Youth Development system in England

Giggsy11

I was reading Villas-Boas interview about Chelsea youth and also about the development system in England, he made few good points which were also made previously by Wenger and others. What is your opinion on following Spanish system of having B teams in the lower leagues?

Here is AVB's interview.

The reserve team league is not competitive. The youth levels are not competitive enough. The Youth Cup: does it favour talent or competition? In my opinion there is a missed link between age groups in all competitions. There should be national championships played between teams from around the country.

If the European model is applied in England, it could be tested. The reserve team, for all the hard work, is not competitive. It serves the first team, but it doesn’t serve the progression of talent coming through.

“There is more of a cultural identity if it’s called a ‘B team’. It’s the same name, the same environment. If it’s a feeder club, I couldn’t call a player up to my first team until the transfer window opens.

“What happens in Barcelona B is a good model in terms of competitions. They promote talent. That’s the main difference I see. If your B team plays in the Championship where they are fourth or sixth and threatening, playing good football, you’d call them up.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/9026600/Brazilian-teenager-Piazon-heads-Chelseas-next-generation.html

Mitch Connor

he is right, youth development in England is quite poor in comparison to other countries.

the rules relating to the teaching of kids are a contributing factor (these are changing, and maybe killing the football league at the same time). The actual teaching methods are archaic in some places, though at the top level this is changing every day, led by clubs like Man United and Liverpool.

The reserve team football is a joke though; it isn't competitive and isn't a good teacher for the young players that play in it.

AVB is right that B teams would aid the top clubs - United being able to train the kids their own way and suppervise their progression on a daily basis, and then seeing them play in League 1 or the Championship (for sake of argument) would be a massive boost and really help the young players United have. It would be a massive improvement on the way things are done now.

However, Man United B taking points of Notts County and thus denying them, potentially, promotion is simply something that doesn't sit right with me. Football teams should have an identity, and Man United B would not have that. Sure, you may get some fans that would go to a B game when United are away or when they can't get a ticket to OT, but I can't imagine the support being much greater than the reserves currently get (which is terrible imo)

A tigher integration of Parent and Feeder club could be the answer but again I am not sure of this either - as I don't like the idea of clubs, with a history and tradition and support base of their own, being used.

kryogen

Simply put, imo having B teams that compete in the Championship/League 1 would be great for the club in question, but bad for the league overall.

I would like more to be done about youth development in the country but as of yet I am unsure how I feel is the best way to proceed, a way to make the reserves and youth games more competitive is a must of course.

But there is not a simple solution to the problem without harming the "smaller" clubs.

GavRedKing

The only problem with having a " B " team is where in the Football League will they fit in? Do you start them off outside the FL and make them gain there place by going through the league and thus having them playing at a worse level then Reserve level football but instilling a mentality of winning and gaining what they deserve or do you throw them into League 2 and have them take points as Mitch said from teams that will want to climb the FL ladder and hope to reach the EPL someday.

Its a tough one to call and one I dont think we'll see for a long time in England.

LuckyLloyd

Premiership (or any interested club) B teams could register at the level below the Bluesquare Premier (or thereabouts) and see how they go. The reality is that a Liverpool / Utd / City B team would have a more limited ceiling than people think. They'd have to have fully registered squads, so you would therefore be talking about players outside the CL 25. The turnover in their squads would be huge season on season, and the advantage they'd garner from playing at home would be tiny (for the first few years at least).

I think they'd be doing very well to be strong Championship teams, they might find an equilibrium below that. Though if they did get up and running they would find attendances after a while. A United / Liverpool B team playing in League 1 / FA Cup would get fans through the door at a rate not too far removed from the average attendence for those levels imo.

If England was serious about youth development that would be a way to go about it.

~Rebel~

Giggsy11 wrote: »

I was reading Villas-Boas interview about Chelsea youth and also about the development system in England, he made few good points which were also made previously by Wenger and others. What is your opinion on following Spanish system of having B teams in the lower leagues?

Here is AVB's interview.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/9026600/Brazilian-teenager-Piazon-heads-Chelseas-next-generation.html

Pretty much exactly the same stuff Rafa was saying a few years ago as well.

