Dons youth

[wee toon red]

How many trophies have Motherwell won since 2010/11? 

[wee toon red]

12 hours ago, RicoS321 said:

Does any club feature strongly for Scotland? Looking at the last u19s for example, half the players are in England and the rest belong to different clubs. Boyd is in it, as our representative in that regard. I can't find much on the u17s, I'm guessing that Masson and Carrol would be involved, with both at one point rumoured to be off down south too. It seems reasonable to say that we should be well represented, but I don't think anyone is, which suggests that young players are moving around a lot more.

I guess I'd just like us to have more than one u21 player and an ex player in the u19s. The number of players in and around the full squad who have played for us is actually quite impressive but it's hard to see where the next lot are coming from.

[THFN1983]

9 minutes ago, wee toon red said:

How many trophies have Motherwell won since 2010/11? 

To my knowledge it's zero but perhaps I'm wrong.

Is it not better to judge a team on how it performs in the league over 15 years rather than how many cups they have won?

I guess the point you are trying to make is we have spent tens of millions of pounds more than Motherwell in the last 15 years to win 1 league cup and 1 Scottish Cup? 

Remind me, in that time how many cups have St Johnstone won? How many have St Mirren won?

[Bukta Bertie]

Problem we have now is that it's far too easy for the English clubs to keep tabs on and then scoop up any promising young Scottish talent for a sum that to them is no more than loose change found down the side of a sofa.

How we can stop that I just don't know.

Maybe make the amount they have to pay clubs for development 'compensation' (for want of a better word) a lot more. 

[THFN1983]

24 minutes ago, Bukta Bertie said:

Problem we have now is that it's far too easy for the English clubs to keep tabs on and then scoop up any promising young Scottish talent for a sum that to them is no more than loose change found down the side of a sofa.

How we can stop that I just don't know.

Maybe make the amount they have to pay clubs for development 'compensation' (for want of a better word) a lot more. 

Unfortunately I doubt we'll be able to make clubs pay more for development and even if we do it'll most likely be a very marginal increase which won't have a massive bearing on what we could do with what we received.

 

I think the only solution to dissuade youth players from going down south early is to trust in them more and integrate them into the first team and play them a hell of a lot more when opportunities present themself.

 

How many times have we seen managers introduce regular starters in the 80th-90th minute of games when the game is either won or lost rather than take a punt on a youth player to see the game out or to show endeavour to try and rescue something?

 

Even when, and it's very rare to be fair, that we've been 2-3 goals to the good the manager opts to put on a usual starter when a Boyd or Lobban etc. has been on the bench. 

How can we really expect that youth player to feel when an English Premiership team comes knocking on their door when they see how little AFC rate them.

[DantheDon]

43 minutes ago, THFN1983 said:

To add, we have an average league placing of 5th (5.14) from the past 14 years which obviously will be worse this year and Motherwell have an average of 6th (6.43) which will be bettered this year.

Motherwell's turnover last year was estimated at around £5million whereas ours was roughly £23.5 million.

It’s all very interesting but I would venture Motherwell are generally an outlier bucking the trend. As you pointed out only they and Celtic have been an ever present in the league alongside us in those past 15 seasons. They are obviously doing something correct as has been noted by the amount of poaching we have tried from them during this time. It’s not to dismiss what you’re saying but I would refer back to a famous quote about miniskirts when looking at statistics. Ultimately you can make them say whatever you want by looking at only the relevant ones. 
 

Aptly since we are in a thread about youth development I would think the best approach for AFC is one focussed on youth. As has been proven since Dave took charge recruitment is a hit or miss thing especially when competing with the limited resources we have. We should obviously look to recruit the odd player to supplement this but I think this approach would serve us better than what we are currently doing. 

[Bukta Bertie]

Reinstate a proper reserve league. Yes please.

[wee toon red]

1 hour ago, THFN1983 said:

To my knowledge it's zero but perhaps I'm wrong.

