Alfonso
Established Member
Wenger recentely stated that he finds it addictive signing so many young players from around the world, as he has chance to develop them into the next big thing, which can be very rewarding for both manager and club. However, do you think we are getting into a postion that we are signing too many youngsters to an extent that it is uneccessary? Is there only so many quality youngsters you can have at a club?
A pretty werid question you may say, as how can a club have too many talented youngsters? However, i feel we are getting to a stage where we should draw the line somewhere, and let our current youngsters develop and evolve as footballers, instead of them having to look over their shoulders every two minutes to see the 'next this or that' arrive. Moreover, I feel looking throughout our squad(reserves and under 18's included) that we have a wealth of talent in every position.
Of course, you can argue, and say the more talented youngsters a club sign, due to law of averages, one of those players will end up being world class by the age of say 24. But as we all know, for every Cesc, there will be a David Bentely or Jermaine Pennant.
Furthermore, i feel that it is good for a large group of young players to be settled as well, i.e have a strong community amongst themselves, that will not only help them but help Arsenal in the long term(recent examples include Senderoes and Cesc). The Man Utd class of 1992(Beckham and co) is another example. Would the signing of too many youngsters break this strong bond our current youngsters have? Much like what is happeing at West Ham at the moment, i.e the Argies.
Moreover, im worried that the signing of so many new young players is somehow not good for the morale of our current crop of youngsters. I know it is a dog eat dog world, and this applies even more so in football, but surely it would unresorucefull for us to spend so much time and moeny on our current youngsters only for us to sign players in similar positions with similar abilities( e.g whats the difference between Song and Denislon?). Yes, one could argue, this seprates the boys from the men, but when players are young they are vulnerable and need extra support, espeically considering we have a high number of overseas players, who have difficulties adapting to unfamilar surroundings, i.e a different culture.
Also, without question, i think we have more players(from first team to reserves/under 18's) than required. And there are not enough games in the reserves and Carling Cup for all of them to be satisfied.
The question of will we turn down the 'new maradona' just because we have too many youngsters arises. But we will only know if they are the 'new maradona' or not if we train them and develop them over years anyway, because however rated a youngster is at 16 there is no gurantee they will be world class in the future. The downside is at a cost of another young player. So, i guess it comes down to how much opportunity cost we want to employ. But are we really doing trial and error untill we have a 'perfect' set of youngsters?
Discuss.
A pretty werid question you may say, as how can a club have too many talented youngsters? However, i feel we are getting to a stage where we should draw the line somewhere, and let our current youngsters develop and evolve as footballers, instead of them having to look over their shoulders every two minutes to see the 'next this or that' arrive. Moreover, I feel looking throughout our squad(reserves and under 18's included) that we have a wealth of talent in every position.
Of course, you can argue, and say the more talented youngsters a club sign, due to law of averages, one of those players will end up being world class by the age of say 24. But as we all know, for every Cesc, there will be a David Bentely or Jermaine Pennant.
Furthermore, i feel that it is good for a large group of young players to be settled as well, i.e have a strong community amongst themselves, that will not only help them but help Arsenal in the long term(recent examples include Senderoes and Cesc). The Man Utd class of 1992(Beckham and co) is another example. Would the signing of too many youngsters break this strong bond our current youngsters have? Much like what is happeing at West Ham at the moment, i.e the Argies.
Moreover, im worried that the signing of so many new young players is somehow not good for the morale of our current crop of youngsters. I know it is a dog eat dog world, and this applies even more so in football, but surely it would unresorucefull for us to spend so much time and moeny on our current youngsters only for us to sign players in similar positions with similar abilities( e.g whats the difference between Song and Denislon?). Yes, one could argue, this seprates the boys from the men, but when players are young they are vulnerable and need extra support, espeically considering we have a high number of overseas players, who have difficulties adapting to unfamilar surroundings, i.e a different culture.
Also, without question, i think we have more players(from first team to reserves/under 18's) than required. And there are not enough games in the reserves and Carling Cup for all of them to be satisfied.
The question of will we turn down the 'new maradona' just because we have too many youngsters arises. But we will only know if they are the 'new maradona' or not if we train them and develop them over years anyway, because however rated a youngster is at 16 there is no gurantee they will be world class in the future. The downside is at a cost of another young player. So, i guess it comes down to how much opportunity cost we want to employ. But are we really doing trial and error untill we have a 'perfect' set of youngsters?
Discuss.
