Celtic and Rangers B Teams in League Two?

[ropy]

33 minutes ago, kingjoey said:

Another thing that was mentioned on the Sportsound discussions was why not have other B teams in as well if clubs want it. No mention of what would happen to the size of League 2 if this happened. A league of potentially 26 teams sounds very inviting.

All of the top league teams should have B teams, there would be enough of them to create a whole new league.

[AsimButtHitsASix]

If teams REALLY want B teams what's to stop them doing it "properly" and starting at the bottom of the pyramid? I can't fathom why B teams get to jump ahead of Huntly or Spartans or Girvan. 

[NorthBank]

Sevco had a great chance to play youngsters during the years they were in the lower divisions. Did they do it? Did they f**k.

[wastecoatwilly]

1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said:

Because they're the only clubs that want to hoard 80+ over 18 year old footballers. Some get loaned out to varying levels, so they need the Colt sides to get game time into those who can't get loan moves.

Its nothing more than them trying to excuse the fact they're stockpiling players to prevent other clubs benefiting. Transfer fees are a major income for Scottish sides so the OF sucking that away from them by taking every youth player going is the dream.

It's good to know everybody on here is happy with the status quo,this pish is the best keeping players we don't need quality mince.

Edited March 19, 2021 by wastecoatwilly

[Jacksgranda]

7 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

It's good to know everybody on here is happy with the status quo,this pish is the best keeping players we don't need quality mince.

Yes indeed, willy.

[Ira Gaines]

It's nobody else's fault that Celtic are a bunch of penny grabbing shite I'm afraid.

[bennett]

13 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

It's good to know everybody on here is happy with the status quo,this pish is the best keeping players we don't need quality mince.

Whatever you want Willie....

[AJF]

2 hours ago, NorthBank said:

Sevco had a great chance to play youngsters during the years they were in the lower divisions. Did they do it? Did they f**k.

To be fair, while I think the opportunity was there to try and bring through more youth players, to say we never done it is not quite true.

If we take the 12/13 year where we played in the 3rd Division (league 2) as an example, there was a total of 336 appearances made that season by players aged 23 or under. (according to Transfermarkt).

This included players like Barrie McKay, Andy Little, Kyle Hutton, Lewis McLeod, Robbie Crawford and Chris Hegarty who were all regular first team players.

That's quite a lot of appearances. I'm not saying this to support the Colts proposal though, I don't particularly care for it.

Edited March 19, 2021 by AJF

[mishtergrolsch]

3 hours ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

If teams REALLY want B teams what's to stop them doing it "properly" and starting at the bottom of the pyramid? I can't fathom why B teams get to jump ahead of Huntly or Spartans or Girvan. 

Well the SFA set the bar by letting that new lot, The Rangers, in. Why stop there?

[CountyFan]

Why would playing for an OF-affiliated league 2 side be any better for the development of a young player than playing for an actual league 2 side? Until someone answers this question, fans of other clubs are just not going to go for it. If the answer to Scotland's national team woes is to get the young players game time at league 2 level, then loan them to a league 2 club. 

[ken es]

If this goes through then that's me finished with Football in this country after 50yrs a supporter.Hopefully get an answer before i consider parting with more cash to support my club next season.

Will have some regrets of course but enough is enough.

 

[Dundee Hibernian]

1 hour ago, mishtergrolsch said:

Well the SFA set the bar by letting that new lot, The Rangers, in. Why stop there?

Very good point, and let them change their name from Sevco Scotland. What's to stop the SFA using the names 'Celtic' and 'Rangers' for the colt sides in the event of the pair f*cking off to a different league system, and allowing them access to the top league, for the good of the game in Scotland?

Edited March 19, 2021 by Dundee Hibernian

[wastecoatwilly]

1 hour ago, CountyFan said:

Why would playing for an OF-affiliated league 2 side be any better for the development of a young player than playing for an actual league 2 side? Until someone answers this question, fans of other clubs are just not going to go for it. If the answer to Scotland's national team woes is to get the young players game time at league 2 level, then loan them to a league 2 club. 

It's very simple Celtic would be in control of how they wanted their players to play,putting them out on loan they don't have that control.
Some players have very good experiences out on loan others don't.

Edited March 19, 2021 by wastecoatwilly

[CountyFan]

4 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

It's very simple Celtic would be in control of how they wanted their players to play,putting them out on loan they don't have that control.
Some players have very good experiences out on loan others don't.

