John collins talking sense on sportsound

[vanderark14]

50 minutes ago, bazmidd said:

It's not the fact they aren't choosing to pick them it's the fact they are still youngsters and aren't good enough or experienced enough yet to play in Rangers or Celtics first team. It's a hell of a difference stepping up to play in Rangers or Celtics first team than Dundee Utd or Hibs. After a couple of seasons playing men's football developing, improving and proving themselves they will have a much better chance of breaking into these teams. 

 

Of course the ideal situation would be all the best youngsters in this country played for Hibs, Dundee Utd etc and had an easier path into first teams that aren't as good as the Old Firms, but the best youngsters unfortunately pick the Old Firm.

If the Old firm develop top players it clearly benefits Scotland.

And no these other countries are on a different level to everyone in this country apart from the Old Firm. The Old Firm could potentially produce players for Scotland the same way Ajax do for Holland or Dinamo Zagreb do for Croatia

As has been pointed out Croatia is not a good example.

Rangers and celtic don't know if their youngsters are good enough because they'd never take the risk unless forced, see Nathan paterson

I glad you see it as fact that Rangers and celtic choose not to play their youth players, they choose to buy expensive and often very overated pish like Shane Duffy. 

You seem to think this will work, I see no evidence of this because history shows us our clubs won't care about developing for the national side. Nothing will change, celtic and rangers won't promote their players just because they've played some part timers. They will still buy operated shite because of the fear of losing to the other side.

 

[bazmidd]

2 hours ago, sjd1972 said:

One player in the Croatia 2018 squad had played ‘colt’ football and that was one of the reserve keepers.  And this would only benefit the national team if they were forced to make the sides Scottish i.e 8 Scotland qualified players in starting line ups.

Well Modric, Lovren, and Kovacic are 3 straight away so I don't know where you are getting that stay from

[sjd1972]

24 minutes ago, bazmidd said:

Well Modric, Lovren, and Kovacic are 3 straight away so I don't know where you are getting that stay from

 

[bazmidd]

7 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

As has been pointed out Croatia is not a good example.

Rangers and celtic don't know if their youngsters are good enough because they'd never take the risk unless forced, see Nathan paterson

I glad you see it as fact that Rangers and celtic choose not to play their youth players, they choose to buy expensive and often very overated pish like Shane Duffy. 

You seem to think this will work, I see no evidence of this because history shows us our clubs won't care about developing for the national side. Nothing will change, celtic and rangers won't promote their players just because they've played some part timers. They will still buy operated shite because of the fear of losing to the other side.

 

Right okay Rangers and Celtic may or may not play these young guys after they've played two or three seasons against lower league clubs, not all them can break through, some will some won't, but whoever they do end up playing for, whoever does give them that chance they will have had 70 to 100 games in senior football developing as players, improving, becoming better experienced players instead of stagnating in youth football. If they are still not good enough for Rangers or Celtics first team fine, but they will still be a helluva better player than they would have been had they stood still in youth football and it will stand them in far better stead to push on again if they then go and join a Dundee Utd, Hibs or whoever.  In my mind I really don't give a toss about the old firm, I care about the kids who aren't playing football at a vital stage of their development. I want to see them given every opportunity possible to make the most of their ability. You are correct the system is flawed whereby the Old Firm can hoover up all the best talent and then not use them, but this happens in every country, the fact is some of the most productive academy's in the world though have B teams that is a fact

[bazmidd]

If you want a stat, then 8 out of the top 10 Academy's in Europe for producing players for the top leagues across Europe have B teams as part of their academy, says it all really

[vanderark14]

2 hours ago, bazmidd said:

If you want a stat, then 8 out of the top 10 Academy's in Europe for producing players for the top leagues across Europe have B teams as part of their academy, says it all really

It doesn't say it all, are these league on a par with Scottish coaching? 

