B Teams

[milo]

Its got to be a better system than the loan system, sending your kids out to 3rd rate facilities and questionable coaching compared to having them being run from your state of the art training centre under the watchful eye of some of the best youth coaches in the league.

Surely the answer to that is to get more people to qualify as coaches in this country. It won't happen but the money should come from the Premier League to fund this.

 

[monkeybarry]

Monkeybarry: Not saying you're wrong, but the way football has been polarized by money I'm struggle to see how what you're saying relates to Spurs as a club today.

It's not about just one club, it's not about just now, it's about tradition and an ethos. I have no disagreements, but these are all moral/ethical questions of what football should or shouldn't be. Not as much about what will happen with Spurs if this happens.

To turn it around, do you think this change will have a long term negative effect on Spurs as a club? And if so, how?

I genuinely don't see it as a question that relates to spurs or have an intetest in it fron a one club point of view.
Its about the integrity of the competition as a whole.

There is certainly an argument that a broader competition helps all clubs and I would support any club that wishes to take part in the competition.

And I certainly don't think clubs should have more that one entrant just because they have money.

 

[Notmegov]

Surely the answer to that is to get more people to qualify as coaches in this country. It won't happen but the money should come from the Premier League to fund this.

Yep sounds great. Workable probably not ( the PL being run by a bunch of money grabbing ****s in the most part). I am not really for or against the idea all i was trying to do was put across a few of the ideas why it would be good for the national team because that is the whole point of the review Greig Dyke commissioned.

As i said before he is looking at the route of English players 17 - 22 and how they get MORE lost in our system compared to that of Spain, Germany and Holland and the main thing he noted in his report is the B team thing.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

I do not like the sound of it because of the risk it would have on lower league clubs, all towns and cities in this country deserve a football club and nothing should ever put those clubs at risk, I think having so many football clubs in the country is what makes English football so unique.

What I do think would be quite a good idea is to have a central contract idea like in cricket where unattached young england players who have been trained at the academy in Burton would play for a professional england youth team and the focus would be on development, then when they got to an age where they could play first team football they would be sold with the money going back into the National Academy.

 

[Dicko]

Wouldn't the top of league one just end up getting stacked with PL B teams which could mean...
They could never get promoted and in turn hardly any Championship clubs ever dropping down, also the existing league 1 and 2 clubs get pushed further down the ladder and even though the best run/supported clubs could survive this would have a huge impact on those local side that are currently dreaming of getting into the football league when there is now a whole bunch of new B team that have no ambition to go anywhere except stay where they are hogging up space in the league.

 

[clevelandspur]

JUst looking at second division in Spain you have Barcelona B taking up a playoff space it is sad really imagine when they play a well supported club like Mallorca? The atmosphere must be depressing

 

[jts1882]

I think B teams can only work for the biggest clubs. I'm pretty sure we would be in this group which I don't see being bigger than 8-10 clubs.

However, I'm not sure they would work for the clubs or England. At the level proposed (League Two/Conference) there would no real benefit. After promotion to the Championship it could work, but most of the loan players who have prospered for us were loans to other PL clubs.

I can only see it as a benefit for the big clubs or a waste of effort. If it works for the big clubs then it just means they can continue to grab a large share of promising young players. I see nothing to benefit football overall. Perhaps City and Chelsea will argue for C and D teams, one for each league tier.

 

[Robbo]

I think B teams can only work for the biggest clubs. I'm pretty sure we would be in this group which I don't see being bigger than 8-10 clubs.

However, I'm not sure they would work for the clubs or England. At the level proposed (League Two/Conference) there would no real benefit. After promotion to the Championship it could work, but most of the loan players who have prospered for us were loans to other PL clubs.

I can only see it as a benefit for the big clubs or a waste of effort. If it works for the big clubs then it just means they can continue to grab a large share of promising young players. I see nothing to benefit football overall. Perhaps City and Chelsea will argue for C and D teams, one for each league tier.

This for me. This will only make it easier for rich/big clubs to stockpile even more talented players - it will mean **** all for English talents as Chelski, City, ****, etc. (proably ourselves as well) will only stack up these B-teams with more cheap, foreign talent. Had young, English players been good enough, they would've made the squads of the big teams today. (those that are, do)

I think it would be much more sensible to look at coching and player development on a broader scale in England. Limiting the number of foreign players in PL squads to make room for English players would also give more room for young Englishmen, obviously, but it would probably lower the overall quality of the PL (at least short term), thus lowering the presitge and potential income for FA and those other who benefit from it - which makes it a no go.