So it would be to benefit Celtic and not the national team? Thanks for admitting what we all know already. 

[TonyFerrino]

3 minutes ago, CountyFan said:

So it would be to benefit Celtic and not the national team? Thanks for admitting what we all know already. 

This has the square root of f**k all to do with the national side, or Scottish football as a whole for that matter, and everything to do with the pair of them trying to get their insignificant snouts in the Champions League trough.

Get to f**k.  

[wastecoatwilly]

4 minutes ago, CountyFan said:

So it would be to benefit Celtic and not the national team? Thanks for admitting what we all know already. 

If Ross county had a team in league 2 they would also want to have control of how their players are developing and playing.

[Raidernation]

Asking me to feck off doesn't really work on an open forum bawbag.

I wasn’t asking ya tumshie-heided numpty

[WilliamBragg]

1 hour ago, wastecoatwilly said:

It's very simple Celtic would be in control of how they wanted their players to play,putting them out on loan they don't have that control.
Some players have very good experiences out on loan others don't.

Why should your colt teams jump in 2 levels of my team just because they've got Celtic in their name.

Start at level 7 in West of Scotland League if you want this stupid idea to go ahead.

[NorthBank]

5 hours ago, AJF said:

To be fair, while I think the opportunity was there to try and bring through more youth players, to say we never done it is not quite true.

If we take the 12/13 year where we played in the 3rd Division (league 2) as an example, there was a total of 336 appearances made that season by players aged 23 or under. (according to Transfermarkt).

This included players like Barrie McKay, Andy Little, Kyle Hutton, Lewis McLeod, Robbie Crawford and Chris Hegarty who were all regular first team players.

That's quite a lot of appearances. I'm not saying this to support the Colts proposal though, I don't particularly care for it.

The Colt proposal is for players under 21 (at 21 players should be in a first team squad or look elsewhere). So Rangers only regularly fielded 4 under 21 players that season (Little and Hutton were over 21). And for a team in the lowest senior level they had a squad size of 38 full time professionals playing against mainly part-time players. They had 12 in that squad aged 21 or under accumulating just under 200 appearances but only 4 were getting game time (in the 3rd Division).  And to bolster that squad they signed run-of-the-mill pros like Shields, Sandaza, Black all aged 27 and Kyle at 31 when they had a real chance of showing what their academy was all about.

In contrast St Mirren this season in the Premiership only have one midfielder playing over the age of 22 (one is 19 and we have now added Reid at 16), and that is McGrath at 24 . And 3  are Academy graduates.

Rangers had a great chance in 2013 to give young full-time players a chance of regular football against inferior part-timers yet they mostly played average seasoned pros instead. There is little recent history of Rangers developing young players - even when they had a golden opportunity.

[AJF]

4 minutes ago, NorthBank said:

The Colt proposal is for players under 21 (at 21 players should be in a first team squad or look elsewhere). So Rangers only regularly fielded 4 under 21 players that season (Little and Hutton were over 21). And for a team in the lowest senior level they had a squad size of 38 full time professionals playing against mainly part-time players. They had 12 in that squad aged 21 or under accumulating just under 200 appearances but only 4 were getting game time (in the 3rd Division).  And to bolster that squad they signed run-of-the-mill pros like Shields, Sandaza, Black all aged 27 and Kyle at 31 when they had a real chance of showing what their academy was all about.

In contrast St Mirren this season in the Premiership only have one midfielder playing over the age of 22 (one is 19 and we have now added Reid at 16), and that is McGrath at 24 . And 3  are Academy graduates.

Rangers had a great chance in 2013 to give young full-time players a chance of regular football against inferior part-timers yet they mostly played average seasoned pros instead. There is little recent history of Rangers developing young players - even when they had a golden opportunity.

I totally appreciate that, and I said already I think it was a wasted opportunity to not bring through even more youth prospects into the first team, my main point was around the claim that we never played youngsters which I don’t think is entirely correct, because we gave youth a bigger opportunity during that period compared to any other period in our recent history.

It still wasn’t enough in my opinion, but I understood why Rangers brought in senior players in an attempt to get us through the leagues as quickly as possible because despite all their talent, I think fielding a team made up of predominantly academy prospects would struggle to climb through the leagues.