Whatever they decide about the Reserve league, something has to change, it's just too big a jump from reserve to premiership.

tallaghtmick

I doubt prem teams would agree to this as they use the reserves to keep fringe players fit and help players coming back from injury regain fitness.

Mitch Connor

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Pretty much exactly the same stuff Rafa was saying a few years ago as well.

Whatever they decide about the Reserve league, something has to change, it's just too big a jump from reserve to premiership.

I do feel this is the clubs fault though.

The reserve team used to actually be a place fringe first teamers played to keep their fitness and sharpness up.

You could have the second or third choice keeper, 4th or 5th choice CB and so on. The younger players playing for these sides would be playing with experienced players and playing against experienced players. Now the fringe first teamers would never even look at the reserve team unless they were coming off a long injury, and even then they may only play 60mins and be back in the first team fold.

The reserve team now is basically an Under 20's team - primarily made up of players too old for the academy side. That is why it is so uncompetitive, the age level of the teams is too low, and there isn't much to fight for. IMO the academy league is treated similarly - nice to win but no one really cares - it is the FA Youth Cup that gets the attention and is considered a source of pride to win, and an indication of where the next generation is coming from.

I think the FA need to look at the registration and make up of squads in general, and change the rules of first team and reserve team football.

I think they should consider something like actually making the 'reserve' team a properly Under 20's competition, with the allowance of playing 3 over age players (so that fitness can be gained when needed). On top of this you could make it that only players eligible for the U20's side and those 25 registered for the PL side would be eligible to play for the club in the PL.

This would mean players have to be registered for the PL a year earlier than currently - which could have a knock on effect of increasing the number of loans out of the club - these 20 year old players are too experienced for the current reserve team set up and benifit little from playing in it (a number of 18 and 19 year olds are similar) so basically forcing the clubs to loan them out would help their development.

What they need to do is find a way of stopping clubs from hording talent and also being opposed to loaning them out as they are unsure of the benifits of the loan due to issues of training and competitive game time.

The beauty of the B teams is that the B team players train with the club coaches, and around the club all week and monitored the same way English clubs would monitor their own youth and reserve team players. Then on match day they are playing actual competitive games against proper teams. The main plus side for B sides (imo) is the club training - they are still taught the same club ethos on a daily basis. That is what is missing from loans in England - because the players can get competitive games at another club at some level on loan, but then the parent club are giving up the teaching and monitoring of the kid, and I think that is what they are most against doing.

If a team like united could find a way of maintaining control of a players training while also giving them competitive games at another team, they would jump at it imo.

LuckyLloyd

tallaghtmick wrote: »

I doubt prem teams would agree to this as they use the reserves to keep fringe players fit and help players coming back from injury regain fitness.

You could retain the current reserve league as it is, and still have B teams aswell. The reality is that most premiership clubs would have the resources to do both.

LuckyLloyd

Mitch Connor wrote: »

so basically forcing the clubs to loan them out would help their development.

What they need to do is find a way of stopping clubs from hording talent and also being opposed to loaning them out as they are unsure of the benifits of the loan due to issues of training and competitive game time.

The beauty of the B teams is that the B team players train with the club coaches, and around the club all week and monitored the same way English clubs would monitor their own youth and reserve team players. Then on match day they are playing actual competitive games against proper teams. The main plus side for B sides (imo) is the club training - they are still taught the same club ethos on a daily basis. That is what is missing from loans in England - because the players can get competitive games at another club at some level on loan, but then the parent club are giving up the teaching and monitoring of the kid, and I think that is what they are most against doing.

If a team like united could find a way of maintaining control of a players training while also giving them competitive games at another team, they would jump at it imo.

It's a dilemmna when playing Football Manager (:)) - your facilities and coaches as a top class club will be so much better for a young player's development, yet you can't offer a kid first team football; so the choice is sending them to poor coaches and facilities for a lower league team where the competitive experience may not compensate for being around less intelligent and able people in training every day.

