has bloated the market value of players to such unsustainable levels. The lack of transfer activity domestically is an indication that the cash bubble has well & truly burst here and the problems of teams in Italy reflect the same there. On that score UTD would be wise to wait until the prices are driven down (£30+ million for Rio = sheer madness)as clubs become desperate to sell.

On the globalization point, no team is more global than Utd. Utd have also tried to set up feeder club deals and scouting links all over the world. I applaud this. The important thing is that young talent is brought up the Utd way with its traditions and style. But globalization doesn't = buying every superstar we can get our hands on which seems the way we are going. Utd's fan base is secure and what we need to concentrate on is bringing the next Beckham or Giggs (Fletcher was touted by UTD sources as the next BIG thing 2 years ago) onto the global stage.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by veron004:
<strong>Bayern paid "top dollar" (in terms of their league which doesn't have the same level of money sloshing about as the prem or spanish leagues)for those players who, incidentally, all came from other German sides. Bayern do most of their business buying other German teams' top players. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes they might have paid top dollar for those player by Bundesliga standards, but its not really that much when you consider that Bayern challenge for the CL almost every year, and they've just reloaded for the better part of the next years. The important point being that each of the three players had nothing to do with the Bayern youth system. They were all brought in from the outside.

Originally posted by veron004:
<strong>Real are an anomaly. They were bankrupt until bailed out by the government to the tune of £250 million. It has been their cavalier spending (hey, it's someone elses money after all) which has bloated the market value of players to such unsustainable levels. The lack of transfer activity domestically is an indication that the cash bubble has well & truly burst here and the problems of teams in Italy reflect the same there. On that score UTD would be wise to wait until the prices are driven down (£30+ million for Rio = sheer madness)as clubs become desperate to sell.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well they are an anomaly in the sense that they're one of the few clubs that can always count on the government to bail them out if they get too far in over their heads in debt. However they're aren't anomaly in the sense that most of their star players are foreigners who did not come through their youth system. Most came from foreign or other Spanish clubs. All of the bigger European clubs have shifted their focus in favour of buying good players now, rather than waiting a few years for them to mature in the youth teams.

Also, United are the ultimate anomaly in this equation, in that Beckham, Scholes, Butt, Giggs all made their debuts between 90-93 and have all become world class calibre players. This is the extreme exception rather than the rule, and we've been very fortunate to have been the recipients of something so special. It may not happen again for another 50 years, even if we tried.

Originally posted by veron004:
<strong>On the globalization point, no team is more global than Utd. Utd have also tried to set up feeder club deals and scouting links all over the world. I applaud this. The important thing is that young talent is brought up the Utd way with its traditions and style. But globalization doesn't = buying every superstar we can get our hands on which seems the way we are going. Utd's fan base is secure and what we need to concentrate on is bringing the next Beckham or Giggs (Fletcher was touted by UTD sources as the next BIG thing 2 years ago) onto the global stage.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I agree that we need to continue to nurture the youngsters we have today. I don't think anything will change with regard to our commitment to the players in our youth system. From all accounts, Davis, Fletcher, Timm, Richardson should all have a chance at making the first team one day. Personally I would be happy if we could get two future first teamers out of those. The problem lies in the shift that has occured in the past few years. We've spent almost 50m on two players alone over the past two years and the board are going to want a return on that investment, irrespective of how promising player X in the reserves is. This will put more emphasis on playing the likes of Seba & RVN (as it should) and take away any chance of Fletcher and Davis seing the light at OT. Higginbotham, Healy, come to mind. Its hard to break into the first team when you've got a World Class lineup infront of you.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>Its hard to break into the first team when you've got a World Class lineup infront of you.</strong><hr></blockquote>That's been my argument since I joined here. Up 'n' comers are shying away from OT simply because of that. Some people don't understand that and keep whining about our youth policy. Just like we can't force Leeds to sell Rio or force Rio to leave Leeds, we can't force youth to sign schoolboy forms with us.
Click to expand...
 
If Ryan Giggs had chosen England rather than Wales the English midfield in the World Cup would have been four United players, players developed from youth and born with a year or two of each other. Three are likely to be even better in four years time. I know Gerrard missed out due to injury but could any other club match this? The problems this causes are a lack of opportunity for the next generation.

