MPH Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 I Dont see why people are so worried... The Top Top prem teams challenging for the prem titile have alot of foreign young talent in their team if, as expected, we get to the prem in the next 2-3 years, its not those guys we need to be careful of as, quite frankly i dont see us challenging for the prem title any time in the enxt 20 years, its the Europa cup teams and below that will be getting most of the English talent. Right now if we get a worlds class youngster he will be off and that wont change at all... All this means is we can get the best of the rest.... And why should the likes of Everton get them instead of us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 Look at my post above about Morgan.. Is that 'fair' The world isn't 'fair' never has been, never will be. There are far far more issues in football that can invoke debate about the presence or absence of 'level playing fields' than this one about academies. IF this is the way things will go, I merely want what is best for the club. Neither you nor I can do anything about the multitude of other factors that may be involved. Do you finally see where I'm coming from? Or do you work for the FA or the premier league and can directly influence policy to create a 'fairer football'? If you do and you can then please do so because the whole world of football is getting madder. However, it is what it is... Comprende? You sure like to miss the point with spurious arguments, Morgan! What has that got to do with the debate? Morgan was developed by and has played most of his career for the same club, he's not been creamed off by us as a 16 year old, we paid an agreed fee for him well into his career. It's also nothing to do with being a rich or poor club it's about introducing rules/regulations that clearly benefit the rich clubs at the expense of smaller clubs for no real reason. Fine lets have better academies but why should the rich clubs be given exclusive rights to the best young talent, not only that but those smaller clubs are blackmailed into accepting those rules. but I suppose you'll just tell me in F off and support a poor club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 I'm sorry but you seem very naive.. If Forest had the money we have they would have resigned Morgan... Or most likely they would of anyway.. I doubt they really wanted to sell him if truth be told. And certainly their fans didn't want to see him go. Anyway... Enough already. You continue to support City whilst ignoring the fact that WE are now proponents of exactly some of the stuff you claim to abhorring. I'm happy to support what appears to be a progressive, forward thinking club. And if this means we need to invest to develop a Class A Academy, then so be it. I can't control this so I'm reassured that we would at least have a chance to comply. Rightly or wrongly! Take care mate Re: Morgan, they don't have the money because their owners are useless and he would have left for free in the summer, much like ours were in the past. I really wish you would get over this idea that you are not supporting Leicester if you don't agree with this, I have said I am grateful that the owners have put us in a position where we might be able to take advantage of it and benefit, but that still doesn't take away from the fact this will be damaging to the majority of other clubs in the League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shade Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 If that is the case you must also hate Leicester City Football Club.. Look at what we have just done with Wes Morgan... For a relatively nominal fee, we have 'poached' one of Forest's better players, a real fans favourite, at a time in which they are in turmoil. This could well herald, or at least be a contributory factor, in their likely relegation. This will financially cripple their club still further. Why have we done this? Simple... Because we COULD.. We have money to spend, they haven't. Are you bothered about it? Really? Or are you actually happy that Morgan could be a key defender for us, if not this season, then possibly next? RELATIVELY speaking, what LCFC have done with Morgan is no different to what Man City did with Adam Johnson, or Man Utd did with Rooney.. Ie secured those signings because they had the money to do so. If anything, we have been even more unscrupulous because we have signed Morgan for a knock down fee, as he is a free agent in the summer. At least Man City and United paid considerable sums of money to the respective clubs for the two aforementioned starlets. Are you now then going to criticise LCFC for doing this, rip up your season ticket and no more follow the Evil that is contemporary football? No? Thought not..... oh please don't get me wrong, i don't condone or agree with leicester or west ham or whoever it is relying on outspending others to attempt to win promotion. i can hand on heart say, if you gave me the choice right now, of every club in the championship having 3 million a season to spend and a wage cap of 10,000 a week, or the situation as it currently is, i would choose the former. i wouldn't care if it adversely affected leicester, being in the premier league isn't everything to me. watching and supporting leicester is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accessory Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 