Subject: Train in the Junior school or in sqaud??

Given a really talented junior, say a 4 week popper in the junior school, would you prefer to have him in the junior school for the maximum time, or have him trained in matches??

Does anyone know what would turn out to be the better player, a 4 week popper in the junior school who started at good and comes out after say 32 weeks at say brilliant-unearthly at 18 years old, or an equally talented junior who comes out after 1 week at 16 years old, at good skill in the junior school??

I am personally not sure who the better player of the two would be, I tend to think players improve more in the junior school, but if you are training them yourself, you can mould them into the the exact type of player you want, and can train skills to higher than excellent by the time they are 18.

obviosuly with a 16 yo you have more scope for change.

i am now on a regime of training stuff for 1 season to generally improve my team, and so would want the brillian/unearthly

i would guess someone with a long term plan of 1 position training would be more likely to edge towards the 16yo

I've got two guys in my team that were 17yo 4 week poppers when they came out. They are now 18yo and have had nothing but pace training and two weeks of stamina training.

average stamina, tragic keeper
solid pace, good defender
unsatisfactory technique, weak playmaker
adequate passing, weak striker

This guy was born as:

unsatisfactory stamina, tragic keeper
poor pace, good defender
hopeless technique, weak playmaker
average passing, weak striker




poor stamina, tragic keeper
formidable pace, tragic defender
hopeless technique, weak playmaker
average passing, average striker

was born as:
hopeless stamina, tragic keeper
good pace, tragic defender
hopeless technique, weak playmaker
weak passing, average striker


It's my intention to include them in every training regime I have right up until they are 20 odd...maybe 22 or 23 or something in an attempt to shed some light on this debate.

I'll be able to make a better judgment then. Whether or not it's been a good idea, I've enjoyed it as an experiment so far, as they've popped more quickly than their older, less talented team mates.
(edited)

Ok, after a bit of research, I found the original stats of one of my trainees:

unsatisfactory stamina,
average pace,
average technique,
average passing,
tragic keeper
unsatisfactory defender
adequate playmaker
average striker

He is now:

average stamina, tragic keeper
solid pace, unsatisfactory defender
adequate technique, adequate playmaker
adequate passing, adequate striker

He will pop in pace next week. He was a 4-5 week popper in the junior school, and came out as a very good +2. If he was in the junior school for 13 more weeks, I would guess he would be an Outstanding +2 now.

He recieved 13 weeks of training, 2 stamina, 9 or 10 weeks of pace, 1 or 2 weeks of passing. He has just popped in pace, taking 4 weeks per pop.

Is the above player better or worse than you would expect from an outstanding +2?

on par with an average outstanding i guess but i feel a strange affection towards rounded players. to further this concept, though, this is almost exactly what my best trainee looked like when i bought him except of course the defender / pace balance which was adequate in my case. i can't see much difference after all, a 16 y/o is better if you have a training regime spanning at least 4 seasons, apparently.

What you also have to figure in is that he's trained how YOU want him. He hasn't got that poor keeping that seems to nick all his youth skill :)

So he could more accurately be compared to lower than outstanding +2 because you are taking out the random factor to a certain extent. Both in terms of skills AND age.

Yes, so then are we saying that at the top levels of junior, where skills can go to keeper or stamina, it is better to be training the player yourself?

I'd prefer to train them in squad, if i have the training slots.

Of course it also depends on how you are training. If you're absolutely focused on training one stat, getting someone to uberhigh in one stat doesn't make a lot of money, so that type of team should benefit more from a well rounded incredible than a 17 year old pull.
(edited)

I've advocated it for a long time with no real evidence. These two 17yo are hopefully going to be my evidence...they were in my YS a short period of time and came out as solid, so they effectively cost me very little, and I can be damn sure of their talent because I watched them in my YS. Added to the personal preference thing and the fact I know their respective ages, I think that short term, talented, young trainees are the way forward.

I'd sooner have a youth player who I knew was talented than a random signing. But, given a straight choice between 2 seasons in the youth squad and 2 seasons in the first team for a youth of equal age, I'd sooner have him in the first team as I think he'd get more random pops off my first team coaches than in the youth squad.

Thats why I showed the comparison in player ability after 13 weeks of training and tried to compare it to the youthsqaud, he was my youth and I know exactly how talented he was and at what level he was when he came out as a YP.
(edited)

I think it also depends on what you train.

Keeper and Striker trainers only really need players with 3 skills, therefore are more suited to a younger lower skilled trainee if they happen to hget decent skills in the 3 skills they need, however maybe midfield trainers who can benefit from 5 or even 6 of the stats (ignoring stamina for all) maybe can get away with waiting longer for a Junior and then pulling one with a wide array of decent skills.

if you get my drift..

Boo at the lot of you for giving phil advice when he started!

Out of the youth school asap in my opinion. The younger the better.

Ah, they were foolish!

still are...