I also believe the gap between the top and middle is growing in England. This is partly due to factors outside football (globalisation means people do not follow their local side as much as before). Within football the increase in the number of subs means clubs win trophies with squads rather than sides. Would Sherringham have come to United to win trophies if he was third or fourth choice behind Yorke and Cole? This increasing gap means the top European sides replace English sides four to ten as rivals. Arsenal and Liverpool stay on the list. Finishing above Leeds, Chelsea and the like is considered a formality by many fans.

It is harder to break into our squad because our sights are set higher than even five years ago. We cannot afford to give a youngster an extended run because there aren't any dead games. Losing at home to the likes of Bolton, Middlesboro and West Ham causes problems because we can't afford to drop the points.

Allowing our promising players to go on extended loan periods is one solution. Another is to allow other clubs to develop them and buy the players when they appear to be achieving their potential. The first is expensive because there are many more failure than success, the second means paying big money but, usually, getting a good player.
 
Originally posted by dicko:
<strong>It is harder to break into our squad because our sights are set higher than even five years ago. We cannot afford to give a youngster an extended run because there aren't any dead games. Losing at home to the likes of Bolton, Middlesboro and West Ham causes problems because we can't afford to drop the points.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Spot on dicko. Alan Hansen's infamous statement ("you don't win anything with kids") is not that far from the truth. When that generation was coming through we could afford and, most important WE NEEDED, to give them a run for their money.

I bet we wouldn't be too happy to see us fielding an O'Shea-Brown partnership in the CL. At that time we didn't have much of a choice, today we do, what is likely to happen? We will buy players we are more confident in.

That said, veron004 has a point in terms of not going down the big bucks/mercenary route. 30M (and the wages that go with it) for a CB is absurd. There are many under-10m players that will do as good enough a job for us and can very quickly be at the same standard with decent coaching. We are unlikely to "raise" such a great generation from schoolboy level again but we can do some decent future talent shopping

I am delighted to see most of the activity has been on the coaching front, it shows SAF is betting on development rather than turning into panic-buyers. Assuming no first-team players leave we only really need two first team contestants coming over. The rest should go to exciting prospects.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by True Treble Reds:
<strong>Agreed.

Assuming Disco goes, it's simple, we need a new # 5, # 9 and a new # 3 assuming Micky keeps his # 27.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm not too bothered about replacing Disco. Is there anything to replace apart from the surplus payroll? I would get a REAL multi-talented support striker ;) (i.e. not a donkey type but a classy/flair forward).
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by antohan:
<strong>I'm not too bothered about replacing Disco. Is there anything to replace apart from the surplus payroll?</strong><hr></blockquote>Well yeah but I still think we need an out and out striker for when Ruud &/or Ole are rested or injured.

I think Diego will do well but it'll be too much to expect him to take over if either Ole or Ruud are out for an extended period of time.

United need to show the Europe we mean buisness and that means getting a good quality striker in.... After the defence is sorted like!
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by True Treble Reds:
<strong>Well yeah but I still think we need an out and out striker for when Ruud &/or Ole are rested or injured.

I think Diego will do well but it'll be too much to expect him to take over if either Ole or Ruud are out for an extended period of time.

United need to show the Europe we mean buisness and that means getting a good quality striker in.... After the defence is sorted like!</strong><hr></blockquote>

How much did Yorke contribute last season? How necessary was it to have a 3rd striker? If you're looking for quality you are either unlikely to get it (bench status) or have problems with keeping them motivated (both OGS and the newcomer).

I think what we have seemed to lack at times was something different up front for those times when RVN-OGS (i.e. 2 strikers) is not the best option to play with. I guess I miss Eric :(
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by antohan:
<strong>How much did Yorke contribute last season? How necessary was it to have a 3rd striker? </strong><hr></blockquote>Well, that's kind of my point really. When Ole and Ruud couldn't produce, we were screwed. Diego was still out of sorts even though he showed flashes of skill.

People say that we still scored more than any other team! So what? There were a few games that we scored nowt when it really mattered, Boro, Arse, WHU and poo. Granted, we can't win 'em all, but, we'd have a better chance if we could throw a different look at them toward the end of a game.

I miss Eric too.
Click to expand...
 