2 hours ago, bazmidd said:

Right okay Rangers and Celtic may or may not play these young guys after they've played two or three seasons against lower league clubs, not all them can break through, some will some won't, but whoever they do end up playing for, whoever does give them that chance they will have had 70 to 100 games in senior football developing as players, improving, becoming better experienced players instead of stagnating in youth football. If they are still not good enough for Rangers or Celtics first team fine, but they will still be a helluva better player than they would have been had they stood still in youth football and it will stand them in far better stead to push on again if they then go and join a Dundee Utd, Hibs or whoever.  In my mind I really don't give a toss about the old firm, I care about the kids who aren't playing football at a vital stage of their development. I want to see them given every opportunity possible to make the most of their ability. You are correct the system is flawed whereby the Old Firm can hoover up all the best talent and then not use them, but this happens in every country, the fact is some of the most productive academy's in the world though have B teams that is a fact

We both want to see Scottish youngsters thrive, where we disagree is that I don't believe adding B teams in Scotland will solve anything

These countries with B teams, are they investing heavily in coaching? I know the Spanish do. 

I'd much rather we focused heavily on the performance schools. Our kids playing against part timers in league two won't make a difference 

Edited March 19, 2021 by vanderark14

[er yir macaroon]

37 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

It doesn't say it all, are these league on a par with Scottish coaching? 

We both want to see Scottish youngsters thrive, where we disagree is that I don't believe adding B teams in Scotland will solve anything

These countries with B teams, are they investing heavily in coaching? I know the Spanish do. 

I'd much rather we focused heavily on the performance schools. Our kids playing against part timers in league two won't make a difference 

I believe it will. It will also mean more than one man and his dug will go through the turnstiles. 

[vanderark14]

5 minutes ago, er yir macaroon said:

I believe it will. It will also mean more than one man and his dug will go through the turnstiles. 

Have a look at some other forums and see how welcome the hoardes of old firm.fans will be. The only people who will welcome that lot are greedy club owners

 

[bazmidd]

2 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

It doesn't say it all, are these league on a par with Scottish coaching? 

We both want to see Scottish youngsters thrive, where we disagree is that I don't believe adding B teams in Scotland will solve anything

These countries with B teams, are they investing heavily in coaching? I know the Spanish do. 

I'd much rather we focused heavily on the performance schools. Our kids playing against part timers in league two won't make a difference 

You say you want youngsters to thrive, but don't actually give any reasons as to why B teams wouldn't benefit the players instead you focus only on the clubs in question rather than the players. Of course it will benefit the players there are countless reasons it can benefit the players, in what way would it not benefit them?

The Performance Schools are also fantastic, but why pigeon hole youth development, why block of all other roads and only focus on one, utilise every avenue we can to improve these young players.

[vanderark14]

22 minutes ago, bazmidd said:

You say you want youngsters to thrive, but don't actually give any reasons as to why B teams wouldn't benefit the players instead you focus only on the clubs in question rather than the players. Of course it will benefit the players there are countless reasons it can benefit the players, in what way would it not benefit them?

The Performance Schools are also fantastic, but why pigeon hole youth development, why block of all other roads and only focus on one, utilise every avenue we can to improve these young players.

They'd be playing against part time players no better than the reserve teams they could play instead. The performances schools are starting to show promise, lets see how they develop our players before we completely shag competition out of existence to accommodate the old firm. You seem quite happy to screw over the lower leagues at the expense of a slight chance of a few players making it, I don't. I say we improve what we have and encourage better competition.

I'm not sure your problem is here, just because we don't agree doesn't mean I don't want the best for the player, we just don't agree on the way it should be done. 

[er yir macaroon]

3 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

Have a look at some other forums and see how welcome the hoardes of old firm.fans will be. The only people who will welcome that lot are greedy club owners

 

This will be open to all clubs that meet the criteria. If clubs are into turning away punters,  they should re-evaluate. The money will further boost youth development if it is spent appropriately. 

[Diamond Scot]

My understanding is that Performance Schools are for kids aged between 11 and 16 so have nothing to do with B teams. 

The problem that Scotland has is that the Old Firm have the best youth setup in terms of coaches and fascilities but they are also by far the hardest teams to break into.

So what happens is that alot of the top talent goes to the Old Firm, progresses but then stagnate as they hit a bottleneck where they have no opportunities. B teams would allow these 17-19 year olds some game time whilst keeping the benefits of the coaching etc. 

Its easy for a non old firm team to have 3 or 4 young players on the bench because their squad depth isnt as good, their business model relys on selling a young player for decent money every few years but also that the pressure to win every single game isnt the same.

