Sign in to continue
I'd love it, but the only worry I have is how they'll fit it all in... as from what I can tell whatever they do will be very unfair on quite a few clubs.
Say they put it after League 2...
So the Conference teams that get promoted then will have to play in another league before reaching the Football Leagues where they'll likely get owned by Prem quality youth players. They might stay up and do well, but with they'd probably have more of a chance against League 2 teams. But it also creates a whole new level for them to have to climb.
What happens to teams relegated from League 2? Do they go into this new league, or do they go into the Conference which means that to get into League 2 again they'd have to go through 2 leagues instead of 1 just to get back to where they were. That's harsh.
I'm yet to see anything of how they'd properly integrate this without being unfair to the lower league teams. And I don't like that. The general idea of the proposal I love, would be great for the game in general as it'll give the youth teams some better competition and experience than just playing other youth teams. But they need to come up with how they're going to add them all in without ruining the lower league teams - long run they'll be okay as I'm sure fans would love seeing some top teams youth players, but initially I can't see how they'd get it to work.
Any teams relegated will go into League Three. It's really simple when you think about it...
Ther B-Teams can be promoted all the way to League One, but no higher. So if Man Utd B make it to League 1 and win the League, they will be champions, but won't be promoted. Instead, the Promotion places will go to 2nd and 3rd instead of 1st and 2nd. And the same goes for the playoffs.
B-Teams will always be at least one division below their A-Team and of course, none of them will be in the Championship. The B-Teams are also banned from all Cup competitions.
If a team is relegated from League 2, they won't go down to the Conference. They'll go down to League 3.
There's no doubt it'll be harder for the conference teams to maintain a League spot but if the result is more home grown players surely it's worth it? The English game has a significant lack of english players so that needs to be addressed (I say English, british in general really).
As the plan is, League 3 will consist of 10 Conference teams promoted and 10 Premier League B Teams, so I think we'll see the likes of Man Utd, Man City, Spurs and Stoke (who have all endorsed the idea) and t hen probably Arsenal, Chelsea, Newcastle, Everton, Liverpool and I dunno, let's say... Southampton.
Thanks Taker_2004 for the banner!
I jist don't think short term wise it's fair on the Conference teams. Long term it could be great for football here. There's so much to think about though...
We could end up in a few years in a position where all 10 teams are in the Championship. What happens if they all finish in the top 10? Teams in the play offs would be in the bottom half of the table.
What happens if say in 4 years Man City's B team is in the Championship and City's owners get bored and leave? With how much City are paying on wages they'd have to sell every player and they'd drop faster than Leeds. Would they allow them to play each other in the Championship? They couldn't just give City 6 points against them as that'd be unfair to the other teams. City having 2 matches less than others would be unfair on City. It's unlikely, but this scenario could happen. Or a team could just go to shit like Newcastle did a few years ago and get relegated which poses the same questions.
There's so much more to think about as well, so many scenarios that need to be thought out.
I jist don't think short term wise it's fair on the Conference teams. Long term it could be great for football here. There's so much to think about though...
We could end up in a few years in a position where all 10 teams are in the Championship. What happens if they all finish in the top 10? Teams in the play offs would be in the bottom half of the table.
What happens if say in 4 years Man City's B team is in the Championship and City's owners get bored and leave? With how much City are paying on wages they'd have to sell every player and they'd drop faster than Leeds. Would they allow them to play each other in the Championship? They couldn't just give City 6 points against them as that'd be unfair to the other teams. City having 2 matches less than others would be unfair on City. It's unlikely, but this scenario could happen. Or a team could just go to shit like Newcastle did a few years ago and get relegated which poses the same questions.
There's so much more to think about as well, so many scenarios that need to be thought out.
Have you read the article, or Rhys' reply?
City B wouldn't make it to the Championship, they can't progress beyond League One. The B teams have to remain one full league away from their A teams. If City B made it to the top of League One they'd just stay there, then if City 😇 were relegated City B would automatically drop down to League Two. Yes, if all ten teams finished in the top ten of League One the playoffs would be contested in the bottom half of the table. That's how it would go.
It's completely fair on the conference teams, beneficial even. There's a new league within the Football League being created, seven extra conference teams are getting a free pass into the League, while the competition for the remaining teams would be drastically reduced leaving a greater chance of making the cut for the next season.
The only problem I have with it is that I don't really care that English players "aren't getting a chance." I don't think English players should have any more of a right to play in the Premier League than anyone else. If they're not good enough, they shouldn't be there. Play in the Championship instead.
They can't go any higher than League One. None of them will be in the Championship.
And the B team has to be one division below. If Man City were relegated to League One and the B team were there they'd be relegated to League 2.
And if a B team folds they'll probably be replaced with another B team.
Thanks Taker_2004 for the banner!
Seems kinda pointless then if that's the case. I'll admit that I skimmed, but other articles I've read haven't mentioned that they would need to be a division apart, so that's a new one on me. So let's say a team does a Portsmouth then and ends up dropping down to League 2. Won't be beneficial at all for their B team to be in the Conference - they'd be out of the football league completely then. Or would that B team fold and then a new one is made?
I'd prefer if they do this that they scrap the play offs. They're fun, but not if a team competing in it could be a team in the bottom half of a table in a few years.
I guess if a team has a major fall in the Leagues, they will discontinue their B team and another Premier League team will take its place. If they are in major financial difficulties, I doubt they'd have the capacity to keep the B team going anyway.
