So who would be big enough to have a 2nd team. The Manchester clubs... arse... tot... Chelsea... meryside clubs... Maybe villa and Newcastle... rich new owners of smaller clubs like qpr will want one. Before long... half or more of the championship will be "b" teams. That will knock championship teams down to league 1... league 1 to league 2... and 10 or more league 2 teams kicked out of the league into sub-league obscurity. It definately trickles down and hurtssmaller clubs.
Ya just made the point with Gerrez and him with me where that would be the big stumbling block, everyone wanting that. With that, of course it hurts as that is way too many teams but if we were just talking about LFC that would be good ( not gonna happen in real life regardless). Thoughts on having "feeder" teams not just in England but other places around Europe?
i don't really agree. the whole concept of say villa... is to have enough players to play in the prem. I think there are about 8 sides who will do this. 8 new league sides... disaster? nope! just my opinion but the sooner this bloody happens the better its not killed the fabric of spain or germany or any other country.
I believe this concept will improve the level of football from top to bottom and ultimately produce better and more experienced youngsters. Look at the youngsters in our u21 team. They play at u21 level but in a B team set up, they would be playing at a higher level, in front of decent crowds and against stronger opposition etc. I'd take that any day because that's the best training/experience youngsters can get. The English game needs something radical and I think this is the best solution to ensure youngsters are getting enough quality game time.
Other side of it is the big clubs hogging the players. They likes of Man City, Chelsea, Man Utd, etc already have 30+ senior player squads, many of which are very promising youngsters that would be better off at another club getting first team football. Having a second team would mean they could easily have 50+ players. Sure, the cream of the crop would benefit from playing competitive football but is that really beneficial to the other players or lower league clubs? If the current top seven all have a second team, what chance do the lower teams have when there are seven teams willing to offer first team football with top quality premier league standard facilities on offer? Not to mention the better coaches and physios, plus they get looked after much better too (ie, they get looked after with buying cars, houses, paying bills such as insurance, etc. The modern day player does nothing for their self). Then there is the possibility of playing for the associated big club or just the reputation of having played for that club giving them a better chance of playing for someone else later on. I say seven clubs thinking of Man Utd, Man City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham, Liverpool and Everton. What about Newcastle or Villa? Maybe even Swansea, Cardiff and West Ham with how they appear to be growing! The lower clubs wouldn't stand a chance. It is already unlikely but we'd never see a Wimbledon or Bradford happen again. Even the promotions of clubs like Hull, Wigan, Barsnley, etc wouldn't ever happen. I've already mentioned how important the clubs are to the local communities. These clubs dying would have an impact on local areas, most of which are already struggling with the way things are. #completelyagainstit
To Liverpool or other Premier League or Championship sides? No. To League One and Two teams? You bet you life its damaging!
You see, I think your getting closer to the problem but looking from the wrong angle. The u21 player would benefit from playing first team football but why should the lower league clubs suffer because the bigger clubs are greedy? If the bigger clubs had a B Team they would just hog players!
I agree - it's not fair on some clubs but something radical needs to be done to improve the standard of football in English youngsters. We can keep investing money in grassroots football, and building centres of excellence but it's not working. Getting young players playing competitive football from a young age is the best solution IMO. Partnerships between big and small clubs could be a better solution but as I mentioned previously, the parent club needs to be hands on to ensure that the young players are playing and playing in the right style etc. I'm not a fan of this because playing for a different club would having to adapt to new surroundings etc. It's best to keep the youngster in a stable environment, with the same coaches and players to develop relationships etc.
Yes you are correct in theory... if things are just the same structure and no effort made to stop negative impact... like i said the big clubs should pay a lot to have it happen. Frnakly though... those clubs need to look to themselves and why they fall down. some are just surviving and thats why i give exmaples of progressive clubs coming up form the conference putting them to shame. I say add the 8 teams and provide a structure for others to add teams in the future somehow. you forget one thing. LFc would rent off tranmere... hell hwy not buy them out..... history... not a good reason imo either way they get much needed money. Overall i just think the country gets more benefit and the big clubs (us) do too... so if a few badly run clubs have to drop a division fair enough. cos if not LFC B eventually its afc wimbledon or whoever that comes up. .... now feeder clubs in foriegn countries. I believe this is of little utility but does make a return. you can only sent 2/3 guys there a year really so the return may be limted. further its a lesser league and a different pace of game. A championship hiding for a team of young lads would bring them on faster than this loan... or at least more of them Feeder clubs do work but they are still limited and the spanish really do both. Madrid buy a guy then send him out all the time. All just my opinion.....