Re: Morgan, they don't have the money because their owners are useless and he would have left for free in the summer, much like ours were in the past. I really wish you would get over this idea that you are not supporting Leicester if you don't agree with this, I have said I am grateful that the owners have put us in a position where we might be able to take advantage of it and benefit, but that still doesn't take away from the fact this will be damaging to the majority of other clubs in the League. Those same clubs would have been very happy to see us go out of business when we were in administration ten years ago. Why should we give a damn about any of them now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 You sure like to miss the point with spurious arguments, Morgan! What has that got to do with the debate? Morgan was developed by and has played most of his career for the same club, he's not been creamed off by us as a 16 year old, we paid an agreed fee for him well into his career. It's also nothing to do with being a rich or poor club it's about introducing rules/regulations that clearly benefit the rich clubs at the expense of smaller clubs for no real reason. Fine lets have better academies but why should the rich clubs be given exclusive rights to the best young talent, not only that but those smaller clubs are blackmailed into accepting those rules. but I suppose you'll just tell me in F off and support a poor club. When have I ever told you to F off? It's you who has been rude to me today Dave so get off your high horse and accept that I don't always agree with you.. One final time.. I am not saying that this proposition is morally correct. But to imply that football has ever had any sort of level playing field, even pre the Prem is something I don't agree with. And my point on Morgan is a broader one, as you well know, relating to the inequity that continues to exist in contemporary football.. Of which LCFC are now benefitting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 Re: Morgan, they don't have the money because their owners are useless and he would have left for free in the summer, much like ours were in the past. I really wish you would get over this idea that you are not supporting Leicester if you don't agree with this, I have said I am grateful that the owners have put us in a position where we might be able to take advantage of it and benefit, but that still doesn't take away from the fact this will be damaging to the majority of other clubs in the League. Then also be grateful if the FA introduce this idea that we may be in a position to benefit from it rather than bleating on about what is and isn't fair. You can't have your proverbial cake and eat it.. As I said earlier, you're the worst type of socialist. Zero sum game.... If a system creates winners, it will also, by definition, create losers. This has been true since the dawn of time. That's why City have been able to sign Morgan, Peltier, Danns etc to the detriment of the selling clubs. Cest la vie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 Those same clubs would have been very happy to see us go out of business when we were in administration ten years ago. Why should we give a damn about any of them now? If you were referring directly to, say, Portsmouth you would have a point, I would disagree with it, but how about Swindon, everybodies favourite second team, all those fans that came on here and we all wished them good luck for the rest of the season, decent honest clubs who are being punished for no reason, unlike us and Pompey and Leeds who were punished for financial mismanagement on a massive scale. That was deserved and as a direct result of our own poor management. Can you see the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 Then also be grateful if the FA introduce this idea that we may be in a position to benefit from it rather than bleating on about what is and isn't fair. You can't have your proverbial cake and eat it.. As I said earlier, you're the worst type of socialist. Zero sum game.... If a system creates winners, it will also, by definition, create losers. This has been true since the dawn of time. That's why City have been able to sign Morgan, Peltier, Danns etc to the detriment of the selling clubs. Cest la vie You have still not answered my question, how will you feel if we don't get this status and have to close our academy, a very real possibility? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 You have still not answered my question, how will you feel if we don't get this status and have to close our academy, a very real possibility? That the world is an unfair place and that I hate the FA etc etc.... I'd probably cry and bleat on about how my life has not panned out like it should and how I'm not still 21 and can't still go out and pull birds in the Fan Club. Then I'd go out and get pissed... lol Anyway, the gym calls... Adios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 That the world is an unfair place and that I hate the FA etc etc.... I'd probably cry and bleat on about how my life has not panned out like it should and how I'm not still 21 and can't still go out and pull birds in the Fan Club. Then I'd go out and get pissed... lol Anyway, the gym calls... Adios And that is why you are the worst kind of capitalist. Tread all over the little guys until there are no little guys left and realise that you are now at the bottom and getting shat on, then complain about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 People can not blame the premier league on there being tops clubs. Big clubs were emerging way before that. Clubs having wealthy owners are much more responsible - as they account for Blackburns win in the 94-95 season and chealseas emergence as a big club. Other than those mentioned its just been Leeds ( once) Everton ( twice) who have won the league outside of Man utd, Chealsea and Arsenal since 1980 .. 