It really is a great system that can work well I think. Sure, there will be kinks in the armour here or there but the same can be said for any change to the Leagues... in a few years, once the kinks have been ironed out, I can see it being great. The B teams get full time football and major exposure, while the other normal teams still have just as much chance to get a cup run or whatever.
Thanks Taker_2004 for the banner!
I do like the idea. Newcastle have some great young players, but they just don't get competitive football, which this would give them. Just reckon there'll be a lot to sort out before we get close to it, and don't really like breaking up leagues and making new ones... whenever people talked of adding Celtic or Rangers into League Two I was always of the opinion that teams already in our leagues fighting their way through or to survive shouldn't have to be pushed out of the way for them - if they wanted to join then it should be from the very bottom, even if they just could the Blue Square North and South as the very bottom (cus let's face it, any lower than that and you're not really a football team).
This is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. The FA were crackers under David Bernstein but now they've got Greg Dyke in charge, his plans are even worse. He should fuck off back to TV land. If the top teams are getting a 2nd team, that's only going to push a number of smaller teams out of the leagues. Which will result in lower revenue and ultimately closure. These smaller clubs are running on shoe-string budgets and any loss in TV money plays a big part in if they can run the next season.
Why do they need a 2nd team, just send your best English players out on loan to the smaller clubs like we usually do. Take Chelsea for instance bar one, all of their young English players are playing in the lower English leagues. And all of their non-eu players (starred) are playing abroad.
I thought the FA had the plan we were going to build footballers ups from grass-roots level, that's why they've invested all that money into the training academy at Burton. Now that hasn't solved the footballing equation of why we haven't won the World Cup, we need to destroy the football league system. If they want to copy what Spain & Germany do, they need to understand why they play that way, not how. The ironic thing is, Schalke have best young players in the Bundesliga and their four best young players have a total sum of five appearances for Schalke II. And Spain/Barcelona play tiki-taka football which is ingrained in their style by the manager. Its like when Brazil were on top in the 90's no-one decided to convert our pitches into beaches so we could play samba football, then win the 2010 World Cup.
This is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. The FA were crackers under David Bernstein but now they've got Greg Dyke in charge, his plans are even worse. He should fuck off back to TV land. If the top teams are getting a 2nd team, that's only going to push a number of smaller teams out of the leagues. Which will result in lower revenue and ultimately closure. These smaller clubs are running on shoe-string budgets and any loss in TV money plays a big part in if they can run the next season.
That right there is my biggest problem with it. Although I think it could work and do like the idea of B teams, I don't like this part of it.
I reckon we're a long way from this actually happening though. A long way.
The plan is to start it in the 16/17 season if it goes ahead.
Thanks Taker_2004 for the banner!
Would be surprised if it does happen that soon.
Thinking about this... it's not like we really need this so much, all it's doing it papering over one of the massive problems we have in this country. It's not that we can't produce the players. It's that young English players cost so much. There are some great young English players in the Championship. Will Hughes could go on to be a great player. But who's going to pay over £10m for him with they can sign a quality foreign youngster for less money? We seem to think that because they're English that they're worth more and so they stay at smaller clubs which then ruins their chances of becoming great.
Newcastle had it when we signed Cabaye. We were after an English youngster at the time and they wanted £15m for him. We went and picked up Cabaye instead for £4.6m who wasn't that old and was already an International player. Why spend £10m more just because the guy is English?
Let's face it, if our young English talent was good enough then they'd be able to break into Premiership teams. Look at Sterling, Shaw, Rodriquez, Barkley. There's at least 4 young players who have come through superbly this season - you could argue that Rodriquez made the break through last season, but the first half of this season was what made him in my opinion.
There are guys in the Championship who are good enough, but teams are priced out of buying them most of the time.
Another Newcastle example which gave us fans a good laugh at the time. Carroll moved to Liverpool for £35m. David Villa, a full Spain International with a very good scoring record moved for just 5.1m Euros (was about £4m at the time I think). He's a bit older, but there shouldn't be that much of a difference in price. There was another big transfer around the same time as well that was a much better deal for a player around the same age as Carroll. And you just know that Carroll only cost that much because he's English. And that's out biggest problem and it is and will continue to hinder the national team.
Another Newcastle example which gave us fans a good laugh at the time. Carroll moved to Liverpool for £35m. David Villa, a full Spain International with a very good scoring record moved for just 5.1m Euros (was about £4m at the time I think). He's a bit older, but there shouldn't be that much of a difference in price. There was another big transfer around the same time as well that was a much better deal for a player around the same age as Carroll. And you just know that Carroll only cost that much because he's English. And that's out biggest problem and it is and will continue to hinder the national team.
David Villa did move to Barcelona, 6 months prior to the Carroll transfer for £32.5m. But his goal scoring record was like, 1.5 goals per game. Carroll couldn't hit 1 goal per 2 games, even when half of his Newcastle goal haul came from Championship games. I think the David Villa £4m transfer to Atletico had a lot of factors for being cheap, last year on his contract, still rehabing his broken leg and he was the wrong side of 30. It has paid off for Atletico though because he's played a big part in their success this season.
Source: BBC Football
I really think if they do it properly and make it fair, it could seriously improve the state of home grown players in the English game. The B teams thing works in other countries, most notably Spain and Germany, so I could see it working here too.
Any thoughts?
Thanks Taker_2004 for the banner!