| Is that it for Woolfenden here? 02:04 - Oct 22 with 7032 views | pointofblue |
A late night thought running through my mind - is that it for Woolfenden here? Obviously Edmundson and Burgess bumped him down spots and Nsiala has found favour over him now too. So I guess, at his age where he needs football, that’s it; if he wants first team football he’ll have to move on.
And I hope Cook let’s him, especially as El Mizouni’s emergence might not mean Woolfenden is required to meet the homegrown criteria. I have to admit I do have, possibly overly, a soft spot for Woolfenden and feel he was dealt a bad hand, particularly last year, in defensive partnerships which IMO hindered his progress, but if he wants to have a chance of a decent career he probably needs to move in January. I cannot see anyway he can fight back into the side. |  |
| |  |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 14:11 - Oct 25 with 694 views | WilbrahamBlue |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 12:52 - Oct 25 by itfcjoe |
It's really not difficult to argue against it's "total abolishment".
In the last 15 years it's produced £15m or so in transfer fees and well over 1000 appearances for the club
Even this summer's transfer business has been built off the back of being able to sell Downes, Dozzell, Gibbs, Bishop and Lankester which has brought in over £3m. For all the talk of our transfer spend being neutral this summer it is down to academy players that this has been the case.
We have lost 3-4 players before their first contract - but we've kept hold of the other 15-20 youth internationals that have been produced - some have worked out and some haven't.
The academy has been a good thing for Ipswich Town, for a variety of reasons - but with the investment being cut back to the bone in it then it has had a couple of leaner years. There are a million reasons to keep it - just worrying about success on the pitch misses the point that a football club should be representative of it's community and should give back to it. |
Even at 15m in transfer fees (including top-ups we may not have even financially realised) over 15 years exclusively from academy trained players - that's not got near covering the cost of the academy over the same period? A decent academy at levels we have been at could generate that in 2 summers.
In those 15 years the academy hasn't provided Ipswich 1st team with anything more than a tiny trickle of sustained appearances that have been impactful on the pitch.
We are heralding Downes, Dozzel, Bishop and Lankaster as some sort of academy success stories when in reality they failed to enhance OUR first 11 enough, or showed a great desire to leave as soon as they had a decision to make.
The 15-20 youth internationals you mention that may or may not have worked out, your being hugely generous. I'm interested in to what your definition of 'working out' is Joe? Certainly not worked out at our club where it matters, or brought in significant fees.
Should we keep ticking along referencing Dyer and Wickham from yesteryear and how great the academy is? Why not consider radical/progressive developments and strategies to do with youth, recruitment and even reserve football?
Why not develop a more progressive attitude to sustained success on the pitch, for the 1st team? We can either get involved or sit at the back and make these changes over the next few years as everyone else revaluates the same issue. | | | |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 15:26 - Oct 25 with 643 views | itfcjoe |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 14:11 - Oct 25 by WilbrahamBlue |
Even at 15m in transfer fees (including top-ups we may not have even financially realised) over 15 years exclusively from academy trained players - that's not got near covering the cost of the academy over the same period? A decent academy at levels we have been at could generate that in 2 summers.
In those 15 years the academy hasn't provided Ipswich 1st team with anything more than a tiny trickle of sustained appearances that have been impactful on the pitch.
We are heralding Downes, Dozzel, Bishop and Lankaster as some sort of academy success stories when in reality they failed to enhance OUR first 11 enough, or showed a great desire to leave as soon as they had a decision to make.
The 15-20 youth internationals you mention that may or may not have worked out, your being hugely generous. I'm interested in to what your definition of 'working out' is Joe? Certainly not worked out at our club where it matters, or brought in significant fees.
Should we keep ticking along referencing Dyer and Wickham from yesteryear and how great the academy is? Why not consider radical/progressive developments and strategies to do with youth, recruitment and even reserve football?
Why not develop a more progressive attitude to sustained success on the pitch, for the 1st team? We can either get involved or sit at the back and make these changes over the next few years as everyone else revaluates the same issue. |
I think the biggest issue the academy is facing is that since Mick left the first team has either been a state or in League 1 - and that means that you can't realise value.
