Football League clubs have voted in favour of changes to the academy system-Why?

[drew]

The Independent report is most revealing. The new rules have been drafted by the premier league clubs! The original mandate appeared to be how to improve Englands chances on the international stage but when have any of the top clubs been interested in England!!!! Arsenal/Man Utd/Man City/Chelsea/Liverpool are all in foreign ownership. Their interest will be in the brand of their club and the it's value, not the success of the England team. Whilst the report gives more detail about future compensation payments which could earn smaller clubs more in the long run, why does the sell on clause not apply to selling a player to a foreign club, doesn't make sense. Seems to me that we could sign a kid that we train for 5 years, who is then poached by Arsenal who sell him on for £40m to Real Madrid and we don' get a penny. Sell him to Fulham for £10m and we get £2.3m. Totally illogical.

 

[Screaming J]

I may be in a minority of one here but if the foreigh owners in the Prem get their way and decide to float it off from the rest of football with no relegation perhaps I'd just wave them goodbye. Then we can all get on with the real stuff in the Football League. Sod 'em!

 

[BigGully]

Where is your evidence that small clubs sign too many youngster?

Most clubs sign too many youngsters, sometimes to fulfill fixtures mostly because they assess too loosely.

Especially in the younger age groups, if you go back a generation then maybe the 'best' 10% were sucked into the professional system.

Now most decent school players are now exposed to the professional system at some level, many never having a realistic chance of success and ends in rejection, so if you are within the best 30% in you go whilst the long term opportunities have decreased, do the sums.

 

[drew]

Most clubs sign too many youngsters, sometimes to fulfill fixtures mostly because they assess too loosely.

Especially in the younger age groups, if you go back a generation then maybe the 'best' 10% were sucked into the professional system.

Now most decent school players are now exposed to the professional system at some level, many never having a realistic chance of success and ends in rejection, so if you are within the best 30% in you go whilst the long term opportunities have decreased, do the sums.

Not entirely sure what point you're making. Youth football has come on a long way since the seventies and possibly even the eighties. In the seventies, as far as I am aware, the club did not run any junior teams, just taking on young players on an apprentice basis. That changed and the club saw the benefits of that with the likes of Hinshelwood, Virgo, El Abd, Fraser et al all playing first team football.

You then make the ridiculous comment about only signing players to fulfill fixtures! Well if you are going to run a team then you need the numbers to make up that team, whether that be 7 a side or 11 a side, plus of course subs. Are you suggesting that if there are only 6 players you are confident might develop you are going to shoot yourself in the foot by not taking on enough to play games. Absurd.

As for most 'decent' school players being exposed to the professional system well that is easy to say bearing in mind that the club visit and have training sessions with far more schools than they ever did and therefore get the opportunity to what players develop.

I get the impression from most of your posts on this thread that you are completely happy to see the premiership clubs cherry pick from our doorstep.

 

[BigGully]

Not entirely sure what point you're making. Youth football has come on a long way since the seventies and possibly even the eighties. In the seventies, as far as I am aware, the club did not run any junior teams, just taking on young players on an apprentice basis. That changed and the club saw the benefits of that with the likes of Hinshelwood, Virgo, El Abd, Fraser et al all playing first team football.

You then make the ridiculous comment about only signing players to fulfill fixtures! Well if you are going to run a team then you need the numbers to make up that team, whether that be 7 a side or 11 a side, plus of course subs. Are you suggesting that if there are only 6 players you are confident might develop you are going to shoot yourself in the foot by not taking on enough to play games. Absurd.

As for most 'decent' school players being exposed to the professional system well that is easy to say bearing in mind that the club visit and have training sessions with far more schools than they ever did and therefore get the opportunity to what players develop.

I get the impression from most of your posts on this thread that you are completely happy to see the premiership clubs cherry pick from our doorstep.

My points are from the young players perspective.

The real scandel isnt that a Premiership club is now only paying £300 000 for a kid of 14 years old, but more that money should be changing hands at all for kids from the age of 9 years old.

Mullery started up the first 'youth set up' at BHA in the late 70's, I think under the stewardship of John Shepherd and Mick Fogden and yes your right that it was a different system, but was it any worse than now, some might say bits of it was better.

There was no recruiting from the age of 8 - 12 years years old, you were allowed to play competitively for your school, rep sides, Sunday sides unhindered by registration and thereafter if any scouts deemed you good enough you would be invited in to see that clubs 'set up' without being bound to that club.

You were then invited in to train twice a week and each day of the holidays, ironically probably experiencing more practice hours 30 years ago then now at many Centre of Excellences.

Games were arranged against other pro clubs which didnt clash with your Sunday League Team, before having to commit at the age of 14 years old to Associated Schoolboy Forms.

If you were fortunate to have options of a pro club to sign for you based your decision souly on which club you felt would nurture your potential, not because you registered for a club at 9 years old and are unable to move due to likely compensation issues.

They may need to have an allocated number of players to fulfill fixtures, but I bet not once did they tell the kid or his parents that actually their signing is about that, it aint fair on that kid who is inevitably going to be released at some time.

Let clubs work hard to provide a dynamic, progressive and nurturing environment, when they do they will retain and recruit the best talent, but if they dont, then the 10 year old should be free to move whereever he want without any issue of compensation.