Skyline Drifter Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 I keep wondering aout that too - how will playing one or two matches against senior pros in this cup be more beneficial than being loaned out and potentially playing an entire season in amongst and against senior pros? Did Super Saintees not loan out about 5 or 6 of their youth team to the lower leagues last season? That's bound to have done these players the world of good and give an indication if they are more likely to make the jump? It's not going to be "more beneficial". This isn't an either / or situation. They can do both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 which is silly in itself.we have in effect players registered to play for 2 clubs playing in the same competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dee_62 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 It's not going to be "more beneficial". This isn't an either / or situation. They can do both. f**k off with your sensible posts! It's probably more that it seems like it's created an awful lot of noise and potential expense for lower league clubs just to give the U20s maybe 2 extra games a season! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 If young players would benefit from playing at a lower level in competitive games then why not just loan them to the lower league clubs? How does playing for an Under 20 side against senior teams aid their development? They'll have the opportunity to test themselves at a higher level, and at progressively higher levels if they advance through the competition. I think it's axiomatic that the best way to improve at anything is test yourself at a higher level. Whether this is too high a level to begin at, though, we'll find out soon enough. They clearly can't loan every player out to lower league clubs as there simply aren't enough clubs. The existence of development teams is, I think, proof of that. It is second best to youths progressing into the first team at a high level or going out on loan at a slightly lower level, but I reckon it does have some development value. (And if they're hammered and knocked out, the impact on their psyche shouldn't be too bad considering it's only once a season and not a whole league campaign of being pitched in at the wrong level, although I'm sure that Hearts' youngsters benefitted greatly from their season in the top tier.) The development league needs some work too, I reckon. I can't see the benefit of so many teams playing for a single prize that most can't hope to win. The quota of over-age players is only beneficial to youth player development when it is complemented by competitive, meaningful games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poet of the Macabre Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 They'll have the opportunity to test themselves at a higher level, and at progressively higher levels if they advance through the competition. I think it's axiomatic that the best way to improve at anything is test yourself at a higher level. Whether this is too high a level to begin at, though, we'll find out soon enough. They clearly can't loan every player out to lower league clubs as there simply aren't enough clubs. The existence of development teams is, I think, proof of that. It is second best to youths progressing into the first team at a high level or going out on loan at a slightly lower level, but I reckon it does have some development value. (And if they're hammered and knocked out, the impact on their psyche shouldn't be too bad considering it's only once a season and not a whole league campaign of being pitched in at the wrong level, although I'm sure that Hearts' youngsters benefitted greatly from their season in the top tier.) The development league needs some work too, I reckon. I can't see the benefit of so many teams playing for a single prize that most can't hope to win. The quota of over-age players is only beneficial to youth player development when it is complemented by competitive, meaningful games. If they advance through the competition, the best team they can face would be a Championship club. Which they could do if they were loaned to a Championship club. Any added development compared with a loan spell would be minuscule. Would it not be a lot more beneficial to not have players concentrate on winning things at 17 and instead try and improve their technical abilities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 Yes, but they can't all be loaned to Championship clubs and the some of the better ones already will be; this would possibly be of benefit to some of the others though. I think they should be looking to win things long before they're 17, and that most of their technical abilities will be developed by then. However, it's not an either/or scenario, since the essence of development is taking the skills that you develop in practice and applying them in the 'heat' of competition. If your skills fail under pressure then they're not worth much. Ideally, the focus of development would be something like: pre-10 they'd be looking at playing for fun; 10-14 it'd be more about skill development; 15+ it'd be predominantly applying skills in competition. With as many hours actually playing - for schools, local sides, and clubs - as possible. In terms of colt teams playing in the League, Ivo might be right and that in the Challenged Cup we're seeing the next increment in a process towards this; however, I thought that the mooted draft system for younger players was an attempt to head off this sort of thing, to complement the loan system as a step between under 20s football and the first team. That's why I didn't think we'd be heading any further down the B team/colts in the League route. Anyway, a good way to stop this process - if that is what is happening - might be for the senior teams to play their best sides and beat the development teams out of sight. I think the argument for colts teams in the League is that they give a degree of player development, although I don't think this would be as effective as the loans system. The arguments against would be that colts/B teams in the League would distort the competition (since they couldn't be promoted beyond a certain point); they displace teams/clubs who have worked their way through the pyramid on merit and block those who are trying to do so; they would lack the commitment to the competition that clubs' first teams have; and that having them in the League actually looks wretched. Maybe the issue is more that the Development League itself is too bloated and isn't working, that it'd be better for 18s and 19s to be set free to learn their trade wherever they can and possibly enrich lower league sides, and we'd be better off with reserves leagues with a quota of 4 or 5 u18s in the reserves teams to bring on that age group. Or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScarf Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 My word, just caught wind of this farce of a tournament. You have Arbroath playing the ICT first and second team in the space of 4 days in Inverness. And what happens if the Hearts Under 20s get quite far and draw Hibs? An absolute minter of a tie, maybe not for the Jambos of course. Words fail me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ned Nederlander Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 Still shite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 If this has come about come about because there's thought to be a lack of player development in the development league, then it might make more sense to align their development process with international/UEFA age groups...with reserves leagues brought in but pitched to a slightly younger age group... Under 17s - play in senior leagues for national/regional academies, or age-group football and break into reserves team/first team where possible; Under 19s / reserves league - match-day squads of 50% senior pros, 50% under 19s (so 8/9 from each in a squad of 16/18); & some out on loan; Under 21s - go out on loan, play first team or reserve team football, and basically going out to learn their trade where they can find it; ...that would be a slightly more logical set up; would stop bloated squads of 19-20 year olds playing age-group football that doesn't benefit their development when they should be playing at whatever senior first-team level they can find; would give clubs a decent standard of reserve league to keep players match fit; would still develop youngsters alongside senior pros; and would curb any move from the authorities towards colt teams playing in senior leagues or cups. ...with the reserves leagues being made more competitive by being smaller, independent of the senior leagues so there could be promotion/relegation to play for and possibly end of season play-offs - such as in leagues of 8, with autumn and spring seasons; or an east/west split with 4 teams from each qualifying for end of season national play offs after vying to win their region - to give more authentic competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.