Very good thread

I'm also concerned that even though we are one of the worlds best clubs, when it comes to selling players we rarely ask or recieve adequate payment for the players going out. [Stam being a possible exception] We always seem to be letting players go on frees, or at bargain basement prices. <img src="graemlins/nono.gif" border="0" alt="[No No]" />

Comments?
 
I can't think of too many players, Jaap notwithstanding, that we've sold that are on the up and up as far as career is concerned. More often than not, if a player moves away from OT, he's had his day thus his value isn't that high.

Ince could fall into Stams category but we had Nicky coming through and Keano taking over so the £8m or so we got was a welcome boost to the coffers at the time.
 
Originally posted by True Treble Reds:
<strong>I can't think of too many players, Jaap notwithstanding, that we've sold that are on the up and up as far as career is concerned. More often than not, if a player moves away from OT, he's had his day thus his value isn't that high.

Ince could fall into Stams category but we had Nicky coming through and Keano taking over so the £8m or so we got was a welcome boost to the coffers at the time.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Agreed, those who are good have stayed here for life. I'm actually very happy to see we can keep great players happy to see out their career having only played for us, it says something about how the club is run and the ambition/continuous challenges it sets for itself.

Which brings us back to bringing up the players rather than join the continuous merry-go-round of greedy bastards and fabulous fees we have seen in Italy, for instance.

It also brings us back to different times/phases for United: in the early 90's it was an ambition to get the club to the top at English level, then European, then consistently dominating and when they started running out of challenges... we got last season :( It has been quite a trip for those involved but then, anyone joining now doesn't have that to look forward to. Yes, getting back to the top this coming season, and then? Just continuing to be the best, which can be quite boring frankly. The more you look at it the more unlikely it is that the 90's will perpetuate themselves :( :( :(
Click to expand...
 
Thing is Utd have not dominated in Europe. Sure they've been very consistent in reaching the later stages, but they're behind Real and Bayern IMHO. This is especially true when you look at head to head encounters. I'm sure Fergie doesn't want anyone to think the '99 CL final was a fluke. His goal has been to win it then retain it. So there is plenty of ambition left in Fergie for the team.

On the domestic front, it's suddenly become very competitive at the top again. I wouldn't be so sure that Utd will dominate as easily as they have done in the 90's. There are fresh challenges to be faced.

I guess I also have to accept Utd have reached the stage in their global developement which means they can't afford to take the risks of allowing youngsters the time to break through and settle in. As has been mentioned by others in this thread - there are no "throw away" games anymore for Utd. When Utd lost the last three games of the 2000-2001 season by fielding a lot of new faces it seemed to rebound horribly on them when the team made such a complacent start to last season.

I expect a red hot start to this campaign. <img src="graemlins/devil.gif" border="0" alt="[Devil]" />
 
Originally posted by veron004:
<strong>I expect a red hot start to this campaign. <img src="graemlins/devil.gif" border="0" alt="[Devil]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

I do as well. You are right about never getting to dominate but rather consistently challenge for honours at European level.

My point is, after the Treble all you can wish for is continuous repetiton, which is a challenge (not easy) but no longer a dream. Look at Ronaldo, he won the WC twice, he's not looking at winning it three times, he is looking at a much less fancy competition (Olympics) simply because he never got it! That's what we have seen with Giggs and Scholes mainly.

You start losing that cutting edge and things like last season happened. Look at Real, you could say they have dominated European football, can't you? Well, in the domestic league they are boring to watch, they don't even bother much, you only really see them turn it on for ~2 months a year from the CL quarters on. To keep the hype going they have to sign a World Superstar for silly money every year, otherwise you would be looking forward to a long boring season...

In some way it was very good that we got stuffed (yep, well and truly stuffed) last year. Arsenal and Pool have got stronger and that can only make every weekend more exciting, which is what I love about the EPL, eyeball-to-eyeball, SAF-Keegan, SAF-Wenger... You have to love it!
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by antohan:
<strong>

In some way it was very good that we got stuffed (yep, well and truly stuffed) last year. Arsenal and Pool have got stronger and that can only make every weekend more exciting, which is what I love about the EPL, eyeball-to-eyeball, SAF-Keegan, SAF-Wenger... You have to love it!</strong><hr></blockquote>

Utd have always responded to the challenge in the past. We've got something to prove this season. Our record against Arsenal and Liverpool has been very poor recently. Our success has been based on our consistency against lower opposition not our domination of the better teams in the league.

