Joe Hugill

Status
Not open for further replies.


Henry_Hill said:
that is correct the club were actively looking to sell him but did offer him a contract, probably knowing it would turned down. Cant blame the kid for moving on when you see all the best young players leaving and it must be difficult to turn down a club like United
Click to expand...
Exactly. No blame on the player, but the problem is the investment will never match the return on losing these players at 16.
Moneyball said:
Agent once told me if a player signs a three year deal as a first year pro at a top flight club he can virtually guarantee him a decent career, that career might be in the lower leagues but he’ll have a career.

Very different at a League One club!
Click to expand...
That's changed at Liverpool recently.
 
the dude said:
Gilmour signed from Rangers. Tomori and Abraham only got a game because of the transfer ban. They'd have been out on loan again otherwise.
Click to expand...
What you are implying in previous post is the academy is a waste of time, it doesn’t work for even the top teams you said, what a load of rubbish even in last 10 years it’s made a lot more for our club than the club has put in ie Henderson, Pickford, Asoro, and Maja plus many others, so don’t spout garbage like I said in a previous message.
 
Red and white TID said:
What you are implying in previous post is the academy is a waste of time, it doesn’t work for even the top teams you said, what a load of rubbish even in last 10 years it’s made a lot more for our club than the club has put in ie Henderson, Pickford, Asoro, and Maja plus many others, so don’t spout garbage like I said in a previous message.
Click to expand...
I never said that at all. I just pointed out that your post holding Chelsea up as a shining example was a load of shite.
Red and white TID said:
What you are implying in previous post is the academy is a waste of time, it doesn’t work for even the top teams you said, what a load of rubbish even in last 10 years it’s made a lot more for our club than the club has put in ie Henderson, Pickford, Asoro, and Maja plus many others, so don’t spout garbage like I said in a previous message.
Click to expand...
Think the confusion is that I've replied to your reply to another poster! I think the Academy if managed correctly is a fantastic thing and your right it has paid dividends for us in the past and may well again in the future. At the moment we seem a bit screwed. Poor results and seemingly willing to sell our best prospects. It could even be argued that Chelseas model is good for the club as they must make a fortune from loan fees. Its poor for the players though.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bat
the dude said:
Gilmour signed from Rangers. Tomori and Abraham only got a game because of the transfer ban. They'd have been out on loan again otherwise.
Click to expand...
Right, but the Chelsea academy has a strong record in the FA Youth Cup and a pedigree that allows them to sell players for seven figures easily.

Patrick Bamford never kicked a ball for them and he was sold for £5.5m. That same summer they sold Bertrand Traore for £8.8m, Nathaniel Chalobah for £5m, Nathen Ake for £20m, and Dom Solanke for £3m (via a tribunal).

That alone would be enough to run a Category One academy for 10 years.
 
Carrick18 said:
Right, but the Chelsea academy has a strong record in the FA Youth Cup and a pedigree that allows them to sell players for seven figures easily.

Patrick Bamford never kicked a ball for them and he was sold for £5.5m. That same summer they sold Bertrand Traore for £8.8m, Nathaniel Chalobah for £5m, Nathen Ake for £20m, and Dom Solanke for £3m (via a tribunal).

That alone would be enough to run a Category One academy for 10 years.
Click to expand...
At the same time I wonder how many of these were actually bought by them after being developed elsewhere? You mention Bamford, I remember seeing him play for Forrest u18s against us, he must have been 17 when Chelsea signed him.
 
1more said:
At the same time I wonder how many of these were actually bought by them after being developed elsewhere? You mention Bamford, I remember seeing him play for Forrest u18s against us, he must have been 17 when Chelsea signed him.
Click to expand...
I thought Bamford would kick on and become a great player. Not to be.
 
Carrick18 said:
Right, but the Chelsea academy has a strong record in the FA Youth Cup and a pedigree that allows them to sell players for seven figures easily.

Patrick Bamford never kicked a ball for them and he was sold for £5.5m. That same summer they sold Bertrand Traore for £8.8m, Nathaniel Chalobah for £5m, Nathen Ake for £20m, and Dom Solanke for £3m (via a tribunal).

That alone would be enough to run a Category One academy for 10 years.
Click to expand...

Chelsea’s model works. They get millions and millions in loan fees and the club do not pay the players wages. If someone turns out good eg Reece James and Tammy they save millions on transfer fees. If players do ok on loan but not good enough for Chelsea they get sold.. it clearly is a good model.
 
I hope Dave Jones and Rodwell both have a conversation with Hugill before he goes.
I'm not sure there's anything they could say that would persuade him to turn down a potentially good career move, but at very least, the lad should know that he has the respect of the club management and that the door is open for a return if future circumstances allow.
 
Out if interest in light of the 16s who have be sold , how many have gone through as scholars to play in next year's U18s? Just thinking of numbers since a fair few of the 18s have been released.
 
