Jump to content

How many fucking times do we need to say, "NO!"


Recommended Posts

On 30/06/2021 at 14:06, topcat(The most tip top) said:

"no financial support" ? 

This clot teams thing  is a shit idea but it's hardly a hill worth dying on, especially after we've spent much of the last decade saving the club

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

The dominance of the Glasgow clubs hasn't changed over the last century but it's always good to see the kicking and screaming from the Diddies.

Must be great, beating teams to a league title with in some cases 22 times their financial power. The SPFL is the least competitive league in Europe yet you think winning it is an achievement.

It would be like all the other premier league diddie teams winning the lowland league then boasting about it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/07/2021 at 09:54, topcat(The most tip top) said:

Reported for being offensive to full backs

which is what the country specializes in ( left sided ! )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
5 minutes ago, Forest_Fifer said:
40 minutes ago, ATLIS said:
Colt proposal for league reconstruction and admittance into League 2 fails. Thank f**k.

Well, that settles it for a generation, eh Rangers fans?

 

Most of us really don't give a fvuk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

* sigh *

GVruo3k.png

Once again, the claim that somehow if we don't have B teams then youth development will suffer, despite there being absolutely no evidence what so ever to back up that claim.

mAvSSTQ.png

Again, I ask, how many fucking times do we need to say, "NO!"?

Edited by Ric
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ric said:

* sigh *

GVruo3k.png

Once again, the claim that somehow if we don't have B teams then youth development will suffer, despite there being absolutely no evidence what so ever to back up that claim.

mAvSSTQ.png

Again, I ask, how many fucking times do we need to say, "NO!"?

Probably 24 times 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ric said:

* sigh *

GVruo3k.png

Once again, the claim that somehow if we don't have B teams then youth development will suffer, despite there being absolutely no evidence what so ever to back up that claim.

mAvSSTQ.png

Again, I ask, how many fucking times do we need to say, "NO!"?

I think the diddies could engage more on youth development and make proposals themselves (that don’t include colts obviously). 

At the moment two clubs are driving a narrative that they are the only ones looking out for the development of elite players for Scotland. So long as clubs just keep allowing them to propose colts and say no, this will continue in perpetuity. 

Turn the tables on them, make proposals and watch them say no when it doesn’t suit their agenda. The mask will slip pretty quickly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/06/2021 at 12:35, invergowrie arab said:

Who is actually putting the motion forward?

Craig Mulholland from Rangers. It almost seems like it’s his legacy project for Scottish football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/06/2021 at 13:30, Thistle Scotland Europe said:

WE NEED B TEAMS IN THE SPFL. END OF STORY. 

They do in Croatia. Look what they have done.

Why can't Scottish people try to produce a team like Croatia have in reaching World Cup Finals. 

The Croatia comparison  gets peddled quite a bit and is actually used in the document sent to clubs.

802CE0EC-3489-4E72-8F4A-FF914DEE77E6.jpeg
 

But by working seems to be highly inaccurate. There are a couple of really big clues why Croatia have done better than Scotland in the table though.

8B8AA2EC-2635-4190-BACC-6861762B9AF2.jpeg

Edited by 7 Eleven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder why they didn't use the Croatia EURO's 2020 squad as a more recent example. Might be something to do with the fact that there are / were something like 4 players from the squad with B team experience and most of them barely had a handful of B team games under their belt. Almost like B teams aren't that important when it comes to player development...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is genuinely about improving the national team then there needs to be a clear pathway into the first team once they are too old for the B team. For that to happen Rangers and Celtic need to make some concessions at first team level (or these concessions should be Premiership wide). This could include all or a combination of the following:

  • Nationality rules (e.g., can’t have more than x foreign players in squad or on the pitch at any time).
  • locally/club-trained player rule (similar to above)
  • Squad size limits (e.g., 18 or 20 first team players over the age of 21)
  • Loan limits  & removal intra-league loans (which is basically a form of league doping when the player can play against every other team except their parent club)

I am 100% certain that each and every one of the proposals would be rejected by Rangers and Celtic based on the belief that it would limit their ability to compete at European level. However, I’d cite Athletic Bilbao’ s (Europa League finalists 2012)  self-imposed Basque policy or Celtic’s very own Lisbon Lions as counter arguments to that.

Finally, I believe that SPFL should be investing all of their time and effort into trying to make the Premier League more competitive rather than turning three engaging already competitive leagues into glorified development leagues. To further help two teams who have dominated the top tier for the last  36 years is nonsensical. Maybe focus on Premiership reconstruction and a redistribution of playing talent. This would require an increase in the number of clubs in the top division and a more balanced sharing of prize money, which are another two suggestions that I believe would be immediately shot down.  This all starts to ask the question as to who are the ones actually holding the Scottish game back?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 7 Eleven said:

 

If this is genuinely about improving the national team then there needs to be a clear pathway into the first team once they are too old for the B team. For that to happen Rangers and Celtic need to make some concessions at first team level (or these concessions should be Premiership wide). This could include all or a combination of the following:

  • Nationality rules (e.g., can’t have more than x foreign players in squad or on the pitch at any time).
  • locally/club-trained player rule (similar to above)
  • Squad size limits (e.g., 18 or 20 first team players over the age of 21)
  • Loan limits  & removal intra-league loans (which is basically a form of league doping when the player can play against every other team except their parent club)

I am 100% certain that each and every one of the proposals would be rejected by Rangers and Celtic based on the belief that it would limit their ability to compete at European level. However, I’d cite Athletic Bilbao’ s (Europa League finalists 2012)  self-imposed Basque policy or Celtic’s very own Lisbon Lions as counter arguments to that.

