Davie Bhoy Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 It's been brought up a wee bit recently. Would you do away with the development league & bring back the Reserve League so that youth players can compete and learn against established senior Proffessional players either out the first team picture or returning from injury... Or do you think the Reserve League encourages clubs to cut it's youth numbers in order to accommodate larger first team squads? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7-2 Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Henrik Larsson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry94 Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 I don't think that the reserve league or development league actually change teams spending behaviour (they are going to sign players for the first team when possible and have their own idea of what a balance equates to) at all. The question is, can we justify having a reserve league on it's own while there would be an under 19 league too? I think the answer is 'no' and I think that the development league is probably the best hybrid we can come up with in merging the youngsters with first team squad players. Players are always going to benefit a lot more from competitive action at senior level though and neither of these will change that. Just got to get loans and that sorted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reid Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Anything but Colt teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie Bhoy Posted February 23, 2016 Author Share Posted February 23, 2016 I don't think that the reserve league or development league actually change teams spending behaviour (they are going to sign players for the first team when possible and have their own idea of what a balance equates to) at all.The question is, can we justify having a reserve league on it's own while there would be an under 19 league too? I think the answer is 'no' and I think that the development league is probably the best hybrid we can come up with in merging the youngsters with first team squad players.Players are always going to benefit a lot more from competitive action at senior level though and neither of these will change that. Just got to get loans and that sorted. You might be right mate but I think that clubs with more money will maybe have less focus on youth if they can snap up players and let them flirt between the reserves & the first team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quitongo's Left Peg Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 You might be right mate but I think that clubs with more money will maybe have less focus on youth if they can snap up players and let them flirt between the reserves & the first team. So that's one club in Scotland, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmontheloknow Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Put them all out on Development loans as happens in some cases aready. Then they play 1st team on a saturday with someone and for the Development side in midweek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie Bhoy Posted February 23, 2016 Author Share Posted February 23, 2016 So that's one club in Scotland, then? No, Rangers too....even Aberdeen sent out Goodwillie on loan so them too. Hearts loaned out Billy King, so these clubs have large squads that might see them play in the reserves at the expense of a youth player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Only five teams in the Country have the capability of running reserve sides on top of youth sides so its utterly fucking pointless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Reserve would be good but the way some people go on its if they make out the 20s is full of kids not from what I see most teams have plenty first team players playing every week so 20s or reserves are much the same thing for most teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Lubo Moravcik, Henrik Larsson or Michael Laudrup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quitongo's Left Peg Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 No, Rangers too....even Aberdeen sent out Goodwillie on loan so them too. Hearts loaned out Billy King, so these clubs have large squads that might see them play in the reserves at the expense of a youth player. Rangers' level is English League One/Two players at the moment. They're not even filling their current squad with players, never mind a reserve team too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hope street Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Each club can play 5 over age players in the dev league. So it's a mixture of youth and older pro's the same as the old reserve league. Yes, there is a time for players to get a loan for first team experience. But the development league is fine for young pro's. Warburton mentions how Danny Wilson didn't play in the dev league and he's a first team player for them. So the dev league is pointless. He doesn't of course mention young O'hara of Falkirk ran him ragged in the Falkirk sevco league match before Christmas. Young O'hara who features regularly at development level. So as usual warburton's talking out his arse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Sanchez Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 No, Rangers too....even Aberdeen sent out Goodwillie on loan so them too. Hearts loaned out Billy King, so these clubs have large squads that might see them play in the reserves at the expense of a youth player.The 26 year old out of contract in the summer David Goodwillie? Astute move with a soon to be fixture in the first team youngster, that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Waldo Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Only five teams in the Country have the capability of running reserve sides on top of youth sides so its utterly fucking pointlessCan an the rest not just play their 'youths' and scrap the youth team - but have a boys team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jambo-rocker Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Only five teams in the Country have the capability of running reserve sides on top of youth sides so its utterly fucking pointless Precisely. Not only that, they have development loans where the youths are capable of playing for both the loan team and u20s squad. Best of both worlds. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing Hearts introduce a colts team to the EOS league. Perfect level to build up some of the younger players with potential, but their present ability that might not be up to scratch and are not getting sufficient game time, and all still within our footballing umbrella. Could do without letting go another Greg Stewart or Jason Cummings, who found that confidence within those levels (give or take 20's in Stewart's case). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Hibs ran a team in EOSL... in what was then the First Division, it's now one combined division due to contracting numbers... in 2013-14. It had a pretty easy time of things: they won the division with 15 wins, 1 draw & 2 defeats though the title did go down to a last day decider with Easthouses Lily. Also won their EOS Qualifying League pool; won the EOS League Cup; and got to King Cup QFs losing to Edinburgh University who then went to Lowland. However, at the end of the season both Hibs and Berwick took their teams out. Possibly the issue was the perceived quality of some of the opposition. If you replaced U20s league with a reserve league you'd surely have to require a quota of U20s... Is that not just the current system by another name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 As HJ says most teams don't have big enough squads for a reserve team. I'd imagine at we've had short bench more often than not this season and most weeks have a couple of 18 year olds listed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jambo-rocker Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Hibs ran a team in EOSL... in what was then the First Division, it's now one combined division due to contracting numbers... in 2013-14. It had a pretty easy time of things: they won the division with 15 wins, 2 draws & 1 defeat though the title did go down to a last day decider with Easthouses Lily. Also won their EOS Qualifying League pool; won the EOS League Cup; and got to King Cup QFs losing to Edinburgh University who then went to Lowland. However, at the end of the season both Hibs and Berwick took their teams out. Possibly the issue was the perceived quality of some of the opposition. If you replaced U20s league with a reserve league you'd surely have to require a quota of U20s... Is that not just the current system by another name? On the top point, I was thinking along the lines that a merged division now might not be as easy a time of it. If fourth round LTHV are the competition (granted they are fifth with quite a few games in hand), I'd be curious to see how it plays out. Obviously this wouldn't be until next season when we've seen if the EOS remains a worthy feeder to the LL, and we've replenished our youth reserves. It's more of an experimental try, the same way Hibs where looking for when they brought one in definitely, but hopeful of it being at a better time with higher competition and not just the second tier they played in. Didn't Berwick drop theirs to cut their costs? And Hibs withdrew theirs immediately after relegation to cut theirs? Isn't there a reserve league for the top non-u20 teams anyway? Maybe, but would you keep it at u17s below or insert a u16 & u18s league in below? Facilitating two reserve/youth squads is surely more appealing than trying to facilitate three for most teams in Scotland? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rococo club Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Think the current u20s system suits most clubs. Allows teams with big squads to field mostly overage players and others can test their youngsters against them. Who benefits more is questionable. Imo the development loan idea is good and should be taken advantage of by more clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.