two very good points to be fair, and a lot more sense than Greg dyke is talking! however many current loan deals stand that the players will train, at least part of the time, with their parent club and are still looked after by the medical team of (to use your example) arsenal for anything serious. Also do you really think the under 18s/21s train with the first teamers? no, they train separately, often at separate times and the only time they tend to work with first teamers are when they are returning from injury or when they are being disciplined (training with the youth teamers is a common punishment for players with a bad attitude, and does that really help the youngsters significantly?) . I'll raise that when I see him next month Also being out on loan brings players away from the isolated bubble to learn more about what "real" football can be like - all of a sudden instead of playing with and against kids their own age, they are playing with pros of all ages, abilitys and experience. This is also true with the B Teams
My main issue with it is how damaging it will be to the lower leagues as we know it. Attendance's will decrease Shouldn't affect attendances for the likes of us, should it?(outside of real and barca, the rest of the B teams around the world struggle to get anywhere near the average attendance of that league), you will have teams of players that regularly change and wont care too much about the lower leagues. Will we be able to see tactical moves between the teams? For example if man united B had a crucial game, would they be able to use Januzaj and other first teamers who are technically young enough, therefore putting the teams playing against them at a competitive disadvantage? I raised that one and it was quickly agreed that there would have to be restrictions (eg if a player has made more than, say, 3 appearances for the first team he is ineligible to play for the B team) Which sides would get a B team? what if, for example, Stoke City wanted a 'B' team, then in 5 years experienced a leeds-esque decline and ended up in league 1 alongside their B team? if that B team was therefore removed, how would it be replaced? Also will this really help our young English players? At the moment what happens to most the youngsters that are sent out on loan is they don't make it and end up being transferred away. I don't think this supports an argument against B Teams. The B team proposal in time I think would be used to implement the big clubs signing more and more players, including foreign players, and instead of rotting away in the reserves they rot away in B teams
Its my opinion that developing our young players must start from grassroots level - better facilities and better coaching, That is my view also. Although I now understand that there are plenty of big clubs that have set up academies in satellite areas to develop youngsters and the grass roots isn't as bad as I assumed. It was conceded though that the flash facilities we have in France in the smallest of towns is not matched in the UK but the coaching by qualified coaches in the UK does sound pretty good. I don't know much about what goes on in UK. less pressure by the press on youngsters! As oppose to the B teams. Having said all that, perhaps im a little selfish in favour of the way which would suit Wycombe better, as I would be furious if one year we missed out on promotion because of Manchester united B!
is in