Is it not better to judge a team on how it performs in the league over 15 years rather than how many cups they have won?

I guess the point you are trying to make is we have spent tens of millions of pounds more than Motherwell in the last 15 years to win 1 league cup and 1 Scottish Cup? 

Remind me, in that time how many cups have St Johnstone won? How many have St Mirren won?

Nah, I’d rather judge my club on trophies won as those are the days and moments that I’ll remember and tell my grandkids about, not the day we finished the appropriate number of places above Motherwell in the league per pound spent.

However, I would very much agree with a wider point about underachieving in terms of trophies won, especially in the gap between old and new Rangers.

[THFN1983]

5 minutes ago, DantheDon said:

It’s all very interesting but I would venture Motherwell are generally an outlier bucking the trend. As you pointed out only they and Celtic have been an ever present in the league alongside us in those past 15 seasons. They are obviously doing something correct as has been noted by the amount of poaching we have tried from them during this time. It’s not to dismiss what you’re saying but I would refer back to a famous quote about miniskirts when looking at statistics. Ultimately you can make them say whatever you want by looking at only the relevant ones. 
 

Aptly since we are in a thread about youth development I would think the best approach for AFC is one focussed on youth. As has been proven since Dave took charge recruitment is a hit or miss thing especially when competing with the limited resources we have. We should obviously look to recruit the odd player to supplement this but I think this approach would serve us better than what we are currently doing. 

I've used Motherwell due to them being an everpresent in the league during this time, not really accurate to include any other teams when they spent seasons in the Championship. So whether they are an outlier or not is impossible to judge based on the past 15 years of participation in the SPFL.

 

With regards to your quote about statistics then what other pertinent info could you offer up in rebuttal with regards to Motherwell to offset what I said? Where have we outshone Motherwell in the league to justify many 10's of millions more being spent by us since 2010/2011?

[THFN1983]

1 minute ago, wee toon red said:

Nah, I’d rather judge my club on trophies won as those are the days and moments that I’ll remember and tell my grandkids about, not the day we finished the appropriate number of places above Motherwell in the league per pound spent.

However, I would very much agree with a wider point about underachieving in terms of trophies won, especially in the gap between old and new Rangers.

What you fail to factor in is that a team that wins many trophies generally is the same team that is doing well in the league. So basically the better you do over a 38 game season will impact on your ability to win trophies which is evidenced all across the globe.

 

Great results in the league and constant impressive performances breed confidence going into cup competitions and in a one off tie then every advantage you can get stands you in good steed to progress to the next round or indeed be champions.

[DantheDon]

39 minutes ago, THFN1983 said:

I've used Motherwell due to them being an everpresent in the league during this time, not really accurate to include any other teams when they spent seasons in the Championship. So whether they are an outlier or not is impossible to judge based on the past 15 years of participation in the SPFL.

 

With regards to your quote about statistics then what other pertinent info could you offer up in rebuttal with regards to Motherwell to offset what I said? Where have we outshone Motherwell in the league to justify many 10's of millions more being spent by us since 2010/2011?

I know you can only compare us to Motherwell in that respect, but that’s exactly my point. Based on that you could argue that no other team (out with old firm) has done better than us as they haven’t been able to maintain a place in the league, with Motherwell being an outlier. That could be used to make the point that in general the greater turnover has seen us outperform most of the teams in the league by not being relegated. If we just focus on the comparisons to Motherwell that is very narrow set of statistics ignoring performance relative to the other teams in the league. 

[THFN1983]

8 minutes ago, DantheDon said:

I know you can only compare us to Motherwell in that respect, but that’s exactly my point. Based on that you could argue that no other team (out with old firm) has done better than us as they haven’t been able to maintain a place in the league, with Motherwell being an outlier. That could be used to make the point that in general the greater turnover has seen us outperform most of the teams in the league by not being relegated. If we just focus on the comparisons to Motherwell that is very narrow set of statistics ignoring performance relative to the other teams in the league. 