12-13 years before the prem came about.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accessory Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 If you were referring directly to, say, Portsmouth you would have a point, I would disagree with it, but how about Swindon, everybodies favourite second team, all those fans that came on here and we all wished them good luck for the rest of the season, decent honest clubs who are being punished for no reason, unlike us and Pompey and Leeds who were punished for financial mismanagement on a massive scale. That was deserved and as a direct result of our own poor management. Can you see the difference? Financial mismanagement on a massive scale has been a feature of English football for years, from the FA downwards. Look how much money and time it took to rebuild Wembley. Some teams have been "punished" (like Leeds, Portsmouth, Palace and many others) or had to deal with consequences in the same way as we have. Others, like Manyoo and Arsenal, seem to get by almost unscathed, though that doesn't mean they will continue to do so in future. But the introduction of elite youth academies will have little effect on that. The differences of opinion in this thread are between those with vision and ambitions who look forward to our return to the top flight and the pessimists who would prefer to see us continue to flounder in lower-league backwaters for years, maybe decades, to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 Financial mismanagement on a massive scale has been a feature of English football for years, from the FA downwards. Look how much money and time it took to rebuild Wembley. Some teams have been "punished" (like Leeds, Portsmouth, Palace and many others) or had to deal with consequences in the same way as we have. Others, like Manyoo and Arsenal, seem to get by almost unscathed, though that doesn't mean they will continue to do so in future. But the introduction of elite youth academies will have little effect on that. The differences of opinion in this thread are between those with vision and ambitions who look forward to our return to the top flight and the pessimists who would prefer to see us continue to flounder in lower-league backwaters for years, maybe decades, to come. No the difference of opinion in this thread is those that are only looking at Leicester and those that are looking at the impact it will have on football as whole. The fact that we have not been granted category A academy status it is only possibility makes only looking at Leicester redundant as we don't know if we will be in the elite group that benefit or the larger group that get screwed over. Either way in my eyes I disagree with such changes to the academy set-up that will massively benefit a rich minority at the expense of the poor majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 When have I ever told you to F off? It's you who has been rude to me today Dave so get off your high horse and accept that I don't always agree with you.. One final time.. I am not saying that this proposition is morally correct. But to imply that football has ever had any sort of level playing field, even pre the Prem is something I don't agree with. And my point on Morgan is a broader one, as you well know, relating to the inequity that continues to exist in contemporary football.. Of which LCFC are now benefitting. Well not directly but you have a number times now suggested that anyone who disagreed with this set up should go and support another poorer club and i wasn't rude because telling someone to go and support another club because they disagree with aspects of how football is run this days is at best disingenuous and offers no serious contribution to this debate. As for Morgan yet again we're not talking about the normal movement of established players from club to club for an agreed fee that is done to develop a cohesive team but creaming off young players, dragging them from their normal homes and life at an early age in the pursuit of making more money, lets face it the whole scheme is more about making more money for a few clubs than the actual development of players. Oh and while I'm here calling someone a lilly livered lefty because they disagree with the way football and the development of young players is going is more than being rude it's plainly wrong. Have you ever looked at how the NFL is run in the USA where in a country that is as right wing, capitalist oriented, every man for himself society you could find they go out of their way to ensure a level playing field, where all proceeds from the NFL marketing is shared equally and where the weakest teams get the first choice of up and coming players. Anyway i've spent enough time in here i've got better things to do than flogging dead horses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Fatboyslow_ Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 