Guest Roger Kint Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Stupid idea with all manner of bad consequences for everyone else. Teams like Gateshead have it hard enough to make the league without these arseholes added a meaningless extra tier between them. Plus what happens if the top 6 in league 1 were PL B Teams? Just scrap promotion? Complete farce! Promotion would go down to the "real" teams, even if they finished 7th. The main issue is that these teams can field strong/weak sides every other week, meaning that it'll be unfair. So its going to be a total mess then. What did we expect with Danny Mills being part of it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shays Given Tim Flowers Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Aiming to win our first World Cup in 60 years in...............Qatar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Stupid idea with all manner of bad consequences for everyone else. Teams like Gateshead have it hard enough to make the league without these arseholes added a meaningless extra tier between them. Plus what happens if the top 6 in league 1 were PL B Teams? Just scrap promotion? Complete farce! Promotion would go down to the "real" teams, even if they finished 7th. The main issue is that these teams can field strong/weak sides every other week, meaning that it'll be unfair. So its going to be a total mess then. What did we expect with Danny Mills being part of it As I mentioned in an earlier post, we have this in Norway. It's bullshit, a mess and they're trying to get rid of it. Allows teams like Rosenborg, Brann, Viking and Vålerenga (some of the major Norwegian teams) to hog all the talented youth in their towns with real, live, football clubs based in the same towns facing extinction in the same lower league. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John P Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 They've had this system in Germany for a while and they are now getting rid of it. Decent article here about it: http://www.espnfc.com/blog/_/name/bundesliga/id/647?cc=5739 Think it's a shit idea, will just give the big teams another excuse to not play youth players in the 1st team Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Idiot Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Presumably the Premier League have seen the utter dominance of 2 clubs in Spain (this season aside) and thought they want some of that additional inequality. Owt to do with having B teams in the regular football pyramid though. B teams are really a great platform to give young players experience at a professional level, and big and small teams have benefited from them alike. In Spain it sorta works (I would bar them from playing in our Second Division though), because of our football pyramid being an actual pyramid, so Segunda B is made up of 80 teams and B teams end up being a small % of the division. I believe it would be a terrible idea in England as eventually a bunch of B teams would take spots at the top of the Football League. In Spain, B teams emerged naturally as initially they were just regular teams with whom the "A" teams entered loaning agreements with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I was at Barca B vs Cordoba at the weekend VI, a Barca socio let us in and we went and sat in the away end It was great fun but the Segunda simply doesn't compare to the Championship and nor do the rest of the lower leagues in Spain to ours. Spain is a nation of glory hunters basically. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Idiot Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Dunno, I'm still scarred by your season in the C'ship, that was some turgid football in that division Our Second Division has certainly a very low tempo and lots of space, but I find it quite watchable. The fact there's little physicality allows entertaining players to shine - Valerón was like Zidane in there. But if you were referring to fans, yeah, there's little atmosphere and lots empty seats in there. Bar a few teams. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Aye I was referring to the level of support and quality of the clubs more than anything. The football was still a very watchable standard, from both sides. Xisco was still awful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 The commission - made up of Danny Mills, Glenn Hoddle, Howard Wilkinson, Rio Ferdinand... The footy avengers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leffe186 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Presumably the Premier League have seen the utter dominance of 2 clubs in Spain (this season aside) and thought they want some of that additional inequality. Owt to do with having B teams in the regular football pyramid though. B teams are really a great platform to give young players experience at a professional level, and big and small teams have benefited from them alike. In Spain it sorta works (I would bar them from playing in our Second Division though), because of our football pyramid being an actual pyramid, so Segunda B is made up of 80 teams and B teams end up being a small % of the division. I believe it would be a terrible idea in England as eventually a bunch of B teams would take spots at the top of the Football League. In Spain, B teams emerged naturally as initially they were just regular teams with whom the "A" teams entered loaning agreements with. It's at least in part to do with having B teams in the regular football pyramid (although individual TV contracts are a more obvious factor). B teams are a good platform to give young players professional football...of course they are, but the teams that benefit are the ones they play for. The bigger sides. If a big team can keep all those players and give them regular football then that gives them an advantage - an inequality - over a team that does not have that opportunity. You can't pretend otherwise. With no B teams many of those players would be getting games for other teams. It might well result in better training for more youngsters and a better national team - that's what you'd expect at least. We just have to decide whether it's a price worth paying. I don't think it is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEEJ Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Disgraceful they've so much as proposed it. Numpties. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Presumably the Premier League have seen the utter dominance of 2 clubs in Spain (this season aside) and thought they want some of that additional inequality. Owt to do with having B teams in the regular football pyramid though. B teams are really a great platform to give young players experience at a professional level, and big and small teams have benefited from them alike. In Spain it sorta works (I would bar them from playing in our Second Division though), because of our football pyramid being an actual pyramid, so Segunda B is made up of 80 teams and B teams end up being a small % of the division. I believe it would be a terrible idea in England as eventually a bunch of B teams would take spots at the top of the Football League. In Spain, B teams emerged naturally as initially they were just regular teams with whom the "A" teams entered loaning agreements with. It's at least in part to do with having B teams in the regular football pyramid (although individual TV contracts are a more obvious factor). B teams are a good platform to give young players professional football...of course they are, but the teams that benefit are the ones they play for. The bigger sides. If a big team can keep all those players and give them regular football then that gives them an advantage - an inequality - over a team that does not have that opportunity. You can't pretend otherwise. With no B teams many of those players would be getting games for other teams. It might well result in better training for more youngsters and a better national team - that's what you'd expect at least. We just have to decide whether it's a price worth paying. I don't think it is. Even if this is the case, it's obviously not the most crucial factor behind Spain and Germany being better than England. Clearly the number and quality of coaches at grassroots level is far more important. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Idiot Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Presumably the Premier League have seen the utter dominance of 2 clubs in Spain (this season aside) and thought they want some of that additional inequality. Owt to do with having B teams in the regular football pyramid though. B teams are really a great platform to give young players experience at a professional level, and big and small teams have benefited from them alike. In Spain it sorta works (I would bar them from playing in our Second Division though), because of our football pyramid being an actual pyramid, so Segunda B is made up of 80 teams and B teams end up being a small % of the division. I believe it would be a terrible idea in England as eventually a bunch of B teams would take spots at the top of the Football League. In Spain, B teams emerged naturally as initially they were just regular teams with whom the "A" teams entered loaning agreements with. It's at least in part to do with having B teams in the regular football pyramid (although individual TV contracts are a more obvious factor). B teams are a good platform to give young players professional football...of course they are, but the teams that benefit are the ones they play for. The bigger sides. If a big team can keep all those players and give them regular football then that gives them an advantage - an inequality - over a team that does not have that opportunity. You can't pretend otherwise. With no B teams many of those players would be getting games for other teams. It might well result in better training for more youngsters and a better national team - that's what you'd expect at least. We just have to decide whether it's a price worth paying. I don't think it is. All sides have B teams. You make it look like only Barça and Real Madrid do. And despite them being currently in the Second Division, they have spent the most of their existence in Segunda B or lower (Barça B was in the 4th tier of Spanish football when Guardiola took over), alongside most of the other B teams. It's a good tool for smaller teams because they can offer pro football to youngsters that could otherwise go to Barça/Madrid academies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKSC Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I don't really agree with the idea of B teams and it would likely be very unworkable. I do applaud them for trying to come up with something though but in reality the simplest thing to do would be pour hundreds of billions in to grassroots football, coaching and youth development whilst simultaneously scrapping PL-PL loans and loaning out any over 21's thus preventing big clubs hoarding fuck loads of top players. They are trying too hard to be innovative. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 For the sake of the youth, I think it's worked well in Spain. The youngsters play some good opposition at a young age. I think it's a decent move to limit it to L1 as the Championship is too important to have other teams messing it up. The big difference is that our lower leagues are better supported. There's some big clubs in L1. That's not the case in Spain. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I don't really agree with the idea of B teams and it would likely be very unworkable. I do applaud them for trying to come up with something though but in reality the simplest thing to do would be pour hundreds of billions in to grassroots football, coaching and youth development whilst simultaneously scrapping PL-PL loans and loaning out any over 21's thus preventing big clubs hoarding f*** loads of top players. They are trying too hard to be innovative. Disagree. They would still hoard the youths, they just wouldn't play em or loan them abroad. Most likely just rot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Shock. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Also I don't think this would really affect the likes of Chelsea. They sign players that can play in the top flights across Europe at 19. Even that Kalas lad had a season in the Dutch top flight. Lukaku and co. wouldn't be in this although it might've helped the progression of McEachren and the like. I think it could benefit a team like us far more than the oil clubs. Man U, Arsenal, Spurs - that actually sign young players or produce academy players with a chance of the first team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 regarding internal PL loans. I actually think the answer is simply allowing the player to play against his parent club. The player should belong to the loaned club for the season. It removes a level of the advantage the loan-owner clubs have. Lukaku would love to smash one in against Chelsea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Shock. I'd have given poor odds like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walter Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 L1 and L2 shouldn't have any foreign players, a max of 5 per squad in the Championship, and 10 per squad in the Prem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 L1 and L2 shouldn't have any foreign players, a max of 5 per squad in the Championship, and 10 per squad in the Prem. That would be illegal as well as incredibly stupid and xenophobic. I'm all for encouraging our own but not to the exclusion of foreigners. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 It'll help develop young English talent no end and be brilliant for the national team. Not a good thing for club football, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 It'll help develop young English talent no end and be brilliant for the national team. Not a good thing for club football, though. It would be the death of the PL for sure. And bad for English football in general for at least 5-10 years. If it weren't for Chelsea, i'm certain we would be close to losing one of our European places. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walter Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 L1 and L2 shouldn't have any foreign players, a max of 5 per squad in the Championship, and 10 per squad in the Prem. That would be illegal as well as incredibly stupid and xenophobic. I'm all for encouraging our own but not to the exclusion of foreigners. I don't think there'll be any English players in the Prem in 20 years time Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now