City approach FA about B team

[SkyBlueCanuck]

as a method of consistently acquiring, training and developing top level youth talent and nurturing them up to the elite level, it is hard to argue against this new scheme. if, at the day's end, the goal is to identify and create as many excellent homegrown players as possible then this must be the clear next evolution of the Football League.

 

[greasedupdeafguy]

as a method of consistently acquiring, training and developing top level youth talent and nurturing them up to the elite level, it is hard to argue against this new scheme. if, at the day's end, the goal is to identify and create as many excellent homegrown players as possible then this must be the clear next evolution of the Football League.

Absolute rubbish, if you are good enough you will play like Rooney did at 16 or Wilshire at 18. Destroying 100 years of tradition in the small hope that it will improve the national team is wrong. Money needs to be pumped into grassroots to get better pitches and coaches that will help produce better player in the future, not b sides playing in empty stadiums against cknferance sides

Spain have had b teams for decades but have only just started to become the dominent force in international football. Why? Because of the best coaching in the world.

 

[n_mcfc]

Disappointed by City supporting this. Really am.

It's just an awful idea. I can't, genuinely, see how they think this will benefit young players.

If players are good enough to play, they'll play. Rooney, Wilshere, Walcott etc.

I honestly think that the attitude of young, footballers in this country is the key problem.

How many players go out on loan and put the real graft in? - Slightly off topic but John Guidetti. Went to Holland did brilliantly. Gone to Stoke and a lot of City fans were pissed off by Mark Hughes (?!) and Stoke for not playing him. Why? Why should they? Why should they drop 2-3 Premier League strikers to accommodate a young player for our benefit? Is he better than Walters, Crouch, Odemwengie? Nah. So why's he gone there? That's my issue. Why have City, and the player, allowed him to go and be a 3rd choice striker at a mid-table Premier League club rather than go to a Championship club who were short up top (Wigan)? Why's he not played more? Is he putting the graft in? He knows he won't be at Stoke again so why bother? The attitude is the problem. Not the lack of competition/intensity in the U21 league. It's attitudes. If there's only 100 people watching them on a Tuesday night, it doesn't mean they shouldn't be working their arses off. It doesn't mean that they deserve to play in the Football League for an U21 team. Again, if they're good enough, they'll play. Teams will take them on loan and so the cycle continues. Worryingly, foreign players who come over to this country at 16-17 never seem to REALLY reach their potential do they? eg at City; Denis Suarez, Juan Roman, Guidetti. It's not good for their character/development.

How many players get a pro-contract (wrongly 80% of the time) at a Premier League club, aged 18, and become comfortable going out on loan and making no impact when they do?

Don't punish the rest of the Football League because the England national team is still shit. Start instilling professional attitudes at a younger age.

I mean look at Milner. His attitude is enviable. He's hardly the greatest player in the league but he's evidence for what you can achieve if you work your balls off.

I think I just dislike young footballers. I get the impression many in this country aspire to be a footballer for everything other than the football.

 

[SkyBlueCanuck]

as a method of consistently acquiring, training and developing top level youth talent and nurturing them up to the elite level, it is hard to argue against this new scheme. if, at the day's end, the goal is to identify and create as many excellent homegrown players as possible then this must be the clear next evolution of the Football League.

Absolute rubbish,

you're entitled to your opinion. i however can't think of a better way to holistically bring a prospect along than to have him play for a top organization under the supervision of the best coaches with the finest facilities and a consistent focus for his achievement... or you could just hope for the best to happen as the youngster navigates a system where the wrong choices will bury him and stunt his development.

if you are good enough you will play like Rooney did at 16 or Wilshire at 18.

Apex fallacy.

Destroying 100 years of tradition in the small hope that it will improve the national team is wrong.

Destroying 100 years of history? Overreact much?

Small hope of improving the national team? Who says it's a small hope? Who says that improving the national team is the only goal here? You do.

Money needs to be pumped into grassroots to get better pitches and coaches that will help produce better player in the future, not b sides playing in empty stadiums against cknferance sides

Pumping money into grassroots and getting better facilities and coaching seems like a natural extention of the B team scheme.

Spain have had b teams for decades but have only just started to become the dominent force in international football.

I think you've got the point here.