Good news for us, but not for the poorer clubs, this is something we should be opposing not supporting because it benefits us. And the money being raised from the likes of sky should be being used to fund such projects for all levels of football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 Oh and while I'm here calling someone a lilly livered lefty because they disagree with the way football and the development of young players is going is more than being rude it's plainly wrong. It's ok I took no offence, I am a lefty, although my liver is more pickled than lilly, so a pickled livered lefty is more apporpriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accessory Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 No the difference of opinion in this thread is those that are only looking at Leicester and those that are looking at the impact it will have on football as whole. The fact that we have not been granted category A academy status it is only possibility makes only looking at Leicester redundant as we don't know if we will be in the elite group that benefit or the larger group that get screwed over. Either way in my eyes I disagree with such changes to the academy set-up that will massively benefit a rich minority at the expense of the poor majority. Simple geography, together with the performance of our academy in recent years, suggest that Category A status is likely. What do you define as the "poor majority"? Do you mean just League 1/2 clubs, or include those in the Conference and the leagues below? In the vast majority of cases, they'll be able to adapt to whatever circumstances may arise. Meanwhile, we're stuck in a league which values quantity over quality, takes no account whatsoever of recent developments (such as the expansion of international football and the development of the Champions League) and therefore retards the opportunities to develop technical skills. It is paralysed by self-interest and therefore incapable of making changes which will bring long-term improvements to the game. If we want a system that produces players with the skills we see in Spain, Germany or Holland, then a network of elite academies is essential. We have to be a part of that network if we are to have any meaningful future as a football club. And if that means leaving the likes of Peterborough, Coventry or even Forest behind, then the sooner the better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfgang amadeus Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 From my point of view, I'm delighted that we're planning on spending 2.8m on developing young players but am firmly against this category a title meaning that us and the other top academies can pinch young players for a much cheaper fee. In no way does this mean I support Leicester any less but I can't believe how many people aren't concerned by the rules surrounding the category a academies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 3 February 2012 Share Posted 3 February 2012 Simple geography, together with the performance of our academy in recent years, suggest that Category A status is likely. What do you define as the "poor majority"? Do you mean just League 1/2 clubs, or include those in the Conference and the leagues below? In the vast majority of cases, they'll be able to adapt to whatever circumstances may arise. Meanwhile, we're stuck in a league which values quantity over quality, takes no account whatsoever of recent developments (such as the expansion of international football and the development of the Champions League) and therefore retards the opportunities to develop technical skills. It is paralysed by self-interest and therefore incapable of making changes which will bring long-term improvements to the game. If we want a system that produces players with the skills we see in Spain, Germany or Holland, then a network of elite academies is essential. We have to be a part of that network if we are to have any meaningful future as a football club. And if that means leaving the likes of Peterborough, Coventry or even Forest behind, then the sooner the better! So if we don't get category A status academy then we cease to be a have any meaningful future as a football club? And you are happy with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramadaone Posted 4 February 2012 Share Posted 4 February 2012 Details below on the different categorys Category 1 The top level category will require clubs to have an approximate budget of £2.325m. Have a full time staff of at least 18. Provide at least 5 hours contact time with players each week. The current 90 minute travel rule will not apply. Provide on site education facilities Category 2 Clubs that cannot meet the required budget requirements and staff levels demanded by Category 1, but still have an indoor training facility will most likely fall into this category. They will spend less time coaching players each week. Will be allowed to take players from age 4 and sign players from the age of 9. Will require an estimated budget of £969k The current 90 minute travel rule will not apply. Category 3 Clubs in this category will not be permitted to coach youngsters until they are 11 Will require an estimated budget of £315k Category 4 Clubs in this category will be used to pick up youngsters that are late developers or have been released from other Academies or Centres