Kernel said:
Out if interest in light of the 16s who have be sold , how many have gone through as scholars to play in next year's U18s? Just thinking of numbers since a fair few of the 18s have been released.
Click to expand...

The club will be signing players released from clubs at u16 level. Such a success at u23 level so they’re doing in the 18s...
 
DJM said:
I hope Dave Jones and Rodwell both have a conversation with Hugill before he goes.
I'm not sure there's anything they could say that would persuade him to turn down a potentially good career move, but at very least, the lad should know that he has the respect of the club management and that the door is open for a return if future circumstances allow.
Click to expand...
I think the £250K that we are getting would suggest that the club have no desire whatsoever to talk him out of this. We know that with the lad who went to Liverpool he was not offered anything to stay and was not even spoken to - the club actually made that move happen. It seems so clear that the club will be making between £1M and £2M by offloading these 7 or 8 players and are quite happy with that. Personally I think they are absolutely selling our future down the river for a quick buck - but what do I know.
 
10 Gary Rowells said:
I think the £250K that we are getting would suggest that the club have no desire whatsoever to talk him out of this. We know that with the lad who went to Liverpool he was not offered anything to stay and was not even spoken to - the club actually made that move happen. It seems so clear that the club will be making between £1M and £2M by offloading these 7 or 8 players and are quite happy with that. Personally I think they are absolutely selling our future down the river for a quick buck - but what do I know.
Click to expand...
I posted because I want to see change. SD is selling up if he can, so I don't expect anything from him on this. I mentioned Jones and Rodwell because they may be still around once SD goes. I'm sure very few would doubt that selling off rising talent does not bode well. I'm sure even Jones and Rodwell can see that. I hope to God things will change for the better. Rodwell and Jones should be acting in the club's best interests now and setting out their stall for a better day to come.

Whilst I'm on, I will put on record my strong view that the better day does not arrive when SD sells. It comes when our owners (SD or other) put structures in place to grow a good future for SAFC: an academy that is well run and an attractive option for players to come, a first team and academy managed by people who train winners not losers, better use of youngsters rather than journeymen in the first team etc etc.

In some ways I see this Coronavirus crap as a potential turning point. We are about to shed a bucketload of players so for the first time I think the owners can not blame inherited squad overheads etc. Of course they can still bemoan the current financial climate but at least every one of our rivals is suffering along with us.
 
DJM said:
I posted because I want to see change. SD is selling up if he can, so I don't expect anything from him on this. I mentioned Jones and Rodwell because they may be still around once SD goes. I'm sure very few would doubt that selling off rising talent does not bode well. I'm sure even Jones and Rodwell can see that. I hope to God things will change for the better. Rodwell and Jones should be acting in the club's best interests now and setting out their stall for a better day to come.

Whilst I'm on, I will put on record my strong view that the better day does not arrive when SD sells. It comes when our owners (SD or other) put structures in place to grow a good future for SAFC: an academy that is well run and an attractive option for players to come, a first team and academy managed by people who train winners not losers, better use of youngsters rather than journeymen in the first team etc etc.

In some ways I see this Coronavirus crap as a potential turning point. We are about to shed a bucketload of players so for the first time I think the owners can not blame inherited squad overheads etc. Of course they can still bemoan the current financial climate but at least every one of our rivals is suffering along with us.
Click to expand...
Good points. Agree with all that.
 
1more said:
At the same time I wonder how many of these were actually bought by them after being developed elsewhere? You mention Bamford, I remember seeing him play for Forrest u18s against us, he must have been 17 when Chelsea signed him.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, but there's a lot of that at the top clubs. It would be no different to Hugill going on from Man Utd to say Hull for £4-5m. They've still made more off developing and selling than Sunderland. They've nurtured a potential.

Of that aforementioned group, only Solanke is a day dot player. Even Chalobah started at Fulham and then moved to Chelsea at 10.


BigCatts said:
Chelsea’s model works. They get millions and millions in loan fees and the club do not pay the players wages. If someone turns out good eg Reece James and Tammy they save millions on transfer fees. If players do ok on loan but not good enough for Chelsea they get sold.. it clearly is a good model.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, but hard to replicate unless you have money and connections. Their catchment area is fiercely competitive. The north-east only really has Newcastle and Middlesbrough. Boro have a good reputation for actually blooding players, and that will persist under Jonathan Woodgate. Newcastle, less so, although I'd bet they're holding the Longstaff brothers up to every parent they speak to.

The big question now is what do those in charge at Sunderland want the reputation/identity to be. Ethan Robson, Bali Mumba, and Denver Hume are a decent set of success stories, to varying degrees, but the real big names may have already left. If I'm a parent I'd ask why do I need to go to Sunderland if my boy is good enough for those clubs?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top