I think ironically BR has said something about this just Cant find the story but just heard it on the radio
Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers had this to say: 'You might have a player who is too strong for your youth team and your reserves, is not quite at the level to play in the first team. Ideally we would have a B team that plays in League Two or League One that could serve us that.' http://hereisthecity.com/2013/10/02/should-reserve-sides-of-liverpool-and-manchester-united-play/
I'm stuck somewhere in between both views. I think if managed properly it could not only improve younger players and subsequently English football but it could improve the lower division teams. Why presume a B team would push a team out? I think there's mutual benefits to be had. The B teams get to play tougher football than in U21 league and the lower league teams get to play against the better 'edge of 1st team players' which will improving them also.
Investments in grassroots football isn't good enough and we don't have enough coaches in the country. How many centre's of excellence have we got? (genuine question as I don't know but suspect that's not enough either) IMO, giving the big clubs a B-Team would only contribute to the problem because they ARE the problem. Clubs need more incentive to produce better quality British players. ATM, it is too easy to buy a crop of youngsters knowing that it is worth it if just one makes it with the backup of knowing that if they don't, they'll still recoup their money by selling them to lower league clubs. The bigger clubs crave instant results, they demand instant success and managers can't afford (see the credit Gerrard is giving BR BTW) to take the risk of getting sacked if it doesn't work out so they play proven players instead.
I see this argument in very similar light to the TV deal argument; one deal for all matches or each club negotiates their own. I think most fans of the bigger clubs would love their own club to negotiate their own deal, not only does it see that club gain extra revenue but it also means us fans could purchase the right to watch all our home games at least. Would it benefit the club? Absolutely! Would it be good for football in this country? Would it ****! However, I am honest enough to admit that I'd subscribe to a Liverpool channel but I don't pay for Sky Sports
Not sure how many CoE's there are but my point is that we can keep building these facilities but it doesn't make a difference. I disagree - there is a lack of talent in England hence the need to shop abroad. And because of the lack of talent, the prices for English talent is inflated (Supply/Demand). You're correct about the bigger clubs craving instant success. Managers are less likely to use them because of the risk, but also because they have big squads so there is no need to use them. However, they will then allow their youngsters to play in a lower league as it enables them to play competitive football (in a less pressured environment) but also continue training with the bigger stars. It allows them to get comfortable being around big players etc etc. That was one of the problems when we signed Caroll, Downing etc is because they aren't used to it and struggled to adapt (IMO) Simply put - bigger clubs can either neglect their youth and keep them in the youth teams, or neglect the youth and let them play regular competitive football. If they don't make the grade, they can then move but they will move having gained great experience playing competitive football and ultimately benefiting another team.
I don't buy the argument that youth is failing in Britain because clubs don't play enough local lads. If they were good enough, they'd be picked or loaned out to lower league sides until they were ready. Plenty have done so in the past and are playing in the PL now. Maybe the British youth are **** because the coaching at grass roots is ****. Because the investment into grass roots football is ****. Because there's not enough facilities at lower levels.
Martinez had an interesting view on this. He said PL sides could form the bulk of the squad for neighbouring lower league clubs. So [his example] Accrington could be a feeder team for Everton with Everton giving them 10 players - "Financially there are many teams in League Two and League One who are having problems and it wouldn’t be a bad thing for them to have 10 players from one club. “Can you imagine playing at championship level with your group, in your environment, but having to win games, try to get promotion and avoid relegation? You know what it means to play against men. That’s what you develop — mentally, psychologically and in every aspect of the game — but we haven’t got that here. "We make them professional at 18 and no one should be ready to be professional at 18." - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...der-clubs-can-help-England-national-team.html
Think bigger and better. A European league system made up of the B teams of ANY club that wants to participate (maybe even make it compulsory for top 4 of each elite league) No first teams allowed and any team entering must have at least 6 players on the pitch from within 50 miles of the club. The league itself paid for by the elite league of each European team that participates in the national Side European cup. The teams must have coaching/management from the country of origin. This to me solves most of the problems: Big clubs get a replacement for their reserves with high quality football, probably of better quality than playing a B team in the championship. Lower domestic league teams don't feel they are pushed out but!!!! If there are big enough & successful enough championship clubs that can enter a team then it can only benefit them. The "premier" leagues in Europe don't have to worry about their existence & the CL is still seen as the pinnacle of European competition. The English national side can only benefit from the experience their young players get from playing in a league system with so many different styles of football as well as forcing teams to recruit more than half the squad locally which should encourage the development of academies or in participation with the FA regional centers of excellence. It would create high quality home grown coaches that actually get an opportunity. They can then go on to manage the top A sides... Obviously the downfall is still the same; getting greedy clubs like ours to agree to part with some of their PL money to finance it. But since their B team is involved it may be more of a carrot?