Finally, I believe that SPFL should be investing all of their time and effort into trying to make the Premier League more competitive rather than turning three engaging already competitive leagues into glorified development leagues. To further help two teams who have dominated the top tier for the last  36 years is nonsensical. Maybe focus on Premiership reconstruction and a redistribution of playing talent. This would require an increase in the number of clubs in the top division and a more balanced sharing of prize money, which are another two suggestions that I believe would be immediately shot down.  This all starts to ask the question as to who are the ones actually holding the Scottish game back?

I agree with large parts of this and I've never really been a fan of the Colt/B teams proposal. Your point about Rangers and Celtic remaining competitive is bang on. How often do you see a promising youngster go through the age groups at either club earning rave reviews only for their development to plateau because they don't get offered the first team opportunities they need.

These players are often regarded higher than their peers playing at other clubs, but because other clubs provide more first team opportunities, they overtake them.

I wouldn't particularly be against a nationality or club trained player rule being introduced, but like you, I just can't see it happening. It would require a drastic change in philosophy at both clubs for it to be a success and as much as fans love to see a youth product break through into the first team, they are also guilty of criticising the manager for not buying proven quality if things go t*ts up. Sadly due to this fan pressure and demand for success I don't think it will be feasible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My view on this, even as a massive Scotland fan, is that our league structure shouldn't exist purely for the purpose of improving the national team. This is particularly true for a smaller league like ours, since most of our best young players are going to end up in England (or other better leagues) at an early age anyway, regardless of what we do, and that's fine.

Clubs have to look out for their own interests first and foremost, and will put forward ideas that work for them. That's why I don't necessarily blame Rangers and Celtic for putting this type of idea forward, it's just the very cynical way they present it that annoys me.

On youth development in general, I think we are starting to do it much better, and that probably reflects changes that were made 5-10 years ago, and particular the performance schools. I think the bigger clubs are seeing the value of proper youth development too - Celtic have done reasonably well of late with Tierney being the jewel in their crown, and Rangers appear to be starting to get it right too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 02/07/2021 at 12:02, wastecoatwilly said:

The dominance of the Glasgow clubs hasn't changed over the last century but it's always good to see the kicking and screaming from the Diddies.

 

On 02/07/2021 at 12:19, Blue Brazil Forever said:

What's your big club then?

 

On 02/07/2021 at 12:39, topcat(The most tip top) said:

Did you realise that  his username is a transparent anagram of "I yellow twat sac"?

 

Also makes him a wet wac loyalist, his big club found?

 

Or he could be wastecoatwilly is a sweaty colt wali, seems apt for this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

On 30/06/2021 at 10:18, ahemps said:

Are we producing more better players though. You have mentioned some names and I don't disagree that they have been helped by the system but are these players better and is there more of them than what we produced prior to the performance schools????

Are the SFA reviewing the data on this to see if it is improving the quality and quantity of players coming through?

 

I was interested in this, and am a bit of a sad sack, so I had a wee look with the publicly available data I could find. I post this with massive caveats about the quality of the data which is sparse and hard to find but also the quality of my recording is pretty limited (i.e. a player who I record as having had a debut in the Scottish Prem might only have played 1 minute and that might be the only professional minute he plays in his career). I have only found data for boys in the system, with outcomes for the girls even more difficult to come by.

However, this is what I see in the data:

I found a total of 63 players who have played professional football1 who also attended the Performance Schools.

In terms of level of debut, only 1 has so far had a top class breakthrough (Billy Gilmour). A total of 32 have broken through to play minutes at what I have called second level, 1 in the English Championship and 31 at Scottish Premiership level.

Level of Debut              
             
Row Labels 1 2 3 4 5 6  Grand Total
2017   4     1   5
2018   3 2       5
2019 1 9 2 2 2   16
2020   5 4 2 1   12
2021   11 1   8   20
No Debut           5 5
Grand Total 1 32 9 4 12 5 63

 

The rate at which debuts are occurring is increasing, as below2:

Row Labels Count of Debut Year
2017 5
2018 5
2019 16
2020 12
2021 20
No Debut 5

The average age of debutants also appears to be decreasing

:              
             
Row Labels 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 No debut Grand Total
16         2   2
17       1 5 1 7
18   1 2 2 4 2 11
19   2 7 7 6 1 23
20 4 1 6 2     13
21 1 1 1   3 1 7
Grand Total 5 5 16 12 20 5 63

 

What does this tell us? It's probably hard to draw more than anecdotal conclusions, but that is probably unsurprising given the total. I would say I see three things in the data:

  1. The level of debuts at a higher level (Scot prem or above) is increasing
  2. The number of boys coming through the system each year is increasing; and
  3. The average age of debut is decreasing.

Together these three conclusions lead me to tentatively say that the system is doing a good job in isolation. What I cannot answer is how these outcomes compare to non-PS outcomes. 

 

 

1My dataset also includes 5 who have not had a professional debut but have secured high profile moves: Jon McCracken (Norwich), Liam Morrison (Bayern Munich), Stuart McKinstry (Leeds), Liam Smith (Manchester City) and Marc Leonard (Brighton & Hove Albion).

2This is a bit of a data fallacy however, as the number of possible debuts increases linearly every year as more boys pass through the system

Edited by albagubrath
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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