What's going on at Chelsea?

[1Manchester]

A B-team league would only benefit the top clubs who have all these loanees on their books. That I'm staunchly against.

Wrong, it would also benefit the National Team (by giving all those youths who have won trophies for the England Youth Teams of late a safe space to make the transition to senior level), fans of those partiucular clubs (especially those who have been priced out of seeing senior team games) and of course the youth team players themselves.

Likewise if done correctly, the impact on the other teams on the Football League should not be a negative one either. For example by setting up a "League 3" division within the Football League which would incorporate both various U23 sides as "B Teams" and the best teams from the National League. Which would not only prevent clubs from being "Forced Out" of the Football League, but also increase the popularity of the Football League from fans of clubs who have B Teams in the Football League.

Our lads benefited massively from the Checkatrade trophy, but unfortunately i think B team's in that competition was the compromise between putting them in League's 1/2 and not atall.

Plus it gave the impression (from fans of League One/Two clubs) that the "big clubs" where trying to hijack a competition which they felt was their own. Which is understandable since this the one cup competition any League One/Two club can realistically win (Especially since the League Cup is taken more seriously by the "Big Clubs" than it was in the past).

So overall; while this was a good idea when it comes to the youth development perpective, the fact it is a terrible compromise that fails to fully please either side of this debate.

So he canceled a billion dollar stadium plan so what? Spurs gonna be labored with debt repayments and Y'all don't have half of the sponsorship deals or the global status that we have much less trophies.

To be fair, your club does actually need a bigger/upgraded stadium to compete financially with the other big clubs, because while you are doing better than the likes of Arsenal when it comes to commerical revenue and more or less the same (as long as you are in the CL/EL of course) when it comes to broadcasting revenue. It is matchday revenue more than anything else that causing the club to lag behind the likes of United, City, Bayern and the El Classico clubs if one looks at the figures themsevles.

I mean with the amount of success the club has had and the London location of CFC, with a bigger/upgrade stadium it is not unreasonable to suggest that the club could be making £50-60 million more per year in revenue after such an upgrade. Enough to firmly establish yourselves in the Top 5 clubs in Europe (By Revenue).

 

[Dancfc]

Plus it gave the impression (from fans of League One/Two clubs) that the "big clubs" where trying to hijack a competition which they felt was their own. Which is understandable since this the one cup competition any League One/Two club can realistically win (Especially since the League Cup is taken more seriously by the "Big Clubs" than it was in the past).

So overall; while this was a good idea when it comes to the youth development perpective, the fact it is a terrible compromise that fails to fully please either side of this debate.
.

Maybe im pissing on tradition a bit here but surely improving the state of play with English football as a whole comes before keeping 4,000 Fleetwood fans happy?

Furthermore, if fully developed pro's get beat by a team of teenagers then they don't deserve to win the trophy anyway, our academy sides of late are the most successful since the Busby babes but Lincoln outplayed us in the semi despite needing pens to win.

 

[1Manchester]

Maybe im pissing on tradition a bit here but surely improving the state of play with English football as a whole comes before keeping 4,000 Fleetwood fans happy?

Agreed; my point was that if B/Youth Teams are going to be competing in the Football League Trophy, I would rather they do so as members of League 1/2 (or 3 depending on their introduction) rather than simply slotted into the competition.

Furthermore, if fully developed pro's get beat by a team of teenagers then they don't deserve to win the trophy anyway, our academy sides of late are the most successful since the Busby babes but Lincoln outplayed us in the semi despite needing pens to win.

Again I am in full agreement with you on this, likewise I feel that Chelsea U23's cup run in the FL Trophy (Hopefully their Man City counterparts can go one step further and actually win it next season) was not only good for the the youth players in that team, but it also showed why the introduction of B Teams was justified and in turn why introducing B Teams in the Football League is a good idea.

Lol. Just ignore the £1bn RA has put into the club to get that.

Not sure you're up to date on the term "sustainability"

The fact is though is that it costs that much (if not more these days) to turn a Mid-Table/Top 6 club (like Chelsea was at the time of the Abramovich takeover) into one of the leading football clubs in both the EPL and in Europe as a whole. Now we can debate the endless reasons why it has cost them this much to reach that stage, but the fact is that for better or worse, the way professional football is organised in this day and age makes it harder for aspring clubs to reach those sorts of levels.