So in short form our vast expenditure over 85-90% of the other teams aside from the uglies has only really had one difference in the league and that is we have never been relegated? That's ultimately what we can celebrate over them in the past 15 years? 

Out with Celtic and Sevco we're probably grouped with a few other teams above the likes of Livvy, Killie, Dundee & St Johnstone as perennial relegation candidates.

Hardly suggests the larger expenditure has been money well spent and worth it in my opinion.

[wee toon red]

59 minutes ago, THFN1983 said:

What you fail to factor in is that a team that wins many trophies generally is the same team that is doing well in the league. So basically the better you do over a 38 game season will impact on your ability to win trophies which is evidenced all across the globe.

 

Great results in the league and constant impressive performances breed confidence going into cup competitions and in a one off tie then every advantage you can get stands you in good steed to progress to the next round or indeed be champions.

Doesn’t that contradict your point about St Johnstone and St Mirren’s success? And we won the cup last season despite being mince in the second half of the league season, which also doesn’t stack up with your argument.

Without having the stats to hand, I’d imagine that over the period you reference we’d have gained the third or fourth most points overall, which is a much more reliable measure of league “success” for our budget rather than just looking at Motherwell. Plus, we have done better than Motherwell in the league and won two more trophies so it’s not really the most relevant comparison anyway, which was kinda my original point. 

[RicoS321]

This thread has gone wild. There a few points worth noting. Our goals scored would fair worse than. Motherwell's, because teams come to Pittodrie and sit in when we're good (and to a large extent away too). That doesn't happen to Motherwell as, for whatever reason, teams fancy their chances. We've had many more qualifications for Europe than Motherwell, which is probably a better indicator than league position. Our budget, when we get it right, allows us to blow most of the diddy opposition out of the water. When we get it wrong, it offers no advantage whatsoever, and is generally a hindrance. 

We don't spend enough money to consistently finish above the rest, it only takes two bad signings to completely nullify the additional spending. We've tried reducing expenditure under Paterson and others, and we saw the return too. Our budget seems to just keep our worst possible place at around tenth, with a ceiling of third. Reducing it could lead to relegation. 

The Dons seem to have a higher expectation when it comes to player salaries too. It's almost like Motherwell can afford to offer less for players as there is no expectation of a good salary there (Ged Brannan might disagree)! I don't think I'm imagining a premium for coming up here.

[THFN1983]

3 minutes ago, RicoS321 said:

This thread has gone wild. There a few points worth noting. Our goals scored would fair worse than. Motherwell's, because teams come to Pittodrie and sit in when we're good (and to a large extent away too). That doesn't happen to Motherwell as, for whatever reason, teams fancy their chances. We've had many more qualifications for Europe than Motherwell, which is probably a better indicator than league position. Our budget, when we get it right, allows us to blow most of the diddy opposition out of the water. When we get it wrong, it offers no advantage whatsoever, and is generally a hindrance. 

We don't spend enough money to consistently finish above the rest, it only takes two bad signings to completely nullify the additional spending. We've tried reducing expenditure under Paterson and others, and we saw the return too. Our budget seems to just keep our worst possible place at around tenth, with a ceiling of third. Reducing it could lead to relegation. 

The Dons seem to have a higher expectation when it comes to player salaries too. It's almost like Motherwell can afford to offer less for players as there is no expectation of a good salary there (Ged Brannan might disagree)! I don't think I'm imagining a premium for coming up here.

All the more reason for investing a lot more in youth to get them into our first team if we're being held to ransom by bang average players to come up here.

If, as you say, that our budget (which appears to be roughly 4 times that of Motherwell) only protects us from relegation then surely that should set massive alarm bells ringing in the hierarchy that things aren't being done correctly at our club. Again this wasn't a sample of 2-3 years I selected, this was over 15 years which is historic enough to take so many things into consideration.