Academy players need to be coming into a settled and decent team to flourish and that is hopefully what Cook is building here - as an e.g. look at how El Mizouni has looked when he has played this season.
The frustration is we had a very good generation of players born in 1999-2000 - Ben Morris, Andre Dozzell, Flynn Downes, Tristan Nydam and Nick Hayes all played for England which is unheard of for a cat 2 club, plus you had Luke Woolfenden, Jack Lankester and Charlie Brown. But that coincided with the club going through it's most turbulent ever period, plus injuries to some, losing one to Chelsea and none make a massive impact.
Had we got a manager in after Mick left who could have given Downes, Nydam and Dozzell decent minutes in the CHampionship - if one of them does well then they are worth £8m as opposed to the £1.5m we got for Downes in League 1. The academy isn't responsible for where the 1st team is, but ultimately that is what effects things for the most.
In the post Brexit workd, with GBE for work permits, there will be a premium on young English players and we have to ensure we are on the right side of that.
The academy has a mission statement which seems very unambitous, but is obviously agreed re the funding it receives:
- To produce one player per season who makes a minimum of 5 appearances in the 1st team (Idris El Mizouni this year)
- To produce one player per season who (as a loan player) makes regular appearance in the 1st team of a Football League Club (Dobra, Simpson and Ndaba this year)
- To ensure that 3 players graduate from U18 squad to PDL squad (Lots this year)
To ensure a minimum of 60% of Scholars have come from Ipswich Town’s Academy registered schoolboys (Probably 80% this year)
Getting 100 appearances out of Dozzell and Downes and selling them on for 7 figure fees when in the 3rd tier is a massive success for the academy - bearing in mind a depressed window where there were only 37 fees paid by Championship clubs all summer ( https://theathletic.co.uk/2804394/2021/09/03/championship-transfer-window-40m-sp and we wanted to sell both players.
Just looking at someone like Brentford isn't radical for me, making the best of what we have here uniquely as a club is what we need to do - that's a big catchment area and a very good reputation. |  |
| |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 15:29 - Oct 25 with 638 views | PhilTWTD |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 18:40 - Oct 22 by positivity |
it's a confusing one. how i understand it is... (please correct if wrong!)
i think we have to have at least one homegrown player in our name squad of 22. woolf is the only one, kenlock and morris are the only other options (bonne doesn't count unfortunately).
if we didn't have one in the named squad *then* we would have to have an underage academy player on the bench (or name just 6 subs)
we should get promoted just to not have to try and get our heads round these arcane rules! |
It wouldn't be a huge issue for the most part as Idris has been in the squad lately. Only if he was out would it mean someone who would normally be out of the first-team squad would have to be drafted in. |  | | |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 20:42 - Oct 25 with 541 views | pointofblue |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 15:29 - Oct 25 by PhilTWTD |
It wouldn't be a huge issue for the most part as Idris has been in the squad lately. Only if he was out would it mean someone who would normally be out of the first-team squad would have to be drafted in. |
Though surely he’s only in the squad because Carroll is injured. With no offence intended to Idris, who are we more likely to want to have in the squad? | |
| |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 18:43 - Dec 4 with 416 views | pointofblue |
Edmundson injured and couldn't even make up the numbers on a nine man bench. If he's not injured it really does seem, as Jackson might be working his way back into contention (though did himself no favours today), Woolfenden will be the first out of the door in January.
In fairness, it may do him good if he does go. | |
| |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 20:52 - Dec 5 with 357 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| Is that it for Woolfenden here? on 08:17 - Oct 22 by Herbivore |
Agree with this. I'd be very reluctant to see him go, unless it's a half season loan to continue his developement. He was good at this level in 19/20 playing regularly alongside an experienced partner. Last season he looked shaky, often either playing on his weaker side or alongside a raw rookie as a partner. This season he's not had much of a sniff lately but in the games he's played I don't think he's looked much different than the other three senior CBs in terms of performances. They've all got qualities but all have a mistake in them. I like Woolf for his ability with the ball, it gives us a different dimension to our play, but it seems he's well out of favour. That being the case I wouldn't mind seeing him go on loan for a few months but I would be reluctant to see him leave permanently. |
Loan him out and get Ndaba back. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
