Cowboy was never vocal in his positivity and was indeed just looking at the arguments more in the round rather than expressing support. There never was any crossed fingers or support - but I guess subtleties are lost on fixated folks. You don’t need to go back in time - never supported it
Well if they are looking to develop their young players the vast majority of the players would be young - if they wanted traditional reserve teams they would be advocating for that and they would call it a reserve team. The point is that most people arguing against B teams don’t really do so because of the player development effectiveness or otherwise rather they just don’t want B teams (particularly Old Firm) in the pyramid as that compromises the credibility of the relevant league competition. Sticking to that side of the debate/argument would be better than theoretical debates about whether or not B teams help young players develop.
They might or some of them might but that theory in isolation is no more robust - it’s just an opinion - these B team guys are saying they want to keep their team unit together and play to their own system/style against more challenging opposition (men). It’s a valid theory both options will likely benefit young players.
The players involved in B teams are not the reserves - first team squads at top level are huge and players are paid big money. They have another team virtually sitting on the bench - those players no longer consider playing for a reserve XI as being appropriate - the world has changed
Well the pyramid as is in essence is not majorly impacted - clubs can still progress up and down pretty much as before. B teams are though parked in the structure.
Effectively there are currently say 12 teams in Lowland League with nothing much to play for. That is in stark contrast with the 10 teams arrangement which is of course the contrary argument to yours and the 10 team version generally is better crowd wise as games are more competitive
But perhaps that is b teams in the pyramid and not just conference - number of Premier clubs aren’t that interested in having a b team. Do the real teams in Conference have SPFL voting rights? Does it need 11-1 vote in favour by Premier Clubs?
But 10 team leagues are competitive and maintain interest through a season for most clubs. Don’t play in the SPFL if you aren’t ambitious enough to play nationally. Don’t think there is plan to have 6 b teams in new league - defeats the object then of playing v men
You can always get pressed depends on quality of players, opposition, pitch, weather at our level how well you can deploy playing it out from back. All back at corners - doesn’t bother me in the slightest as commonplace nowadays. Just one option
I can recall several games when we were playing the ball out from the back this season. And Edinburgh University played themselves into trouble doing just that whilst Celtic weren’t that good at it for first 15 minutes
Not aware that 6 b teams are mooted as far as I have seen it is a league that can have B teams in it - but no number specified. Team 52 would supplant team 42 in 4 way agreement which would not require any amendment