 

[braineclipse]

I genuinely don't see it as a question that relates to spurs or have an intetest in it fron a one club point of view.
Its about the integrity of the competition as a whole.

There is certainly an argument that a broader competition helps all clubs and I would support any club that wishes to take part in the competition.

And I certainly don't think clubs should have more that one entrant just because they have money.

But you asked me about my understanding of Spurs and if I then couldn't see the importance of keeping the league structure as it is or something like that?

 

[braineclipse]

This for me. This will only make it easier for rich/big clubs to stockpile even more talented players - it will mean **** all for English talents as Chelski, City, ****, etc. (proably ourselves as well) will only stack up these B-teams with more cheap, foreign talent. Had young, English players been good enough, they would've made the squads of the big teams today. (those that are, do)

I think it would be much more sensible to look at coching and player development on a broader scale in England. Limiting the number of foreign players in PL squads to make room for English players would also give more room for young Englishmen, obviously, but it would probably lower the overall quality of the PL (at least short term), thus lowering the presitge and potential income for FA and those other who benefit from it - which makes it a no go.

This isn't being proposed in isolation though. There have been other moves made to help increase the quality of young English players.

The reason why this kind of a system is being used in Spain and Germany for example is because it's seen as beneficial for player development. English clubs, like many clubs on the continent will bring in young foreign players. But English clubs will have more English players than clubs in any other country. Helping those clubs develop players will be beneficial to English players.

 

[jts1882]

A chairman Greg Dyke unveils 'League Three' proposal and plans to deal with 'mediocre' foreign players


The Football Association chairman Greg Dyke today called for English football to get behind his plans for a new "League Three" for Premier League B-teams that would sit beneath League Two in the football pyramid, in one of the most radical shake-ups to the national game.

The FA has released the findings of the "FA Chairman's England Commission", set up by Dyke to look into why the number of English players in the Premier League and Championship is falling and what can be done about it. The most radical proposal is a new fifth-tier "League Three" with B-teams from Premier League sides which would be subject to promotion and relegation.

[...]

Under the recommendations of the report, which claims to have canvassed the views of 650 individuals involved with football in England, Premier League clubs would be able to choose whether they wanted their B-team to start in the new League Three or the Conference. They would be subject to promotion and relegation but would not be permitted to rise above League One and would not play in the FA Cup.

Under Dyke's Commission proposals, each team would include 15 English players which he says would, in a ten-team league, give "150 playing opportunities for English players". The report says: "If we assume that the percentage of these that make it into the first team is around six per cent (a marginal improvement on the percentage of players with loan experience that reach the first team) this would translate into nine new English players making it into the first team squad of a Premier League side each season."


More: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...al-with-mediocre-foreign-players-9338666.html

Not sure I understand the proposal exactly. In this Third division between the Conference and League Two or parallel? If it just has PL B teams then it starts as a reserve team league. In terms of competition, the only difference is the prospect of promotion, which I doubt will be much incentive for players who don't plan on staying in the B team.

Also if they can't rise above League One, then the level is not going to be good enough for players trying to break into top PL sides.

 

[jts1882]

I'd prefer clubs to be allowed formal tie ups with lower league clubs, preferably local ones, where they could share registrations in some way. For instance a club like Barnet or Orient might welcome players from a partner club, improving the players available and possibly drawing more supporters who want to see their young players in action. Other clubs might want to keep their independence.

Not quite what I wanted ...

The Commission report also recommends the formalising of agreements between partner clubs, like Tottenham Hotspur and Swindon Town. Under the proposed "Strategic Loan Partnership" (SLP) the Commission says that the "lending club would be able to guide the loaned player's experience more closely". Premier League and Championship clubs would be able to sign SLPs with up to two clubs in divisions beneath the Championship.

The places on the SLP would be for home grown players only, and the Commission estimates that 65 per cent of those players would be English. Under the agreement senior clubs could lend up to eight players in a season although only five could be on the team sheet of the receiving club at any one time. They would also be able to loan coaches and backroom staff including sports scientists to their partner clubs.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...al-with-mediocre-foreign-players-9338666.html

... but a step in the right direction. I still feel that Barnet or Orient would be better to allow Spurs fans to watch the players, rather than relatively distant Swindon.