Why? Because of the best coaching in the world.

Yeah... consistently... for the best prospects up through the ranks, etc, etc...

 

[greasedupdeafguy]

as a method of consistently acquiring, training and developing top level youth talent and nurturing them up to the elite level, it is hard to argue against this new scheme. if, at the day's end, the goal is to identify and create as many excellent homegrown players as possible then this must be the clear next evolution of the Football League.

Absolute rubbish,

you're entitled to your opinion. i however can't think of a better way to holistically bring a prospect along than to have him play for a top organization under the supervision of the best coaches with the finest facilities and a consistent focus for his achievement... or you could just hope for the best to happen as the youngster navigates a system where the wrong choices will bury him and stunt his development.

if you are good enough you will play like Rooney did at 16 or Wilshire at 18.

Apex fallacy.

Destroying 100 years of tradition in the small hope that it will improve the national team is wrong.

Destroying 100 years of history? Overreact much?

Small hope of improving the national team? Who says it's a small hope? Who says that improving the national team is the only goal here? You do.

Money needs to be pumped into grassroots to get better pitches and coaches that will help produce better player in the future, not b sides playing in empty stadiums against cknferance sides

Pumping money into grassroots and getting better facilities and coaching seems like a natural extention of the B team scheme.

Spain have had b teams for decades but have only just started to become the dominent force in international football.

I think you've got the point here.

Why? Because of the best coaching in the world.

Yeah... consistently... for the best prospects up through the ranks, etc, etc...

Its not overreacting. Just look at lower division attendances in the countries which have B teams. League one attendances are the tenth highest in the whole of Europe. Look at the reaction of people involved in the lower leagues at this dreadful idea like Terry Skiverton and Graham Westley.

Its also unfair on clubs who have worked there way up though the county leagues and ryman leagues to then have another barrier consisting of b teams. It would just destroy the integrity of the football league. People would just stop going which would bankrupt teams.

Dont get your third point, why else would b teams needed apart from improving the national side?

 

[Oystercatcher28]

Clive Efford MP (Labour's Shadow Minister for Sport)

"This report focuses the majority of its attention at elite player development - but without improving facilities and the quality of coaching at the grass roots throughout our communities, this will all come to nothing."

Why can't the Championship clubs have B teams? Do you lose a B team if you get relegated?

Steve Claridge (BBC Sport pundit, who played more than 1,000 professional matches between 1984 and 2006)

"Who chooses who as a feeder club? It will be so unfair. Everybody will want Manchester United. What happens to a team who have not got that partnership when one team loans eight or 10 players, and another is left high and dry who don't have that partnership? It is not a fair system.

Who wants to be a feeder/B-team for a mid-table club?

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

I can't get this thought out of my head. Imagine a trailer for a new blockbuster movie ...

"Coming soon, from the guys that brought you The 39th Game - The B-Team"

Der, der, der, derrrrrrrr - de-de-derrrr - de-de de-de-de-derrrrrr (The A-Team theme)

On a more serious note, this B Team league idea is stupid, all the B teams will end up bobbling along at the bottom of the Conference after a few years. Youth players develop by playing WITH experienced players, not AGAINST. All they'll end up with is broken legs, cruciate ligament damage and a desire to do something else.

 

[cibaman]

Disappointed by City supporting this. Really am.

It's just an awful idea. I can't, genuinely, see how they think this will benefit young players.

If players are good enough to play, they'll play. Rooney, Wilshere, Walcott etc.

I honestly think that the attitude of young, footballers in this country is the key problem.

How many players go out on loan and put the real graft in? - Slightly off topic but John Guidetti. Went to Holland did brilliantly. Gone to Stoke and a lot of City fans were pissed off by Mark Hughes (?!) and Stoke for not playing him. Why? Why should they? Why should they drop 2-3 Premier League strikers to accommodate a young player for our benefit? Is he better than Walters, Crouch, Odemwengie? Nah. So why's he gone there? That's my issue. Why have City, and the player, allowed him to go and be a 3rd choice striker at a mid-table Premier League club rather than go to a Championship club who were short up top (Wigan)? Why's he not played more? Is he putting the graft in? He knows he won't be at Stoke again so why bother? The attitude is the problem. Not the lack of competition/intensity in the U21 league. It's attitudes. If there's only 100 people watching them on a Tuesday night, it doesn't mean they shouldn't be working their arses off. It doesn't mean that they deserve to play in the Football League for an U21 team. Again, if they're good enough, they'll play. Teams will take them on loan and so the cycle continues. Worryingly, foreign players who come over to this country at 16-17 never seem to REALLY reach their potential do they? eg at City; Denis Suarez, Juan Roman, Guidetti. It's not good for their character/development.