of Excellence. Players will be 16 years of age or above. Will require an estimated budget of £100k Compensation Fees for each year of development Age 9 to 11 – £3000 for players registered at any club Age 12 to 16 – £12,500 for players registered at a Category 3 club Age 12 to 16 – £25,000 for players registered at a Category 2 club Age 12 to 16 – £40,000 for players registered at a Category 1 club Player Age Groups Foundation – Age 9 to 11 Youth – Age 12 to 16 Pro – Age 17 to 21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 4 February 2012 Share Posted 4 February 2012 Details below on the different categorys Category 1 The top level category will require clubs to have an approximate budget of £2.325m. Have a full time staff of at least 18. Provide at least 5 hours contact time with players each week. The current 90 minute travel rule will not apply. Provide on site education facilities Category 2 Clubs that cannot meet the required budget requirements and staff levels demanded by Category 1, but still have an indoor training facility will most likely fall into this category. They will spend less time coaching players each week. Will be allowed to take players from age 4 and sign players from the age of 9. Will require an estimated budget of £969k The current 90 minute travel rule will not apply. Category 3 Clubs in this category will not be permitted to coach youngsters until they are 11 Will require an estimated budget of £315k Category 4 Clubs in this category will be used to pick up youngsters that are late developers or have been released from other Academies or Centres of Excellence. Players will be 16 years of age or above. Will require an estimated budget of £100k Compensation Fees for each year of development Age 9 to 11 – £3000 for players registered at any club Age 12 to 16 – £12,500 for players registered at a Category 3 club Age 12 to 16 – £25,000 for players registered at a Category 2 club Age 12 to 16 – £40,000 for players registered at a Category 1 club Player Age Groups Foundation – Age 9 to 11 Youth – Age 12 to 16 Pro – Age 17 to 21 I've seen that before but I think there is a mistake, for Category 2 the 90 minute rule will apply, the website I saw with this on was so littered with mistakes that I took that to be another one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramadaone Posted 3 July 2012 Share Posted 3 July 2012 "Newcastle United are braced for the setback of their academy failing to achieve the top grade under the new four-tier Premier League system for youth development. The Premier League team were one of 23 clubs, 17 of whom were from last season’s top division and six from the Championship, who applied for the leading Category One status. 12 clubs of those clubs have now been inspected by the League’s independent standards organisation, with Newcastle one of three teams who have been given an indication that they have failed to reach the top ranking. Wolves and Crystal Palace are believed to be the two others who have learned they are likely to be awarded Category Two status" No official news for us yet but Cat 2 looks certain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramadaone Posted 3 July 2012 Share Posted 3 July 2012 "There will be two leagues as of next season. The u21's replacing the reserves and u18s league will obviously remain. They will both be national porogrammes and you will play all other teams in your own category at both u21 and u18 level. That removes the current u18 FA Academy Premier league where there was 4 groups of 10 and you played the other 9 teams in your group home and away which was in your area and played 10 teams from outside you area. Now you just play by category. So City will probably not play the big big boys at u18 level anymore. So the 4-tier system is being decided and each club has been audited so we will soon see whether we fall in Category 1,2,3 or 4. There will be a limited number of over 21's allowed to play in the u21 league. The amount is still to be decided. But this is a positive so that you don't carry to many experienced players on biggish wages and hardly playing any first team football. Overage players are not allowed to play for the u18s anymore where in the past you were allowed three u19s to play for the u18s. The u18s and u21 matches will be played between Friday and Monday so that the clubs training programmes can be aligned from first team through to u21's and u18s. Supposedly at least two of your home u21 games need to be played at the clubs main ground in order to gaurantee the young players experience of playing in the main stadia. The feeling is that in the modern game, fitness levels are getting better and players are staying in the game longer and its made more difficult for 17,18 and 19 year olds to get regular games for the first team and having the u21 league will enable clubs to be more patient with young players." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry - LCFC Posted 3 July 2012 Share Posted 3 July 2012 Category 1 The top level category will require clubs to have an approximate budget of £2.325m. Have a full time staff of at least 18. Provide at least 5 hours contact time with players each week. The current 90 minute travel rule will not apply. Only that much?? One hour of training every weekday and suddenly you're a top academy (along with the other stuff) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.