redcherryberry Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 We ought to have a thriving academy, but what message are we putting out when SC didn't think any one in the Academy was worth a place on the bench when we couldn't raise 7 fit subs? Is he saying none of them would have benefitted from the experience of being in a matchday squad, even if they had no chance of getting on? In that case, none of them will ever be good enough. Well said. SC had a chance on at least two occasions to put an Academy lad on the bench last season and failed to do so. Granted there will be a lot of departures at U21 level in the comings weeks but at least give one of the Welsh youth International trio (who are in contract for next season) in Morrell, Fry & Connor Evans a spot on the bench for all the obvious reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Maybe it's me being bitter about modern football but there are very few loyal players and most seem to be motivated by money these days I don't blame the player as much as I blame agents Agents are the worst thing about modern football Maybe... But don't be taken in by everything you read about Agents. Up until recently through a relationship, I spoke regularly with an Agent who had married into the family. He predominantly dealt with Spanish players. In the Prem the world of football is aflush with money. Every business wants to be associated with footballers. They are throwing themselves at them. For example...Car dealerships...they basically give cars away to footballers...it's cheap advertising. The list goes on...clothes, Clubs, bars, airlines, holiday companies etc....they all want a piece of them. There is so much to detract away from football. Football is business...big business. Full of lawyers and complicated contracts. Agents are a necessary evil for a footballer. Just in the same way, many mere mortals use a financial advisor. The majority of football fans have no idea how complicated it all is. They see it so very black and white...it isn't. Look it another way....Footballers are notorious for spending their money. A lot of 'football money' comes back into the public domain. Joe public benefits eventually from it. However much money I was paid... I wouldn't want a Pro footballers life. Training and playing...yes...but all the other crap...no thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 I don't think it does a player much good playing for a prem side anyway as a youngster. If say for example liverpool had got joe Bryan when he was 14, would he be better now playing in liverpools under 18s and 21s and moved out on loan, or better as he is having stayed with city. I think it's been best for him to stay and would have been with the ones we've lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Well said. SC had a chance on at least two occasions to put an Academy lad on the bench last season and failed to do so. Granted there will be a lot of departures at U21 level in the comings weeks but at least give one of the Welsh youth International trio (who are in contract for next season) in Morrell, Fry & Connor Evans a spot on the bench for all the obvious reasons. What's the point in putting them on the bench when you aren't going to play them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Its 2m the club could use - no problem at all. The club would be better off scrapping it and just having a youth system based on the old apprenticeships. Most of it is a load of billybigbollux anyway. You make some interesting points. I was thinking about what we did before this word 'academy' came along. The thing is though how would having a 'old fashioned' youth system help us hold on to players any better? If one could then it does bring into focus the pluses and negatives of an academy. City voted in favour of these changes someone said... I am not doubting that...so why is the system failing us as Tinnion examples? Is it because we, like other non Prem academies, naively misread the rule changes or is it because the exploitive Premier teams have used good lawyers to find a way around them? Either way whoever came up with the change in the first place should be sacked. And that is why I am not really understanding this rule change and how it got voted in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 You make some interesting points. I was thinking about what we did before this word 'academy' came along. The thing is though how would having a 'old fashioned' youth system help us hold on to players any better? If one could then it does bring into focus the pluses and negatives of an academy. City voted in favour of these changes someone said... I am not doubting that...so why is the system failing us as Tinnion examples? Is it because we, like other non Prem academies, naively misread the rule changes or is it because the exploitive Premier teams have used good lawyers to find a way around them? Either way whoever came up with the change in the first place should be sacked. And that is why I am not really understanding this rule change and how it got voted in. It got voted through because the prem threatened to cut all funding to the football league If it didn't get voted through a lot of clubs would of gone out of business In otherwords we had little choice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbrahamovic Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Does anyone here get to see the academy much? Any decent prospects? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Badger is normally well informed on the youngsters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hortonred Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Based on results it is a a waste of money.We seem to come up consistently short when producing players for our first team.(Joe Bryan excepted) We lose the real quality to the bigger clubs and the best of the rest provide players for teams below us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Team In Keynsham Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Maybe it's me being bitter about modern football but there are very few loyal players and most seem to be motivated by money these days I don't blame the player as much as I blame agentsAgents are the worst thing about modern football Always like it when this phrase is used. Worse than, say, racist abuse of players by sections of the crowd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Rizzle Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 You make some interesting points. I was thinking about what we did before this word 'academy' came along. The thing is though how would having a 'old fashioned' youth system help us hold on to players any better? If one could then it does bring into focus the pluses and negatives of an academy. City voted in favour of these changes someone said... I am not doubting that...so why is the system failing us as Tinnion examples? Is it because we, like other non Prem academies, naively misread the rule changes or is it because the exploitive Premier teams have used good lawyers to find a way around them? Either way whoever came up with the change in the first place should be sacked. And that is why I am not really understanding this rule change and how it got voted in. The thing is though how would having a 'old fashioned' youth system help us hold on to players any better? It would not. Clubs are tied into the academy system. Academies play academies. Leaving that framework would mean BCFC academy sides from a early age will play substandard opposition. Having a level 2 category v 3 is a draw. Better facilities, better coaches, more guaranteed 1-2-1 coaching time. Further up the scale the more opportunity there is for education etc. Is it because we, like other non Prem academies, naively misread the rule changes .. No level one usurps level two, level two etc. Big club v the small. Why did City vote for this? It is not evident but the pecking order allows City to be as parasitic as the clubs mentioned further up the food chain. Kids do not have to leave BCFC. Brian Tinnion does meet coaches at local unattached development centres and has discussed how City operate. City can become the regional centre of excellence and City can also look at the relationship between club/coaches - kids/parents and what being local offers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.