SFA and Uncle Roy carving up the Elite Youth set up

[HibeeJibee]

Catch-all phrase tbf, but common meaning: a game with little at stake due to club's distance from EL / relegation. As crowds drop for them clearly "crazy passion" doesn't conquer all.

[forameus]

What is the financial penalty for going down in Scotland anyway?  Understand it's going to be variable depending on which club, but for the ones that are likely candidates, is there a huge drop?  When a club like Dundee United - who I doubt would've been put forward as one before the season began - went down, that's quite a big deal to them, but would some of the smaller clubs be as badly affected?  

12 minutes ago, Dindeleux said:

Whilst I'm sure you are right and clubs won't vote it in I can't for a minute understand the thinking behind the term "meaningless games". I don't really think any competitive league game supporting your club could be classed as meaningless to a fan due to the crazy passion most people have for their clubs.

 

I'd also argue that a game being meaningless is purely down to how the product is presented.  When was the last time any EPL game was labelled as meaningless?  They're all "super" or "crunch" games, even if it's shite like Watford vs Stoke (only a little disrespect to those two).  It's just a tag.  I could call most Thistle games meaningless because we're likely to finish in the 8th-10th position like always.  Not really in big danger of getting relegated, but so far away from getting towards European spots.  I still enjoy going though.  They're still competitive games.  They're absolutely not meaningless.  

Plus, the way things seem to be going, the group below Hearts/Aberdeen/Rangers etc appear to be getting closer and closer in terms of quality, so would adding a few lower league sides into that really mean meaningless games?  Or would it just mean that you have a title battle, a European battle, and then a huge battle across the rest of the table?

But what HJ said really isn't wrong.  Why should the clubs really care about completely changing what they have just to blood youths.  If it works, long term you'd absolutely reap the benefits, but what about short term?  The people that vote are running a business, so it's understandable why they won't want to change just in the hope that the national team might get a bit better.  

[Enigma]

Maybe the 8 clubs should be forced to field 4 U21 players from their own academy in every starting 11.

[capt_oats]

5 hours ago, Swello said:

I took that comment more at face value - I thought he was simply meaning that the "risk" of playing more young players needs to be offset by better parachute payments in the event that you end up going down (maybe 'Flow needs to use his dormant account on here to answer ).

On that part, I don't see the risk of playing young players as being as high as it used to be - especially as more/most clubs are doing it. When everyone was overspending and there were better players in the league, then the gap between U20s and Senior Pro's was higher (as we found out in our admin season when we finished bottom). But now? Would anyone really argue that a stand out player in the U20's would do a worse job stepping up to the 1st team than a Tony Straker or Jake Taylor-type journeyman coming from the lowest levels in England? I would almost argue that playing someone who you've watched day in, day out for a few years and who is already settled at the club is lower (assuming you've got a core of good senior pros already) than going for someone picked out by a scouting app on a laptop.

Going by the chat he was having with Gordon Waddell yesterday on Twitter it looks like it was expansion he was getting at. Waddell himself ran a piece in the Sunday Mail the other week touching on the benefits that it might have.

Generally speaking though I think Burrows is putting forward the idea that no one is actually exploring the pros and cons of alternative ideas. Indeed he seemed to be flat out saying in that article that in his view Regan's put very little thought into it at all, instead they've had a vague idea and are saying "that might work" while trying to sell it as some grand plan.

[craigkillie]

It's worth noting that Waddell is clearly pally with Malky Mackay and seems to be the SFA's go-to cheerleader for all of this stuff.

[7-2]

You don't need league reconstruction to create the breathing space for youths getting their chance. It could easily be done with a redistribution of the money clubs are given and removing the increments for final league positions.

Give every club a bigger payment and then just add on bonuses for winning the league and finishing in a Euro place. There have been plenty of 'meaningless games' that would have been ideal to blood youth but clubs didn't because of the financial difference a final league place or two would make. Lets face it, it doesn't really matter if you finish fifth or sixth, seventh or ninth.

[Mr Heliums]

On 06/01/2017 at 13:23, forameus said:

What is the financial penalty for going down in Scotland anyway?  Understand it's going to be variable depending on which club, but for the ones that are likely candidates, is there a huge drop?  

Probably not relevant now – much more money available in the top league – but as a boy I overheard a member of St Johnstone's board worry that we'd get promoted to the Premier as we couldn't afford it. Kind of put a dampener on my enthusiasm for that weekend's four-pointer.

[bunglebonce]

 

If the Highland Academy is to be in the elite 8, then yeah, I have no problems with it being called a carve up.

[ICTChris]

2 minutes ago, bunglebonce said:

 

If the Highland Academy is to be in the elite 8, then yeah, I have no problems with it being called a carve up.

Who are the County youth products?  For us it's

Liam Polworth - 15 starts, 1 sub appearance.

Cameron MacKay - 1 start (now on loan to Elgin)

Cameron Gilchrist - 1 sub appearance (3 mins)

Ali Sutherland - 1 sub appearance (5 mins)

 

[frankthetank22]

14 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

Who are the County youth products?  For us it's

Liam Polworth - 15 starts, 1 sub appearance.

Cameron MacKay - 1 start (now on loan to Elgin)

Cameron Gilchrist - 1 sub appearance (3 mins)

Ali Sutherland - 1 sub appearance (5 mins)

 

It'll only be Tony Dingwall, Greg Morrison and Chris McLaughlin.

[bunglebonce]

21 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

Who are the County youth products?  For us it's

Liam Polworth - 15 starts, 1 sub appearance.

Cameron MacKay - 1 start (now on loan to Elgin)

Cameron Gilchrist - 1 sub appearance (3 mins)

Ali Sutherland - 1 sub appearance (5 mins)

 

• Tony Dingwall - 4 starts, 10 sub appearances - 450mins
• Greg Morrison - 1 start, 4 sub appearances - 117 mins
• Reghan Tumilty - 0 starts, 1 sub appearance - 28 mins
• Chris McLaughlin - 0 starts, 1 sub appearance - 26 mins

Left-back McLaughlin probably ought to have more than two starts and two sub appearances in his career so far.  Jim loves experience though. 

[Swello]

19 minutes ago, bunglebonce said:

• Tony Dingwall - 4 starts, 10 sub appearances - 450mins
• Greg Morrison - 1 start, 4 sub appearances - 117 mins
• Reghan Tumilty - 0 starts, 1 sub appearance - 28 mins
• Chris McLaughlin - 0 starts, 1 sub appearance - 26 mins

Left-back McLaughlin probably ought to have more than two starts and two sub appearances in his career so far.  Jim loves experience though. 

I asked the question on the 'Well thread discussing this stuff - but is there a reason that County are so far behind everyone else in playing academy players?

[Forfinn]

21 minutes ago, Swello said:

I asked the question on the 'Well thread discussing this stuff - but is there a reason that County are so far behind everyone else in playing academy players?

In short, youth development wasn't a priority under the tenure of Derek and George Adams.  Now it is, but we're yet to see the results filter through to the first team.  It's been disappointing not to see McLaughlin given more of a chance at left back, but beyond that you can't really take much issue with the lack of playing time the youngsters have been getting.  They've been doing really well in the U20 league this season, so hopefully we'll see more of them towards the end of this season and next.

[dezz]

Although it's obviously from a Motherwell point of view, our Cheif Exec Alan Burrows was on the MFC Podcast yesterday and Project Brave was discussed at length.

If anyone wants some further info on the plans and potential entry criteria etc then you should go have a listen. Some of the stuff is pretty baffling, such as Stuart Regan admitting to the clubs the entry criteria is inherently flawed!

[LeeKRR1878]

After 2012 I didn't think Scottish football could get any more parochial but this is unreal. Lets get a set up that ensures the big boys are virtually guaranteed to get the cream of the young players who'll improve their first teams and then their finances when the player's sold. Good grief. I take it too many of the big boys have been getting relegated combined with, horror of horror, diddies actually winning trophies so steps have to be taken to minimise it happening again. The fact this set up is even being considered shows what a small minded farce Scottish football is.

I'll agree with that! Clubs like Rangers, Celtic, Hearts Aberdeen and Hibs, too name a few, have the finances to invest in starting XI and have the training facilities in place to offer young players. What about the smaller clubs who rely on bringing through youth players to make up their squad? Have they to get the last pick of what's left? It's unfair and it'll leave a massive gap between the top of Scottish football and the rest?

The way the MLS do it or indeed any American sport, is that the team who have finished bottom of the division get the first pick of the upcoming youth players. It keeps the league fair and teams as even as possible.

Let's be honest, how many youth players come through the likes of Celtic and Rangers and play regular? Celtic have Kieran Tierney and McGregor I believe? Rangers have Barrie McKay. Why not let the smaller less rich clubs have the first pick?

[capt_oats]

So The Herald are reporting that the "8 team elite league" ball is on the slates.

"The final number will be determined by which clubs/academies opt to apply and the credibility of their bids but Herald Sport understands that the idea of an eight club top tier is doomed and the final number could be 10, 12 or even greater."

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/15032317.Exclusive__Mackay_and_Regan_meet_with_clubs_in_bid_to_push_through_Project_Brave_plan/

Edit: just saw this bit as well, "a development/reserve league in which clubs must play at least three overage players."

That's Scottish football fixed then...

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

 

From that Herald article

Quote

 

The plan, which would see all football between Under-11 and Under-16 level move to a March to November season, also envisages a dual age-band Under-18 league, and a development/reserve league in which clubs must play at least three overage players.

A typical re-arranging of the deck chairs. There already is a dual-age band at U-17 level. So creating an U-16 level and moving the dual band up a year. Also tough shit on those summer holidays, you can have an 8 hour round trip to Dingwall instead.

Scrapping the U-20 league and replacing with a development league. Since clubs can already play senior players in the U-20s I don't see what the difference is apart from the requirement to do so. Which isn't realistic for a lot of clubs who already don't have enough senior payers to fill a bench. And what does overage mean in this context? Over 18, over 20 or over 21?

It is basically a return to the model that was in place before the current U20 league.

[capt_oats]

Scrapping the U-20 league and replacing with a development league. Since clubs can already play senior players in the U-20s I don't see what the difference is apart from the requirement to do so.

Not only that but what if a manager just wants to play his young players. He can't do it because he's obliged by rules to play a minimum of 3 overage players?

I was at the our u20s against Hearts earlier in the season and having missed a pen they ended up losing 1-0 against a Hearts side including; Noring, Nowak, Ozturk, Muirhead & Oshaniwa. Dom Thomas was the most experienced Motherwell player on the park.

I genuinely don't see how forcing Craigan to play say Dean Brill, Keiran Kennedy and James McFadden rather than just letting him put out the side he wants improves the situation in any notable way.

[craigkillie]

I don't have an issue with either of these things.  I think youth football probably should have a summer season - the schedule can get thrown off a fair bit by the weather in the winter, or you can end up with 13 year old boys playing in the snow and probably not learning much.  I'm sure they'll still have a break over the school holidays, so I doubt anyone will be going on 8 hour roundtrips to or from Dingwall during that period.

The logic behind requiring some overage players in the U20s is that it should be good for the younger guys to learn whilst playing alongside and against more experienced players, whereas now there are some U20s games where teams send out a full side of 18 year olds or whatever.  It's about bridging the gap between the U20s and the senior teams without having to resort to nonsense like colt teams or full on "reserve football".

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

I don't think it is logical at all to be forced to play senior players in u20s matches. The whole reason the reserve league was scrapped and replaced with a development league was that the senior players involved saw it as a kick about rather than a competitive game. The current system still allows senior players to compete so the only change being made is that young players will have less opportunity to play in competitive matches.

Whether changing youth football to a summer season is a good idea or not is up for question. Currently teams train all through the school year with Summer reserved for organised international competitions and football camps. Kids are going to play football all year round anyway so I don't see the change as being particularly important.