How many players get a pro-contract (wrongly 80% of the time) at a Premier League club, aged 18, and become comfortable going out on loan and making no impact when they do?

Don't punish the rest of the Football League because the England national team is still shit. Start instilling professional attitudes at a younger age.

I mean look at Milner. His attitude is enviable. He's hardly the greatest player in the league but he's evidence for what you can achieve if you work your balls off.

I think I just dislike young footballers. I get the impression many in this country aspire to be a footballer for everything other than the football.

Vieira has been a very big supporter of the concept. He said it was hugely beneficial for him to play in a competitive league against adults. And the loan system is a bit hit and miss. Does the club really know why Guidetti was a huge success in Holland but has disappeared at Stoke?

But I can see why the lower league clubs are against the idea. And It would only make sense for us if our B team rapidly progressed to League 1. I cant see there would be much benefit playing at Conference level.

 

[BringBackSwales]

Disappointed by City supporting this. Really am.

It's just an awful idea. I can't, genuinely, see how they think this will benefit young players.

If players are good enough to play, they'll play. Rooney, Wilshere, Walcott etc.

I honestly think that the attitude of young, footballers in this country is the key problem.

How many players go out on loan and put the real graft in? - Slightly off topic but John Guidetti. Went to Holland did brilliantly. Gone to Stoke and a lot of City fans were pissed off by Mark Hughes (?!) and Stoke for not playing him. Why? Why should they? Why should they drop 2-3 Premier League strikers to accommodate a young player for our benefit? Is he better than Walters, Crouch, Odemwengie? Nah. So why's he gone there? That's my issue. Why have City, and the player, allowed him to go and be a 3rd choice striker at a mid-table Premier League club rather than go to a Championship club who were short up top (Wigan)? Why's he not played more? Is he putting the graft in? He knows he won't be at Stoke again so why bother? The attitude is the problem. Not the lack of competition/intensity in the U21 league. It's attitudes. If there's only 100 people watching them on a Tuesday night, it doesn't mean they shouldn't be working their arses off. It doesn't mean that they deserve to play in the Football League for an U21 team. Again, if they're good enough, they'll play. Teams will take them on loan and so the cycle continues. Worryingly, foreign players who come over to this country at 16-17 never seem to REALLY reach their potential do they? eg at City; Denis Suarez, Juan Roman, Guidetti. It's not good for their character/development.

How many players get a pro-contract (wrongly 80% of the time) at a Premier League club, aged 18, and become comfortable going out on loan and making no impact when they do?

Don't punish the rest of the Football League because the England national team is still shit. Start instilling professional attitudes at a younger age.

I mean look at Milner. His attitude is enviable. He's hardly the greatest player in the league but he's evidence for what you can achieve if you work your balls off.

I think I just dislike young footballers. I get the impression many in this country aspire to be a footballer for everything other than the football.

Vieira has been a very big supporter of the concept. He said it was hugely beneficial for him to play in a competitive league against adults. And the loan system is a bit hit and miss. Does the club really know why Guidetti was a huge success in Holland but has disappeared at Stoke?

But I can see why the lower league clubs are against the idea. And It would only make sense for us if our B team rapidly progressed to League 1. I cant see there would be much benefit playing at Conference level.

Vieira is right, and not only do they play against better/harder opposition, they get to do it and develop AS A TEAM, which is what we want

 

[goat boy]

Why didn't guidetti get a game? I remember reading that a kid had gone off to Oldham for 3 months and in that time had made 2 appearances as a sub. Whats the use of that? You have to assume all city kids are pretty talented so something must have gone badly wrong there... but I seem to read similar stories time and again. You can't tell other teams what to do, so clearly this is what they've come up with instead. Rightly or wrongly.