A real catch 22, and something the Spanish game have neatly side stepped.

Mitch Connor

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You could retain the current reserve league as it is, and still have B teams aswell. The reality is that most premiership clubs would have the resources to do both.

i don't think they would to be honest.

Man United, Man City, Chelsea would. I imagine Arsenal, Liverpool and Spurs would too - beyond that I don't think Premiership sides would be able to maintain a B side along with the current structure.

I don't think Spurs actually have a reserve team anymore and I think Man City may have done away with their 'Elite Development Squad' too.

I am certain teams like Wolves, Wigan, Swansea, Blackburn or pretty much anyone in the bottom half could run a competitive B team, and the B team would have to be competitive (even if it takes a few years) for their to be much of a point in it - I don't think a non-league B team would be of any use - I think they would have to be holding their own in League 1 at the very least.

If B teams were allowed, and were introduced - it would simply (at the moment) be another way of Man United/Chelsea/City being able to snap up vast amounts of young talent. The competitive games problem is the only issue holding them back at the moment imo. If you added a B team to the current structures you are creating space for 18 to 25 new signings. It would further increase the gap between the top and the bottom of the PL, never mind the PL and the lower leagues.

I honestly think tighter integration of Parent and Feeder clubs is the way to go (if you have to go some way), but that comes with an even greater risk to club identity (for the feeder club)

Giggsy11

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I
The beauty of the B teams is that the B team players train with the club coaches, and around the club all week and monitored the same way English clubs would monitor their own youth and reserve team players. Then on match day they are playing actual competitive games against proper teams. The main plus side for B sides (imo) is the club training - they are still taught the same club ethos on a daily basis. That is what is missing from loans in England - because the players can get competitive games at another club at some level on loan, but then the parent club are giving up the teaching and monitoring of the kid, and I think that is what they are most against doing.
.

This is the main reason why I dont mind having B team. Young players will train with first team all week and will be playing competitive game on Saturdays and Sundays. Would do world of good for any young player's progress.

Mitch Connor

Giggsy11 wrote: »

This is the main reason why I dont mind having B team. Young players will train with first team all week and will be playing competitive game on Saturdays and Sundays. Would do world of good for any young player's progress.

It would, yes. I don't disagree with that at all. It is clearly, for me, the most enticing aspect of the B team idea.

My issues are:

1. I don't like the idea of an artificial B team taking the place of a club with history, tradition and supporters.
2. I don't think all PL sides could do it, so it would be another issue creating an unfair playing field in the PL.
3. It would allow clubs doing it to sign (possibly) 25 extra players, further reducing the talent available to other sides
4. Youth development and the English game? Ha! Unless you had a rule stating X number of UK players required, it would be as full of foreign kids as the academy and reserve team sides are - help with youth dev for the club, not the national side as some would suggest.

There are pro's to the issue, but the cons are just far to big to ignore imo. To be in favour of B teams, you would have to be very selfish with respects to your club - it would be bad for the domestic game and wouldn't really help the national side imo

Giggsy11

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I1. I don't like the idea of an artificial B team taking the place of a club with history, tradition and supporters.

B team should start from lowest league, so if they make it all the way then I would say they earned it. Tbh no team should take the league status for granted. I know where you are coming from but if a team works all their way from bottom league when they would earn my respect for sure.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

2. I don't think all PL sides could do it, so it would be another issue creating an unfair playing field in the PL.
3. It would allow clubs doing it to sign (possibly) 25 extra players, further reducing the talent available to other sides

I think both will have same root cause. So to take away this unfair rule, only U 20s, 21s or whatever, only those age group players should be allowed to play in B teams. For ex Gibson shouldn't be allowed to play in B team as he is around 24 as the reason for B team is to play youngsters not fringe players.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

4. Youth development and the English game? Ha! Unless you had a rule stating X number of UK players required, it would be as full of foreign kids as the academy and reserve team sides are - help with youth dev for the club, not the national side as some would suggest.

You gave the solution too .