I'm sure that needs to change if we want to end the view that the Utd era is fading.
Click to expand...
 
Maybe the problem with our youngsters is that they are trying to break into the first team for PL, FA Cup and CL matches. Maybe we should be setting them up to win or go as far as possible in the Worthington Cup.
Their improvement should be benchmarked in terms of how well they compete with the likes of Blackburn and Sunderland and Boro. etc...in the worthington Cup...Make them winners there and they will fit in smoothly into the PL, FA and CL...

But I agree, the backbone of Utd must always be British based and hopefully youth system strong....

:)
 
in 99 we bought 1 striker yorke, 1 world class defender Stam, and one largely unknown winger in blomquist, we won the treble because we mainatined balance when giggs was not present.

this year we need the same sort of players plus utility players.

maybe duff, rio/nesta and a left back (as backup or replacement for silvestere... r carlos??, wi th him being the backup)
 
Stam was not just a great defender but a massive presence at the back, as was Schmeichel - our defense was imposing because of this. But credit has to go to Yorke for making the biggest difference, because he provided the other half to one of the greatest striking partnerships in modern football - their one two's that season, not to mention overhead kicks were a danger to every team however good that season. Too bad it didn't last. And of course we had 4 strikers on top form that season too. For this reason our new striker this season has got to be of very high calibre who can form a very complementary partnership, rather than another kid still making his name.
 
I agree.

Forlan is one for the future as his goal in the W.C. demonstrates. We need someone who can push Ruud and Ole hard and who will compliment either if the other is not available.

Do you buy into the idea that Duff could fulfil this role? Personally, he seemed much more effective out on the wings.
 
Originally posted by veron004:
<strong>I agree.

Forlan is one for the future as his goal in the W.C. demonstrates. We need someone who can push Ruud and Ole hard and who will compliment either if the other is not available.

Do you buy into the idea that Duff could fulfil this role? Personally, he seemed much more effective out on the wings.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think Duff can play up front, but I'm not sure he would weigh in with the required number of goals - the point about a link striker is to add to the number of goals, not reduce them. He'd be good cover, and something different to try in some games, as well as cover/successor for Giggs.
Click to expand...
 
If RVN and OGS score a hatful like last year and Forlan comes good...then Duff will be an excellent buy.....if not then we will all be asking for a 4th striker.

Duff will probably be good for 10 to 15 goals a season especially with the quality service he will receive from Utd midfield.

He will add to the team....that much is certain.
 
I Personally think Duff would be a terrific signing. He has all the qualities that I admire, such as hard work, commitment and fearlessness, to complement his undoubted skill. He's a Utd fan, and he appears very down to earth.
 
I agree, though a substantial sticking point in our ability to land him would obviously be where he would play for us. Our midfield and striker roles are already occupied, whereas Liverpool might benefit from the fact that they could easily vacate their left wing for him.
 
Originally posted by Neil Thomson:
<strong>the point about a link striker is to add to the number of goals, not reduce them.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Amen :rolleyes: <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" />
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>I agree, though a substantial sticking point in our ability to land him would obviously be where he would play for us. Our midfield and striker roles are already occupied, whereas Liverpool might benefit from the fact that they could easily vacate their left wing for him.</strong><hr></blockquote>

True, but I think Duff would definitely push Giggs or Becks hard. Truth is, when we had Blomqvist pushing Giggs they both excelled during the treble season. Giggs doesn't have the competition ATM. Besides Fergie needs to nurse Giggs along a bit these days and in that respect Duff would get a lot of opportunities. Similarly with Becks. That broken bone he suffered is predominantly stress related. My wife's a theatre nurse and when all the hulabaloo about Beck's metatarsil was being discussed, an orthopaedic surgeon told her that it's not a good sign. He's overplayed on it and, even after recovery,it is potentially a long term weakness & problem (Same with G. Neville - who played more games than anyone last season.)

Hence Duff would give Fergie options on the right too and the opportunity to reduce Beckham's workload.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by veron004:
<strong>Similarly with Becks. That broken bone he suffered is predominantly stress related. </strong><hr></blockquote>

So Duscher lunging into it studs first had nothing to do with it. Beckham's metatarsal was just stressed.

Right.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.