Time to bin the high earning foreign imports that are classed as "potential" by the board as our fingers have been burnt too many times by them and instead the club should be investing in the coaching set-up with our own youth. We have the training facilities in place now so the environment is there for success, we just have to get the correct youth scouts and coaches working for us to identify the best talent around the country and then develop them so they're first team ready by 16/17/18 to dissuade them from taking the English route so soon.

If it means paying over the odds to get the right coaches in then let's do that, let's become the Barca of the north!!!

[RicoS321]

1 hour ago, THFN1983 said:

All the more reason for investing a lot more in youth to get them into our first team if we're being held to ransom by bang average players to come up here.

If, as you say, that our budget (which appears to be roughly 4 times that of Motherwell) only protects us from relegation then surely that should set massive alarm bells ringing in the hierarchy that things aren't being done correctly at our club. Again this wasn't a sample of 2-3 years I selected, this was over 15 years which is historic enough to take so many things into consideration.

Time to bin the high earning foreign imports that are classed as "potential" by the board as our fingers have been burnt too many times by them and instead the club should be investing in the coaching set-up with our own youth. We have the training facilities in place now so the environment is there for success, we just have to get the correct youth scouts and coaches working for us to identify the best talent around the country and then develop them so they're first team ready by 16/17/18 to dissuade them from taking the English route so soon.

If it means paying over the odds to get the right coaches in then let's do that, let's become the Barca of the north!!!

It doesn't only protect us from relegation. It protects us from relegation and gives us a higher likelihood of playing in Europe. Which we've done, regularly. 

The fifteen year period you have taken spans two different approaches. Expensive European imports are a recent thing. Prior to that it was a mixture of expensive and inexpensive British imports. We have also increased the expenditure on our youth system as we've increased the spending on foreigners. You've also used Motherwell to make your point, who have probably had a similar return on youth investment to us, and aren't currently littering their team with youth prospects. 

In short, you seem to be mixing together various arguments to form a solution, or point, which will likely change to mean something closer to what you're actually trying to say (I'm not criticising here). 

As I mentioned previously, and on various other threads this season and in the past, the balance of our squad is the issue. We should be looking to have a good balance between players with SPFL experience, project players, other experienced players (if we can't get SPFL ones) and youth. Once again, in January, we brought in players without SPFL experience, which exacerbates the imbalance. In my opinion, for youth team players, we need a quota, publicly stated, that both forces the manager's hand, whilst giving him a bit more time and patience from fans (the equivalent of announcing a three year project). 

[THFN1983]

Granted we've qualified for Europe based off our league placing more than Motherwell but I don't think any supporter could hand on heart state that we've not disgraced ourselves more often than not with the performances and results?

So boiling it down, over the past 15 years with the expenditure we've got it has saved us from relegation whilst at the same time got us pastings in Europe and seen our credibility on the Euro scene plummet.

Motherwell could very well have the same return as you say with their youth policy, you don't know, but regardless of the accuracy of that statement I find it very difficult to believe that we're not massively outspending them on that department as well. If that is indeed the case then for X amount of millions more spent on youth development by AFC we're getting no more real time benefits from it. 

You don't feel it's valid or right to string various arguments to form a singular point? I believe there is a common denominator between all the issues I'm raising which is the complete waste of money that AFC is spending in comparison to another SPFL club with no significant returns. 

Speaking of the balance of the squad then could you give me a breakdown of the first 11 and also a squad of 25 with regards to youth, project, SPFL experience & other players with experience? What percentage of each would you find acceptable? Doesn't have to be an exact figure but a ballpark tolerance would suffice.

[OxfordDon]

6 hours ago, THFN1983 said:

Continuing on with our lack of forwards coming through the ranks, and our lack of real goalscoring forwards that we've been blessed with recently (with a few notable exceptions), I decided to have a little AI Q&A about how we have fared in front of goal since the 2010/2011 season up until now and compare that with Motherwell and Celtic as they have been present in the league fully since then. I thought 15 years was a fair sample size to accurately make an informed point.

