Jump to content

Old Firm Colts in L2


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, elgin proud said:

u seem very angry that someone disagrees with your opinion try and relax a little more

Swing and a miss as VT would say. It's not difficult to cut through your piss poor attempts at justifying the Colt teams being included in the league and get to the real reason why you clearly want them in the same league as you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Aberdeen Cowden said:

Neil McCann (who?) says it’s OK a great idea, aye right.

Saw this. And to justify Colts he used the example of Andy Robertson becoming a superstar...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RiG said:

Saw this. And to justify Colts he used the example of Andy Robertson becoming a superstar...

Andy Robertson became a superstar by playing for QP after being released by Celtic at the age of 14. When he came to QP he was a left midfielder and it was QP who saw the potential in him being a left back. He got into the QP team at 17 and the rest is history. It has nothing to do with Colt teams playing in League 2.

Interesting to note that Rangers idea says that the Colts cannot go higher than the Championship and does not mention what happens if they end up bottom of League 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Dooflick said:

Andy Robertson became a superstar by playing for QP after being released by Celtic at the age of 14. When he came to QP he was a left midfielder and it was QP who saw the potential in him being a left back. He got into the QP team at 17 and the rest is history. It has nothing to do with Colt teams playing in League 2.

Yup. It's a very bizarre example to choose. Almost like McCann hasn't got a fucking clue what he's babbling about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dooflick said:

Andy Robertson became a superstar by playing for QP after being released by Celtic at the age of 14. When he came to QP he was a left midfielder and it was QP who saw the potential in him being a left back. He got into the QP team at 17 and the rest is history. It has nothing to do with Colt teams playing in League 2.

Interesting to note that Rangers idea says that the Colts cannot go higher than the Championship and does not mention what happens if they end up bottom of League 2.

I asked that very same question on another thread . Surprisingly no one could answer it. 

Should ask Neil Mccann.  He seems to have an opinion on everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The autist in me just absolutely loves a spreadsheet and analysing data (no idea why I don't look into doing it as a job tbh). So I figured we needed some kind of objective barometer to see what produced the better quality player: loan deals, colt deals or players coming through the lower leagues.

So first I had to decide what constituted a good quality player. I decided the Guardian's list of 100 best players in the world produced every year is a decent barometer. Ex players, journos, coaches, etc from around the world. Should be a decent split. So I looked at these players careers before they made an international debut when they could still be classed as a young or up-and-coming player.

First of all 35 of the players came through at top flight teams without a single game on loan or at a colt club. Basically if yer good enough ye'll get yer game anyway. But that's still only about a third. Here's the rest:

(NB: there is some cross over. Frenkie De Jong, for instance, started playing in the lower leagues for Willem II, signed for Ajax, then started playing for Jong Ajax. So, although he played in the same division for both clubs, only the games for Willem II count as lower league games and his games for Jong Ajax are colt team games)

TOP 100:
29 players came through via Colt teams playing a total of 668 appearances. 15 played more than 20 games for Colt teams
25 players came through after loan spells away playing a total of 978 appearances. Only 15 of them played more than 20+ games away on loan.
28 players came through after playing in the lower leagues playing nearly 1,400 games between them. 24 of them manages more than 20+ games

So it seems that Colt teams aren't any better than the other two systems. They also give young players less games than the other two on average.

TOP 50:
18 players came through via Colt teams playing 407 games. 9 played more than 20 games.
9 players came through via loan spells playing 381 games. 6 played more than 20 games
14 came through lower leagues playing 768 games. 12 played more than 20 games.

TOP 25:
9 colt players, 191 appearances, 4 with 20+ games
3 loan players, 87 appearances, 1 with 20+ games
8 lower league players, 273 appearances, 6 with 20+

TOP 10:
4 colt players 92 appearances, 2 with 20+ games
0 loan players
3 lower league players, 83 appearances, 2 with 20+ games

The higher you get to the absolute legends then it's more likely that clubs aren't gonna be loaning them out. I guess Messi, Mbappe and Ronaldo were always too valuable to spend a season getting "toughened up" in the diddy leagues. Also less likely for these guys to spend time in the lower leagues as these guys would all have been marked out as worldies from a young age so the big clubs would have hovered them up in no time. But, in general, there isn't much difference between the three and, if anything, the best thing to get more players is to have them playing first team football for clubs as early as possible. Not on loan and not via colt teams. Just have big clubs stop snatching all the best players before their baws drap fully.

If you break it down further, by country, you see this entirely based on where players come from. Germany and Spain have B teams so the majority of their players have spent some time in the B teams. Belgium and Brazil have a big drop in quality down the leagues with no B teams so players from there get flung straight into the first team. England and Italy love giving their players game via loan deals so a lot of players from there get games in the lower leagues on loan.

Honestly. I don't think it makes a blind bit of difference for the most part but would say players coming through at lower league teams is possibly preferable to being loaned down to them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Celtic and Rangers are allowed to have colt teams in the SPFL will they be regarded as separate clubs which will mean that they will receive a vote each on SPFL decisions such as reconstruction?

That would be guarantee both Celtic and Rangers get 2 votes each while everyone else gets 1 ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, RiG said:

Swing and a miss as VT would say. It's not difficult to cut through your piss poor attempts at justifying the Colt teams being included in the league and get to the real reason why you clearly want them in the same league as you.

I like change 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Snafu said:

If Celtic and Rangers are allowed to have colt teams in the SPFL will they be regarded as separate clubs which will mean that they will receive a vote each on SPFL decisions such as reconstruction?

That would be guarantee both Celtic and Rangers get 2 votes each while everyone else gets 1 ???

The colts would not have a vote 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I like the bit where they try to spin there crushing defeat when the clubs roundly dismissed their idea to the extent that they knew there was no chance of a vote succeeding that they didn’t bother putting it to a vote.    

it was wrongly reported I couldn’t shag Rihanna.  That is not the case as it never went forward to a vote.

Lets be clear, I know it doesn’t need repeated but just in case.

THIS IS A SHIT IDEA, f**k off.

Thankfully there’s too many good folks in Scottish football to allow this to happen. 

Edited by parsforlife
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

I don't think that's a reason. I suspect lower league chairmen are holding out for more money.

Certainly some. (Turncoats like Cowdenbeath all but admitted it on here). But there’s a good amount who are very firmly against it.  Once again the championship have put Ross McCarthur forward as their rep on the spfl board.  Someone who has regularly stated their hatred of these ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, parsforlife said:

Certainly some. (Turncoats like Cowdenbeath all but admitted it on here). But there’s a good amount who are very firmly against it.  Once again the championship have put Ross McCarthur forward as their rep on the spfl board.  Someone who has regularly stated their hatred of these ideas.

Never happened and Cowden have voted this down three times and were firmly against it  a few months ago - so why do you feel the need to peddle a myth ?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...