I mean one only has to look at Tottenham and their recent revival under Poch, the fact have managed to they have managed to do so despite their limited transfer/wage budget shows how much of a remarkable achievement it is. However the fact their squad is vunerable to being stripped of its best players also shows that you can only go so far with limited finances.

Sky reckon Roman is going nowhere.

http://www.skysports.com/football/n...abramovich-has-no-interest-in-selling-chelsea

On another note, we've released a few players:
Mitchell Beeney
Isaac Christie-Davies
Cole DaSilva
Matej Delac
Eduardo
Jordan Houghton
Renedi Masampu
Wallace
Tushaun-Tyreese Walters

Not surprised he is leaving considering how he failed to get any gametime whatsoever (Be it the Premier League, Champions League, FA Cup and League Cup) in the 2 seasons he was at Chelsea as 3rd choice keeper.

Personally if I was in Granovskaia's position I would give Caballero another 1-year contract, make him 3rd choice and sign someone like Oblak to provide competition with Courtois (which hopefully make him less likely to mess up like he did against Barcelona last season).

We should bid for Kante.

If City could get all those players; then buying Kante, Willian, Hazard, Azpilicueta and Rüdiger would go a long way to providing the addtional depth we need in our defence, midfield and attack and result in something like this:

Ederson/Bravo
Walker/Azpilicueta - Rüdiger/Stones/Kompany - Laporte/Otamendi - Mendy/Delph
KDB/Gündoğan - Kante/Fernandinho - D.Silva/B.Silva
Sterling/Willian - Agüero/Jesus - Hazard/Sane​

 

[Harry190]

Agreed; my point was that if B/Youth Teams are going to be competing in the Football League Trophy, I would rather they do so as members of League 1/2 (or 3 depending on their introduction) rather than simply slotted into the competition.



Again I am in full agreement with you on this, likewise I feel that Chelsea U23's cup run in the FL Trophy (Hopefully their Man City counterparts can go one step further and actually win it next season) was not only good for the the youth players in that team, but it also showed why the introduction of B Teams was justified and in turn why introducing B Teams in the Football League is a good idea.



The fact is though is that it costs that much (if not more these days) to turn a Mid-Table/Top 6 club (like Chelsea was at the time of the Abramovich takeover) into one of the leading football clubs in both the EPL and in Europe as a whole. Now we can debate the endless reasons why it has cost them this much to reach that stage, but the fact is that for better or worse, the way professional football is organised in this day and age makes it harder for aspring clubs to reach those sorts of levels.

I mean one only has to look at Tottenham and their recent revival under Poch, the fact have managed to they have managed to do so despite their limited transfer/wage budget shows how much of a remarkable achievement it is. However the fact their squad is vunerable to being stripped of its best players also shows that you can only go so far with limited finances.



Not surprised he is leaving considering how he failed to get any gametime whatsoever (Be it the Premier League, Champions League, FA Cup and League Cup) in the 2 seasons he was at Chelsea as 3rd choice keeper.

Personally if I was in Granovskaia's position I would give Caballero another 1-year contract, make him 3rd choice and sign someone like Oblak to provide competition with Courtois (which hopefully make him less likely to mess up like he did against Barcelona last season).



If City could get all those players; then buying Kante, Willian, Hazard, Azpilicueta and Rüdiger would go a long way to providing the addtional depth we need in our defence, midfield and attack and result in something like this:

Ederson/Bravo
Walker/Azpilicueta - Rüdiger/Stones/Kompany - Laporte/Otamendi - Mendy/Delph
KDB/Gündoğan - Kante/Fernandinho - D.Silva/B.Silva
Sterling/Willian - Agüero/Jesus - Hazard/Sane​

?

I'm a Man Utd fan.

 

[adexkola]

First off, cheers for the very detailed post.

As I have said once or twice on this fourm, you cannot simply put untested youth (1) into the first team and expect them to win you games/trophies from the get go. Simply because the Premier League/Champions League is a whole different ball game compared to the sorts of games they have previously played in (2).

I agree. There is a learning curve that young players have to undergo before they are blooded in, that may interfere with immediate success. This can be mitigated to some point by easing them in, but that trade-off between immediate success and long term potential will always exist.

So when you combine the fact many football managers are always under pressure to win trophies/titles, simply throwing them into the lions den is the last thing you should be doing to these players (3).

I disagree. Throwing players into the lions lions den need not be destructive to their long term careers. Especially if done carefully, as part of a long term training program designed to get them up to speed.