[bazmidd]

3 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

They'd be playing against part time players no better than the reserve teams they could play instead. The performances schools are starting to show promise, lets see how they develop our players before we completely shag competition out of existence to accommodate the old firm. You seem quite happy to screw over the lower leagues at the expense of a slight chance of a few players making it, I don't. I say we improve what we have and encourage better competition.

I'm not sure your problem is here, just because we don't agree doesn't mean I don't want the best for the player, we just don't agree on the way it should be done. 

Well that statement has been proved wrong by the challenge cup where Colt teams have struggled against lower league teams which is exactly what they need, challenged. The performance Schools are just one small part in a much bigger picture. Performance Schools only provide extra training up to a certain age. It is the ages from 18 to 21 where young players need the next challenge.

Lower League clubs are hardly getting screwed here, no one is getting chucked out the league, in fact two Highland league and two Lowland league teams are also joining! Celtic and Rangers receive no payments for league positions, they are actually paying money from their own pockets to each club in that league to make this happen, it's not Rangers and Celtic who are being handed something here, they genuinely want to develop their young players, which can only benefit the national team.

My problem here is you argue against the idea but give no valid reasons to back up your argument. No lower league clubs are getting screwed, and it is going to help improve some of the best young players in the country so all I can see here is anti old firm bias and hate. Blinkered.

[bazmidd]

1 hour ago, Diamond Scot said:

My understanding is that Performance Schools are for kids aged between 11 and 16 so have nothing to do with B teams. 

The problem that Scotland has is that the Old Firm have the best youth setup in terms of coaches and fascilities but they are also by far the hardest teams to break into.

So what happens is that alot of the top talent goes to the Old Firm, progresses but then stagnate as they hit a bottleneck where they have no opportunities. B teams would allow these 17-19 year olds some game time whilst keeping the benefits of the coaching etc. 

Its easy for a non old firm team to have 3 or 4 young players on the bench because their squad depth isnt as good, their business model relys on selling a young player for decent money every few years but also that the pressure to win every single game isnt the same.

Spot on, glad there are others who can see the benefit of this. Because it is an Old Firm backed idea there are automatically fans of other clubs who will say no regardless. I follow a smaller club myself but I can see the benefit for Scotland. If everyone can just take their club bias away for a second and think about what's best for the national team it's a no brainer to let the two biggest clubs in this country, with the best facilities, best coaches who actually have a plan on how to develop elite players, a plan that follows similar ones elite clubs around Europe follow, and they have the money to implement it, why would we be against that and try and stand in their way because a when in no way shape or form is it meant to diminish any smaller clubs but in the big picture it is designed to in turn improve our national team

[mccaughey85]

32 minutes ago, bazmidd said:

Spot on, glad there are others who can see the benefit of this. Because it is an Old Firm backed idea there are automatically fans of other clubs who will say no regardless. I follow a smaller club myself but I can see the benefit for Scotland. If everyone can just take their club bias away for a second and think about what's best for the national team it's a no brainer to let the two biggest clubs in this country, with the best facilities, best coaches who actually have a plan on how to develop elite players, a plan that follows similar ones elite clubs around Europe follow, and they have the money to implement it, why would we be against that and try and stand in their way because a when in no way shape or form is it meant to diminish any smaller clubs but in the big picture it is designed to in turn improve our national team

Yeh I agree with that but for sake of fairness every club should have the option of entering a colt team. It can't just be an option for the old firm. 

[ProudScot]

6 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

Yeh I agree with that but for sake of fairness every club should have the option of entering a colt team. It can't just be an option for the old firm. 

It’s an option for everyone isn’t it? But you have to pay to have your team in the league system 

[mccaughey85]

19 minutes ago, ProudScot said:

It’s an option for everyone isn’t it? But you have to pay to have your team in the league system 

Not sure, I am assuming they will make it open to all the teams. 

[bazmidd]

3 hours ago, mccaughey85 said:

Yeh I agree with that but for sake of fairness every club should have the option of entering a colt team. It can't just be an option for the old firm. 

