[quote author=keniget link=topic=38031.msg1018748#msg1018748 date=1261340453]
I don't disagree that those players wouldn't improve us greatly now, however I'm not sure about getting so worked up about it.
Those players have gone to clubs who have won nothing in recent years. Utd and Chelsea don't really go out of their way to sign these players and when they have (Sinclair, Foster), you'd hardly say it's been a resounding success.
Teams like Villa and Spurs buy these players and play them week in, week out (Arsenal are a bit of an anomaly given their setup and Wenger)... we wouldn't. Would the likes of Young and Lennon become the same players at Liverpool?
I don't think they would've done. They'd have struggled with the odd appearance and then gotten fucked off to the same clubs that have 'em now. The top clubs generally wait for these talents to mature at smaller clubs and then use their spending power to prise them away.
If we're talking about hindsight, I'd look at players like Defoe.
[/quote]Chelsea are the anomaly not Arsenal because of their spending, although they still signed Johnson, Sturridge, Cole and Lampard at a young age.
Manchester united chanced into an astonishing run of home grown players, because their club saw the benefit of a top class youth set up way before anyone else (uk) and they are still reaping the benefits with Evans, Gibson, Welbeck etc They have had little need to trawl the lower leagues because they already have a top class youth system.
