The Talent Development Environment in Elite English U21 Men’s Professional Football

The career trajectory of young footballers has been given attention in recent years, in particular the factors influencing their progression to becoming established senior professional footballers. Researchers have focused on aspects such as the quality of talent development environments (e.g., Mills et al., 2012; 2014a; Mitchell et al., 2021) and understanding junior to senior transitions (e.g., Morris et al., 2015; 2017; 2017). This research is centred on the U21 professional development phase of football in England, which is the final stage the majority of young footballers will encounter before entering a first team environment.

This phase has been identified as the most crucial career transition point, with the ultimate goal of producing a greater number of ‘home-grown’ players (Premier League, 2011). It has been suggested that this phase presents nuanced challenges that players and practitioners must navigate (Dowling et al., 2018; Richardson et al., 2013). However, relatively little is known about the daily experiences of players in the U21 phase, and almost no research has focused on the effectiveness of such an environment. This research examines the extent to which the primary objective of the elite English academy system in professional football, i.e., a talent development environment, is being met, with a specific focus on the U21 professional development phase.

A mixed methods approach, both quantitative (scoping review and survey) and qualitative (semi-structured interviews and ethnography) facilitated the capture of insights into development practice and the perceptions, views and opinions of players, coaches and support staff in this phase of professional football in England. The research consists of four studies.

Study one is a scoping review of all professional clubs’ academies to identify the structure, extent and organisation of U21 football. Findings identify significant variation across the four academy categories and limited web-based information about clubs’ objectives. In addition, a review of the research literature specifically focused on U21 football, reinforced the dearth of empirical literature in this area. Study two surveys players’ opinions about the quality of their talent development environments and general health, across category 1 and 2 clubs. The most positively perceived elements of the players’ environments were a recognition of long-term development and the availability of support networks; the least positive were the absence of holistic quality preparation, communication and alignment of expectations. However, players perceived their general health to be good.

Study three is an interview-based exploration of the organisational structure, value of competition, relationships, attitudes, and the role of coaches in managing and conducting U21 football. Players and coaches provided a comprehensive insight into their environment, highlighting the impact on the developmental agenda of factors such as inconsistent and unstable group composition, limitations in providing an environment that would ready players for first team football, and a lack of competitive challenge. These elements were not conducive to an effective learning environment and impacted negatively on well-being and intrinsic motivation. Study four adopts an ethnographic approach to explore the lived experiences of players and key stakeholders. A practitioner-researcher perspective provides an ‘insider’ insight into the day-to-day workings of the U21 environment, documenting these experiences

over an extended period of time. Findings highlight a range of structural issues relating to the stability of the group and psycho-social challenges emanating from identity, meaning, purpose and belonging. Specifically, the results showed that players beyond their first year experienced a loss of determination and self-motivation due to a lack of exposure to first team football and/or de-selection.

It seems clear from both the concept of the U21 phase and from these accounts of practice that

(a) its developmental ambitions might be better termed a ‘late development model’ and (b) that another more apt descriptor would be ‘talent readiness’ phase (both in preparing for first team football and a sifting/selecting process by clubs). In summary, this research contributes a unique and novel perspective on U21 football across the English academy system. It casts considerable doubt that its structural integrity, its capacity to ‘reach’ all players, and the quality of competition as a precursor to the intensity and results-oriented nature of the first-team experience provides an adequate developmental experience for players and readies them for first team football. It presents opportunities for the Premier League and the Football Association to re-evaluate the phase to better meet its intended purpose. This might usefully be centred on the quality of competition, integration of squads and structured incorporation of first team exposure.