Your point about managers being under pressure stands though. I'm getting to that.

Thus it make sense to ease them into the senior game (at the highest level) from the U23s by giving them enough game between those two levels until they are ready for the "big leagues".

And this is what I disagree with.

If you can't afford to play young players and suffer the short term blip in results, fine. Then sell them to teams that will gladly get them playing time, probably lower in the football pyramid. That will be more invaluable to them, being part of a team that actually needs them, than being placed in a no-stakes intermediate league between the U23 and the first team.

Hence why I am such a strong advocate of B Teams, simply because in contrast to the usual system of easing youth players into senior players (4) it is a much better way of giving them a safe space for them to develop in the right place, the right level of football and at the right time.

Youngsters don't need safe spaces. They need playing time. Competitive playing time, where the stakes are more than their personal prospects of making it to the first team.

Finally can I also add that I feel that no youth player (5) should have a god given right to play in the senior team (6) and thus would need to prove themsevles elsewhere before I would consider them to be fit to wear the shirts of their parent club.

Young players who currently find their way to the first team (I'll use McTominay for example) earned their way to the first team through showing something in training or on a one off match. There are multiple ways of proving yourself. You don't have to prove yourself in a low energy environment first.

(4) Which usually involve sending them to short-term loans to random clubs endless numbers of times, which makes it virtually impossible for them to establish themselves at any sort of playing enviroment nor provide them with the stablity they need at this level. Likewise it also makes it harder for the parent club to support them at this critical stage in their playing career.

(5) Again no matter how good they are or even how good they could potentially be.

That's the major flaw of the loan season. If there is no lane to the first team squad, what benefit is obtained by jumping from loan club to loan club? Find a club where you can reasonably expect to challenge for a squad position at least.

(6) Especially when I feel that a said senior team (for a major football club on the level of United and City) should have at least 2 (ideally 3) World Class players in each position.

In each position?

Fine. Pay for it then at top dollar from clubs that took the time to get youth potential to the maturity needed for your club to take them on. Don't expect English football to subsidize the (short-term) cost of bringing youth potential up to speed.

 

[cjj]

I mean one only has to look at Tottenham and their recent revival under Poch, the fact have managed to they have managed to do so despite their limited transfer/wage budget shows how much of a remarkable achievement it is.

Maybe, but Spurs have been there before Pochettino. Jol and Redknapp had us there or thereabouts.

However the fact their squad is vunerable to being stripped of its best players also shows that you can only go so far with limited finances.

I'm not even sure what this is on about.

 

[Sandikan]

Wrong, it would also benefit the National Team (by giving all those youths who have won trophies for the England Youth Teams of late a safe space to make the transition to senior level), fans of those partiucular clubs (especially those who have been priced out of seeing senior team games) and of course the youth team players themselves.

Likewise if done correctly, the impact on the other teams on the Football League should not be a negative one either. For example by setting up a "League 3" division within the Football League which would incorporate both various U23 sides as "B Teams" and the best teams from the National League. Which would not only prevent clubs from being "Forced Out" of the Football League, but also increase the popularity of the Football League from fans of clubs who have B Teams in the Football League.



Plus it gave the impression (from fans of League One/Two clubs) that the "big clubs" where trying to hijack a competition which they felt was their own. Which is understandable since this the one cup competition any League One/Two club can realistically win (Especially since the League Cup is taken more seriously by the "Big Clubs" than it was in the past).

So overall; while this was a good idea when it comes to the youth development perpective, the fact it is a terrible compromise that fails to fully please either side of this debate.



To be fair, your club does actually need a bigger/upgraded stadium to compete financially with the other big clubs, because while you are doing better than the likes of Arsenal when it comes to commerical revenue and more or less the same (as long as you are in the CL/EL of course) when it comes to broadcasting revenue. It is matchday revenue more than anything else that causing the club to lag behind the likes of United, City, Bayern and the El Classico clubs if one looks at the figures themsevles.

I mean with the amount of success the club has had and the London location of CFC, with a bigger/upgrade stadium it is not unreasonable to suggest that the club could be making £50-60 million more per year in revenue after such an upgrade. Enough to firmly establish yourselves in the Top 5 clubs in Europe (By Revenue).

Lower league fans absolutely detest the idea of B teams. It goes against everything the league has ever stood for.
And if you can tell me how "developed" teams of fallow kids used to playing in a ball playing manner are going to become playing against battled hardened long ball merchants, i'm all ears.