Yes, that could be a runner and would certainly breathe life into pre-season. They could make it the last two Saturdays and the midweek in between.

Off the top of my head a few drawbacks - top clubs on overseas camps, they can field stronger teams before loaning out U21s and EFL clubs don't traditionally (or maybe can't) play friendlies within their own division. Ideally the draw would need to be fixed so you don't play a league opponent two weeks running. But not insurmountable.

Great idea guys . But don't a lot of the Premier League teams fly around the world with their squads pre-season ??
Lots of mini tournaments in Asia and US and the like ?

Corpaboy wrote:Great idea guys . But don't a lot of the Premier League teams fly around the world with their squads pre-season ??
Lots of mini tournaments in Asia and US and the like ?

They do. I suppose they'd have a decision to make if an idea like this one came to pass.

The very big clubs have enough players to cover all these bases - Chelsea have FORTY out on loan and more than 100 professionals altogether,

George Street-Bridge wrote:The very big clubs have enough players to cover all these bases - Chelsea have FORTY out on loan and more than 100 professionals altogether,

Which is exactly why B Team are a lousy idea, as their existence encourages the stockpiling of young players who, in times gone by, would have been looking for deals to play in the lower leagues. Why do that when you can be paid more to languish in the B Team of a Premiership side and turn out for the odd match in the Spotafan Trophy in front of a gullible public?

As for the idea that the Trophy gives the potential international stars of tomorrow much-needed game time, that theory has been comprehensively debunked here. The issue here is lack of mobility between the self-styled "elite clubs" and the rest of the pyramid. The legitimisation of B Teams intensifies rather than ameliorates that lack of mobility.

Kairdiff Exile wrote: Which is exactly why B Team are a lousy idea, as their existence encourages the stockpiling of young players who, in times gone by, would have been looking for deals to play in the lower leagues. Why do that when you can be paid more to languish in the B Team of a Premiership side and turn out for the odd match in the Spotafan Trophy in front of a gullible public?

As for the idea that the Trophy gives the potential international stars of tomorrow much-needed game time, that theory has been comprehensively debunked here. The issue here is lack of mobility between the self-styled "elite clubs" and the rest of the pyramid. The legitimisation of B Teams intensifies rather than ameliorates that lack of mobility.

I agree and would add.

The Premier League, the loan system, agents, replica shirts. All features of the modern game which seek to remove cash from football fans and place it in the pockets of the already wealthy.

Ahh you're just both pissed cause you missed a good game last night

I was surprised how easy it was for the County team last night. A six nil win would not have been an injustice. Semenyo could easily have scored four times instead of just once in the space of four minutes after he came on. The result was a seven goal turnaround from their four nil win at Swindon.Why? The answer is that it was not the same team that played Swindon. Only four of the players who started last night started against Swindon and none of their goalscorers from that game played. Yet Chelsea were allowed up to five over 21 players but played only one who wasn't a teenager. One boy was only 16.So what good is having these under 21 teams in the Trophy doing? These clubs have so many players they could easily afford to include several older players to improve the experience that these kids get from playing grownups. It's annoying that clubs like Chelsea do not make better use of the opportunity that the Trophy gives them. As always it will be the EFL clubs who will get it in the neck when the experiment fails.

Amberexile wrote:

Justanordinaryfan wrote:It’s very difficult to get his confidence up by scoring goals, when most of the time he’s deeper, and spends more time defending, than our full backs?

Very good point. He didn't score on Saturday but that tackle in our box probably saved us 2 points.

I was there Saturday too, and I also admired the whole teams defending ethics, however my point was, that I can’t see him boosting his confidence with goal scoring, in the positions he finds himself in, due to the way we play .... admittedly more away from home, than home, but even at RP he is often found as deep as the full backs, and that is in open play, not just second phases from set pieces !! ... and whilst his tackle was very important to us as a team, he will have quickly forgotten about that come Monday when again he hasn’t scored.

Reading around Chelsea's playing staff, I got the impression they are ruthless with players coming through the youth programme who they decide don't fit the bill, don't go out on loan but still have time on their contracts.

It looks like you only get a squad number if there's a role they can see you playing which will benefit the club, and using permitted over-age players in this cup isn't part of the programme.

George Street-Bridge wrote:Reading around Chelsea's playing staff, I got the impression they are ruthless with players coming through the youth programme who they decide don't fit the bill, don't go out on loan but still have time on their contracts.

It looks like you only get a squad number if there's a role they can see you playing which will benefit the club, and using permitted over-age players in this cup isn't part of the programme.

I suppose that from Chelsea's point of view it allows them to guage just how well their undoubtedly more skillful players hold up against the more physical element of the adult game.

In terms the very top players have to be as tough as they are talented. