Project Brave rumbles on..

[Savage Henry]

59 minutes ago, coprolite said:

 

There isn't a problem that can't be solved by blaming foreigners.

 

Right.  If the Scottish players were good enough, they'd be playing.  Bad players don't become good players simply by playing more games.  All that does is lower the overall standard.  The principle behind Project Brave is surely a good one.  The practice seems to be an absolute mess.  

Also: it's a terrible article.  A series of one sentence paragraphs and no real analysis, in which the journalist is referred to as "our man".  It's just a list of complaints.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/project-brave-just-isnt-brave-11528847

[Bazil85]

42 minutes ago, coprolite said:

 

There isn't a problem that can't be solved by blaming foreigners.

 

Trust me I'm not blaming foreigners, I am squarely blaming the decision makers in our game. 

[Bazil85]

41 minutes ago, Tartantony said:

 

Yeah I see what you mean. I was aligning my thoughts with the current UEFA criteria where you need to register 8 homegrown players (defined as developed in your own nation, with 4 being developed by the club).

I'm not sure it would help the smaller teams as they might not have 6 players that are good enough or replacements good enough if there are injuries/suspensions. Perhaps 6 is too many and it would work better with the UEFA rules. It's an idea I like though.

 

Yeah it's something that would have to be debated to get the right number and I think it would have to be embedded over a few years. Guess it comes back to the point on developing players though. If you're not developing good enough players then tough luck, you better start. Doubt it would happen though in reality man. 

[Bazil85]

4 minutes ago, Savage Henry said:

Right.  If the Scottish players were good enough, they'd be playing.  Bad players don't become good players simply by playing more games.  All that does is lower the overall standard.  The principle behind Project Brave is surely a good one.  The practice seems to be an absolute mess.  

Also: it's a terrible article.  A series of one sentence paragraphs and no real analysis, in which the journalist is referred to as "our man".  It's just a list of complaints.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/project-brave-just-isnt-brave-11528847

It's more the point that it would forces clubs to heavily consider youth development (as it appears to have done for Germany in recent years... Not that I'm saying we'll ever get to that level). I'm not saying it'll turn bad players into good players at all, I'm saying it'll encourage more clubs to nurture youth talent because the bottom line is you need to develop better players because a number of them will need to be in your first team one day. 

No one is denying Scottish players are far from good enough right now, that's obvious. The whole point is to come up with a solution to remedy that. Project Brave goes some of the way to do that but not far enough. That's the point of the article. 

[Loonytoons]

Michael Gannon seems to think part time clubs aren't professional. I'm pretty sure only one has amateur status.

"It’s a joke when we’ve got the Scottish Professional Football League and only half the teams in it are actually professional. It’s taking the P."

[Bazil85]

Just now, Loonytoons said:

Michael Gannon seems to think part time clubs aren't professional. I'm pretty sure only one has amateur status.

"It’s a joke when we’ve got the Scottish Professional Football League and only half the teams in it are actually professional. It’s taking the P."

I think he's more talking professional as in full-time professionals to be fair. Queens Park are amateur and about half the other teams are Part Time. 

[Loonytoons]

I think he's more talking professional as in full-time professionals to be fair. Queens Park are amateur and about half the other teams are Part Time. 

Aye, I get that but he's having a pop at people for not doing their job correctly.

[RandomGuy.]

It's more the point that it would forces clubs to heavily consider youth development (as it appears to have done for Germany in recent years... Not that I'm saying we'll ever get to that level). I'm not saying it'll turn bad players into good players at all, I'm saying it'll encourage more clubs to nurture youth talent because the bottom line is you need to develop better players because a number of them will need to be in your first team one day. 
No one is denying Scottish players are far from good enough right now, that's obvious. The whole point is to come up with a solution to remedy that. Project Brave goes some of the way to do that but not far enough. That's the point of the article. 

Do German clubs not have their youth systems heavily subsidised by the German FA?

[Bazil85]

2 minutes ago, Loonytoons said:

 

Aye, I get that but he's having a pop at people for not doing their job correctly.

 

yeah suppose you're right. Still in an ideal world it would be much better to have more people in this country paid to play football and only football. 

[Bazil85]

Just now, RandomGuy. said:

 

Do German clubs not have their youth systems heavily subsidised by the German FA?

 

I'm not sure, I imagine so. That's what SFA should be coming out to say IMO. We need more funding for youth football. Project Brave is a smokescreen for cost saving. If the SFA came out and said 'Our budget for youth football is not enough to help us develop a generation of footballers capable of getting us to a major tournament.' I'd have a lot more respect for them. An honest communication like that would also put massive pressure on government parties to invest more money in our game. 

On that point, when I've brought it up before people have said 'There are more important areas to invest money' Which is completely true, however investing money is not throwing it away. Better players = command of better wages, bigger transfers and more sponsorship. All of which is taxable. SFA are pitiful at fighting for a better future for Scottish youngsters with footballing talent. 

[Smokiejohn]

I think he's more talking professional as in full-time professionals to be fair. Queens Park are amateur and about half the other teams are Part Time. 

I would argue Queens Park have one of the best records in youth player development despite their amateur status , yet lose out as cannot meet criteria to offer professional contract ... surely a “first team” contract amateur or otherwise would suffice ?

[Bazil85]

3 minutes ago, Smokiejohn said:

 

I would argue Queens Park have one of the best records in youth player development despite their amateur status , yet lose out as cannot meet criteria to offer professional contract ... surely a “first team” contract amateur or otherwise would suffice ?

 

Agreed, I don't however think that's where the debate sits.

It's in regards to improving youth development further and ways in which we can do that. Minimum home grown players in the starting 11 would be a great step for me. It would require 11 votes from top flight clubs to change it though so will never happen in a month of Sundays. More just a discussion point from the article TBH. 

[Kitty_Boy]

Statement from Ayr United:

http://www.ayrunitedfc.co.uk/project-brave-statement/

In summary:

• Disappointed that entry to the Elite section was not granted;
• The Progressive Performance (second) tier has been designed to ensure that developing, ambitious academies could position themselves to progress to full Elite status;
• Will make an application for Elite status in June 2018, when the academies will be reassessed and have fulfilled 73 of the 75 Elite criteria.

[Smokiejohn]

Agreed, I don't however think that's where the debate sits.
It's in regards to improving youth development further and ways in which we can do that. Minimum home grown players in the starting 11 would be a great step for me. It would require 11 votes from top flight clubs to change it though so will never happen in a month of Sundays. More just a discussion point from the article TBH. 

Yeah , I agree ... more has to be done to ensure a pathway for young players to get into first team squads ... and not just to sit on the bench either .

I was just highlighting the great work some of the smaller clubs and their talented coaches are doing ,whose skills I hope are not lost to our youth.

[Swello]

8 minutes ago, Kitty_Boy said:

Statement from Ayr United:

http://www.ayrunitedfc.co.uk/project-brave-statement/

In summary:

• Disappointed that entry to the Elite section was not granted;
• The Progressive Performance (second) tier has been designed to ensure that developing, ambitious academies could position themselves to progress to full Elite status;
• Will make an application for Elite status in June 2018, when the academies will be reassessed and have fulfilled 73 of the 75 Elite criteria.

 

If Ayr Utd can fulfil the vast majority of Elite criteria from League 1, that's really impressive. Is there some kind of special/external funding in place?

 

4 minutes ago, Smokiejohn said:

 

Yeah , I agree ... more has to be done to ensure a pathway for young players to get into first team squads ... and not just to sit on the bench either .

I was just highlighting the great work some of the smaller clubs and their talented coaches are doing ,whose skills I hope are not lost to our youth.

 

Taking Motherwell as the example I know best - the pathway isn't necessarily the issue (although it is at the biggest clubs I guess). The pathway can be as good as you want but if the players are not good enough or ready from a physical/mental point of view, then there is no point pitching them in to meet an arbitrary figure or an ideal. 

As an example, we had a young player at the end of last season who was pitched in against Killie in a pressure game as we were struggling for defenders - he was roasted alive by Jordon Jones and was hooked after 30 mins, confidence killed. That's an example of how not to do it of course, but the danger is that we introduce young players because we should rather than because they're ready, no-one wins. 

[Ayr_United_1910]

3 minutes ago, Swello said:

 

If Ayr Utd can fulfil the vast majority of Elite criteria from League 1, that's really impressive. Is there some kind of special/external funding in place?

 

 

As far as I am aware Swello, the Ayr United Academy is its own set up, separate from the club.  Community based,  receive grants, funding etc from outside sources, from what I am led to believe.

[Smokiejohn]

Taking Motherwell as the example I know best - the pathway isn't necessarily the issue (although it is at the biggest clubs I guess). The pathway can be as good as you want but if the players are not good enough or ready from a physical/mental point of view, then there is no point pitching them in to meet an arbitrary figure or an ideal. 
As an example, we had a young player at the end of last season who was pitched in against Killie in a pressure game as we were struggling for defenders - he was roasted alive by Jordon Jones and was hooked after 30 mins, confidence killed. That's an example of how not to do it of course, but the danger is that we introduce young players because we should rather than because they're ready, no-one wins. 

Yeah , players have to earn their place and be good enough ... with better coaching / resources and recruiting now demanded under project, hopefully that’ll be the case and not have young players exposed like you detail above .

[craigkillie]

6 hours ago, Bazil85 said:

Great article in the Daily Record (not often I say that) about Project Brave not being brave enough. Mentions Germany in the early 00s after the team were flagging a bit. They changed rules to force clubs to play six home grown German players. This should be goal 1 of Project Brave. 

I'm not convinced this was actually ever a rule in Germany.  I can't find any reference to it online.  It's entirely possible that the journalist made it up or misinterpreted something else.

[Bazil85]

8 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I'm not convinced this was actually ever a rule in Germany.  I can't find any reference to it online.  It's entirely possible that the journalist made it up or misinterpreted something else.

Could be right, journalist is talking back in early 00s. Only stuff I can find on it relates to how it is now. Looks like the registered player squad now need to have 12 German players (out of 25 roughly I'd imagine)  and below is the chat from wiki (as reliable as it is) 

I'd perhaps argue, regardless of how accurate it is, still feel it should be something Scottish football should be considering. 

For the 2006–07 season, the limits on foreign (non-EU) players were lifted, based on a decision of the German Football Association (DFB) and Deutsche Fußball Liga made on 21 December 2005. At the same time, the UEFAlocal player ruling was introduced. This ruling stipulates, that a certain number of locally produced players must be enrolled at each club. For the 2006–07 season, this was at least four such players, for the 2007–08 season six players and for the 2008–09 season eight such players.

A locally produced player is a player who, during the age of 15–21 years, was licensed to play for the club for three different seasons or years

[German Jag]

19 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I'm not convinced this was actually ever a rule in Germany.  I can't find any reference to it online.  It's entirely possible that the journalist made it up or misinterpreted something else.

Had a quick look at the Dfb Pokal finals from 2001 to 2006. More often than not there were less than 6 German players in the starting line-ups.