 

[monkeybarry]

So Swindon fans that love and support their club are inferior to fans of a bigger club?

 

[elyid]

So what happens if a team (say Portsmouth back-along) finishes top 10 in the PL and gets a B team, and the goes on to drop from the Premier league all the way to league 2.

Do they still keep their B team?
(which is surely unfair as it means the 10 B-team teams have an advantage forever)

Or, do they *swap* with a new B team?
(which is just crazy)

 

[elyid]

For me the solution is obvious: The FA needs to help ALL professional clubs become better at developing talent.

Update official FA coaching guidelines for young players (i.e. a real long term plan, including tactics, sports science education (for the players), full size pitch only at an older age etc.) then take advantage of the number of professional clubs in this country by giving each of them £1m a season to implement it.

Maybe have guidelines like it must include X "FA trained" coaching salaries (no. depending on division), a % for infrastructure, they must take on X new academy players each year etc. to make sure clubs don't waste it.

This will cost £92m a year and result in Englands players being among the best educated anywhere, as well as an abidance of modern coaches. Review it after 10 years, and even then you've still spent less than Emirates Marketing Project.

The problem is that beyond the PL most clubs simply don't have enough spare resource to focus on developing talent fully and are financially pretty tight. Why not make each of these clubs a centre of coaching excellence?

(and it's quite communist, which always seems popular over here)

 

[milo]

I'd like to see the FA put more effort into getting more people qualified to coach and for a cap on the size of academies to be introduced. If the talent was more evenly spread around then more players would get competitive games.

It would also provide a revenue stream for the lower league clubs because the big clubs would not be able to hoover up all the talent and more players would be signed from the lower leagues.

 

[braineclipse]

So what happens if a team (say Portsmouth back-along) finishes top 10 in the PL and gets a B team, and the goes on to drop from the Premier league all the way to league 2.

Do they still keep their B team?
(which is surely unfair as it means the 10 B-team teams have an advantage forever)

Or, do they *swap* with a new B team?
(which is just crazy)

B-teams will be forced down below the first team. B-team in League One, PL team gets relegated then the B-team has to go down to League Two regardless of their league position. Similarly to if a League One B-team gets into a promotion spot they won't get promoted.

 

[braineclipse]

Not sure I understand the proposal exactly. In this Third division between the Conference and League Two or parallel? If it just has PL B teams then it starts as a reserve team league. In terms of competition, the only difference is the prospect of promotion, which I doubt will be much incentive for players who don't plan on staying in the B team.

Also if they can't rise above League One, then the level is not going to be good enough for players trying to break into top PL sides.

The difference is the prospect of promotion. And players at that level will probably be motivated by the club's ambition, not just their own. Much like a player that's on loan to a promotion chasing club is probably going to try harder to get promotion for them (despite not having a future there) than they will try to win the reserve/U18 league. I think.

Depends on the age group. A 21 year old Andros Townsend will obviously benefit more from a loan to QPR in the PL. But a younger player might benefit a lot more from consistent League One football than from U18/reserve league games. To stay with the Andros Townsend example, look at all the loan deals he had, most of those he didn't really do much at I think. You don't see the advantage of playing competitive games at a B-team for us, with us caring about his development along with consistent coaching instead of a long line of loans to teams that won't care much about his development and all about their short term results?

 

[monkeybarry]

But you asked me about my understanding of Spurs and if I then couldn't see the importance of keeping the league structure as it is or something like that?

Exactly.
It is not ABOUT one club, but affects ALL clubs.

I have no interest in whether it would benefit spurs or not - its irrelevant.
But over the course of history THE LEAGUE has shaped the club and should continue to do so.

I care about the integrity of the competition as a whole. Nothing more, nothing less.
And clubs have to compete and achieve within that structure

 

[milo]

Exactly.
It is not ABOUT one club, but affects ALL clubs.

I have no interest in whether it would benefit spurs or not - its irrelevant.
But over the course of history THE LEAGUE has shaped the club and should continue to do so.

I care about the integrity of the competition as a whole. Nothing more, nothing less.
And clubs have to compete and achieve within that structure

I agree. The one thing that English football has got over all other European countries is a deep and competitive league structure. I don't think that is worth throwing away on a gamble that it might improve the England team. There are things that the FA can do to improve the quality of home grown players but that requires them to tackle the power of the Premier League not give them more.