Agreed, I think Aberdeen have shown an interest in entering a Colt as well. Suppose it comes down to finance 

[wee-toon-red]

5 hours ago, bazmidd said:

Spot on, glad there are others who can see the benefit of this. Because it is an Old Firm backed idea there are automatically fans of other clubs who will say no regardless. I follow a smaller club myself but I can see the benefit for Scotland. If everyone can just take their club bias away for a second and think about what's best for the national team it's a no brainer to let the two biggest clubs in this country, with the best facilities, best coaches who actually have a plan on how to develop elite players, a plan that follows similar ones elite clubs around Europe follow, and they have the money to implement it, why would we be against that and try and stand in their way because a when in no way shape or form is it meant to diminish any smaller clubs but in the big picture it is designed to in turn improve our national team

What’s best for the national team would be for all gate money and other income to be pooled, not a sticking plaster solution which will only help widen the gap between the old firm and everyone else.

Edited March 19, 2021 by wee-toon-red

[vanderark14]

6 hours ago, bazmidd said:

Well that statement has been proved wrong by the challenge cup where Colt teams have struggled against lower league teams which is exactly what they need, challenged. The performance Schools are just one small part in a much bigger picture. Performance Schools only provide extra training up to a certain age. It is the ages from 18 to 21 where young players need the next challenge.

Lower League clubs are hardly getting screwed here, no one is getting chucked out the league, in fact two Highland league and two Lowland league teams are also joining! Celtic and Rangers receive no payments for league positions, they are actually paying money from their own pockets to each club in that league to make this happen, it's not Rangers and Celtic who are being handed something here, they genuinely want to develop their young players, which can only benefit the national team.

My problem here is you argue against the idea but give no valid reasons to back up your argument. No lower league clubs are getting screwed, and it is going to help improve some of the best young players in the country so all I can see here is anti old firm bias and hate. Blinkered.

You're extremely naive if you actually believe that.

And this has fuck all yo do with ant old firm bias. I've repeatedly said I don't want ANY OF THE TOP CLUBS to be in charge of our youth development. Why? Because their greed and desperation will always Trump youth development.

I've given plenty of reasons for disagreeing with you. Your problem is you don't like what I'm saying so you dismiss it. I'm fine with you disagreeing with me but clearly you can't handle that.

 

Edited March 19, 2021 by vanderark14

[vanderark14]

19 minutes ago, wee-toon-red said:

What’s best for the national team would be for all gate money and other income to be pooled, not a sticking plaster solution which will only help widen the gap between the old firm and everyone else.

No no, that's just OF bias. The colt teams will provide the national team.with a conveyor belt of great players 🤣

 

 

[vanderark14]

5 hours ago, mccaughey85 said:

Yeh I agree with that but for sake of fairness every club should have the option of entering a colt team. It can't just be an option for the old firm. 

This will be dressed up as being open to everyone but the reality is only the Old Firm will benefit and likely be able to field two teams like this.

I'm an aberdeen fan and I 100% do not want aberdeen to send a colt team to the lower leagues.

And if by some miracle every Premiership team took up the offer of a colt league, we've all of sudden got an entirely new league, we could call it the reserve league for shits and giggles. 

[bazmidd]

12 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

You're extremely naive if you actually believe that.

And this has fuck all yo do with ant old firm bias. I've repeatedly said I don't want ANY OF THE TOP CLUBS to be in charge of our youth development. Why? Because their greed and desperation will always Trump youth development.

I've given plenty of reasons for disagreeing with you. Your problem is you don't like what I'm saying so you dismiss it. I'm fine with you disagreeing with me but clearly you can't handle that.

 

When people start to get angry in a debate they tend to be losing... So who would you put in charge of developing elite players? Bearing in mind football players actually have to play for a football club....

[vanderark14]

19 minutes ago, bazmidd said:

When people start to get angry in a debate they tend to be losing... So who would you put in charge of developing elite players? Bearing in mind football players actually have to play for a football club....

I wasn't angry but I did think the blinkered and anti old firm comments from you were out of line.

This argument isn't going anywhere. Neither of us is going to be convinced by the other.

 

[bazmidd]

28 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

I wasn't angry but I did think the blinkered and anti old firm comments from you were out of line.

This argument isn't going anywhere. Neither of us is going to be convinced by the other.

 

Well this reply just strikes me that you have no idea what you would do to develop young players in this country so you are right it isn't going anywhere