Mitch Connor wrote: »

There are pro's to the issue, but the cons are just far to big to ignore imo. To be in favour of B teams, you would have to be very selfish with respects to your club - it would be bad for the domestic game and wouldn't really help the national side imo

There are Pros and Cons, can't disagree with that. I was not selfish with respect to my club, i was thinking frmo youth player point of view.

And I dont see how it wont help National side unless teams are full of foreign kids, for ex Morrison would be playing his trade in some league if we had B team which would have helped his progress, same for Josh Mceachran.

If implemented properly (by proper I mean with few rules which will help English youth as well as Club young players) I can see quality of young players improving drastically.

Mitch Connor

Giggsy11 wrote: »

B team should start from lowest league, so if they make it all the way then I would say they earned it. Tbh no team should take the league status for granted. I know where you are coming from but if a team works all their way from bottom league when they would earn my respect for sure.

This is my biggest issue and I don't think you could ever say a B team had truly earned it.

Take FC United or AFC Wimbledon.

Two fan started and ran clubs. Two clubs ran under strict financial operating proceedures, two sides with a sense of community, part of their local community and all working together to create a club that they feel part of. As they progress and strive to improve, they are doing that as a collective.

Success they gain, they earn, bit by bit.

If Man United enter a B team at the level FC United entered, they are entering a side with the might and resources of Manchester United behind them. This B side will have players trained at one of the best academies around. Players signed from around the world. possibly players earning more week than entire teams they are playing against. The resources behind the team, even if just a percentage of the overall resouces of the Parent club, would far outweigh any side they compete against,possibly right up to League 1 level. They wouldn't earn that right, not really, they may amass the points for promotion, but they won't have worked to get themselves into that position. they won't have had to worry about rents on a stadium or training facilities. They won't have had to worry about wage budgets for coaching and playing staff.

I just don't see how a B team could truly earn anything.

Success gained by a team like FC United, AFC Wimbledon or a team like Notts County would always be of a higher value, and always more earned than anything an artificial B side could ever attain.

That is my main gripe. A football club should mean something, a B team never would.

Giggsy11

Mitch Connor wrote: »

This is my biggest issue and I don't think you could ever say a B team had truly earned it.

Take FC United or AFC Wimbledon.

Two fan started and ran clubs. Two clubs ran under strict financial operating proceedures, two sides with a sense of community, part of their local community and all working together to create a club that they feel part of. As they progress and strive to improve, they are doing that as a collective.

Success they gain, they earn, bit by bit.

If Man United enter a B team at the level FC United entered, they are entering a side with the might and resources of Manchester United behind them. This B side will have players trained at one of the best academies around. Players signed from around the world. possibly players earning more week than entire teams they are playing against. The resources behind the team, even if just a percentage of the overall resouces of the Parent club, would far outweigh any side they compete against,possibly right up to League 1 level. They wouldn't earn that right, not really, they may amass the points for promotion, but they won't have worked to get themselves into that position. they won't have had to worry about rents on a stadium or training facilities. They won't have had to worry about wage budgets for coaching and playing staff.

I just don't see how a B team could truly earn anything.

Success gained by a team like FC United, AFC Wimbledon or a team like Notts County would always be of a higher value, and always more earned than anything an artificial B side could ever attain.

That is my main gripe. A football club should mean something, a B team never would.

Fair enough M.C. I didn't think from that point of view. Probably this is as convincing post as it gets

opr

The lower leagues in Spain and other countries are far more conducive to allowing youth players to develop and play football than in England. It would certainly toughen some youngsters up in the short term but long term I have doubts to how beneficial the type of football played in the main would be to them. Also having to deal with such a physical league week in week out at that kind of age could have hugely negative effects further down the line in their careers. I am not saying you don't see teams who play good football and win at lower levels in England but they are proper developed adults playing in those team who can also cope with the physical side.

I would love some solution to be found but I am thinking in terms of Liverpool and how firing our current reserve team into one of the lower English leagues would be a disaster imo.

The gap has somewhat been bridged for the clubs in the Nexgen series this year. The games are played at a high tempo and feel like proper competitive matches at a really high level which is often not the case watching the reserves/u18's.

Opr