AI answers that since the start of the 2010/2011 season the goals scored and subsequent ratios are as follows....

Aberdeen - 677 = 1.21

Motherwell - 731 = 1.26

Celtic - 1364 = 2.4

AI answers that since the start of the 2010/2011 season the goals conceded and subsequent ratios are as follows....

Aberdeen - 679 = 1.21

Motherwell - 857 = 1.52

Celtic - 384 = 0.67

Basically for all the extra money we've spent, and I'm sure it's a hell of a lot more than Motherwell! We have seen no better end product on the park with regards to the forward lines of each team. Yes we have a better goals conceded ratio but surely you go to watch football to see your team score and conceding less is a bonus.

Looking at the average attendance in the league for Aberdeen and Motherwell for the past 15 years it is clear that we have many thousands more coming through the turnstiles than Motherwell as their highest average attendance, out with this year, was 5946 in 11/12 season whereas our worst was 9072 in 10/11 season but reaching a high of 17,793 last year.

And finally I had a look at league placings since the 2010/2011 season and Motherwell have finished higher than us 7 times and will be 8 come the conclusion of this season.

I guess what I'm asking is what is the point in AFC spunking millions more on transfer fees, wages, manager recruitment, youth development etc. etc. when there is no difference from a team like Motherwell? Who in actual fact have a better placing record in the league than us in the past 15 years.

I need to lie down after finding all that out!

Interesting query.  I widened it to include all teams and games in the top league in that time period.

---

Ordered by Avg Goals Scored per Game (High → Low)

Club	Games played	Goals scored	Avg goals scored / game	Goals conceded	Avg goals conceded / game
Celtic	570	1,347	2.36	382	0.67
Rangers	456	1,020	2.24	357	0.78
Heart of Midlothian	494	705	1.43	602	1.22
Aberdeen	570	781	1.37	637	1.12
Hibernian	494	676	1.37	648	1.31
Dundee United	380	510	1.34	515	1.36
Inverness CT	304	365	1.20	420	1.38
Motherwell	570	676	1.19	779	1.37
Kilmarnock	494	571	1.16	675	1.37
Livingston	190	198	1.04	298	1.57
Falkirk	76	79	1.04	140	1.84
Dundee	266	274	1.03	425	1.60
Ross County	418	420	1.00	643	1.54
St Johnstone	570	555	0.97	708	1.24
Partick Thistle	114	109	0.96	177	1.55
St Mirren	418	401	0.96	567	1.36
Hamilton Academical	304	270	0.89	480	1.58

---

 

Conditions used:

1. Time period

   • Covers the last 15 seasons, from 2010/11 to 2024/25 inclusive.

2. Competition scope

   • Includes only Scottish top-flight league matches:

     • Scottish Premier League (SPL) up to and including 2012/13.

     • Scottish Premiership from 2013/14 onward.

   • No lower divisions included.

3. Match types excluded

   • Domestic cup competitions (Scottish Cup, League Cup).

   • European competitions.

   • Play-off matches.

   • Friendly matches.

4. Clubs included

   • All clubs that competed in the Scottish top flight at any point during the 15-season period.

   • Clubs contribute data only for the seasons in which they were in the top division (no extrapolation for missing seasons).

5. Games counted

   • Only regular-season league matches.

   • Accounts for variations in league size and format across seasons (e.g. 10-team vs 12-team leagues).

Edited 2 hours ago by OxfordDon

[THFN1983]

1 minute ago, OxfordDon said:

Interesting query.  I widened it to include all teams and games in the top league in that time period.

---

Ordered by Avg Goals Scored per Game (High → Low)

Club	Games played	Goals scored	Avg goals scored / game	Goals conceded	Avg goals conceded / game
Celtic	570	1,347	2.36	382	0.67
Rangers	456	1,020	2.24	357	0.78
Heart of Midlothian	494	705	1.43	602	1.22
Aberdeen	570	781	1.37	637	1.12
Hibernian	494	676	1.37	648	1.31
Dundee United	380	510	1.34	515	1.36
Inverness CT	304	365	1.20	420	1.38
Motherwell	570	676	1.19	779	1.37
Kilmarnock	494	571	1.16	675	1.37
Livingston	190	198	1.04	298	1.57
Falkirk	76	79	1.04	140	1.84
Dundee	266	274	1.03	425	1.60
Ross County	418	420	1.00	643	1.54
St Johnstone	570	555	0.97	708	1.24
Partick Thistle	114	109	0.96	177	1.55
St Mirren	418	401	0.96	567	1.36
Hamilton Academical	304	270	0.89	480	1.58

---

 

Seems you're utilising a different AI than I was but I still feel it highlights what I was putting across.

With regards to Motherwell who I spoke of earlier (due to playing the same amount of games as us) we're spending 4X times as much money for a very marginal difference and in fact they have placed higher than us the same amount of times (7) in the past 14 seasons and will be one ahead (8) after this season.

I've no idea what our expenditure is to the likes of Utd, Caley, Killie but would assume it to be around the same ballpark figure as Well if not larger in some cases but ultimately it has got us scoring roughly 1 extra goal every 5 games and conceding 1 less goal over the same period averaged out over 15 years.

So if, as suggested is the case, that we're over spending on signings and wages due to our location with the merest of results then we should be looking to curtail that to a greater extent and trying to supplement the first team with more players who have came through our youth team. That cuts out the drain on fees paid and also increases on the potential wages saved. You also eradicate the unknown quantity that is foreign players adapting to the league and more importantly the country.

[OxfordDon]

3 minutes ago, THFN1983 said:

Seems you're utilising a different AI than I was but I still feel it highlights what I was putting across.

I did note the figures were different, which probably speaks to the reliability of AI more than the data itself  

These should be difficult to get wrong as effectively all it was doing was adding up the final league tables, but hey, it's AI.

Source definition (strict)

• League tables published by the SPL (2010/11–2012/13)

• League tables published by the SPFL (2013/14–2024/25)

• Goals for/against and matches played taken directly from official final tables for each season.

[THFN1983]

2 minutes ago, OxfordDon said:

I did note the figures were different, which probably speaks to the reliability of AI more than the data itself  

These should be difficult to get wrong as effectively all it was doing was adding up the final league tables, but hey, it's AI.

Source definition (strict)

• League tables published by the SPL (2010/11–2012/13)

• League tables published by the SPFL (2013/14–2024/25)

• Goals for/against and matches played taken directly from official final tables for each season.

I'm not disputing your figures in any way, just impressive that AI can get a simple query like this wrong  

But what I was saying still stands firm, the returns over a 15 year period in the league in no way reflect the expenditure that we have.

[OxfordDon]

30 minutes ago, THFN1983 said:

I'm not disputing your figures in any way, just impressive that AI can get a simple query like this wrong  

But what I was saying still stands firm, the returns over a 15 year period in the league in no way reflect the expenditure that we have.

By that measure, Hearts and Hibs have done just as badly as us (Hearts slightly better, Hibs slightly worse).

Dundee Utd on the other hand, are the most successful relatively by reaching our goal returns on half the revenue, presuming we ignore the fact they were relegated during that time period.  Twice.

*not a dig incidentally, just a comment on the fickleness of statistics.  I do agree we are generally punching well below our weight in relation to how much we spend at present.

Edited 1 hour ago by OxfordDon

[THFN1983]

If anything then Hearts and Hibs have done a hell of a lot worse by virtue of being relegated whereas we haven't.

That doesn't excuse our club in any way shape or form though as teams such as Livingston, with an admitted Championship budget which would be below Well's expenditure, have only scored 1 goal less every 3 games and conceded 1 goal more every 2.5 games than we have.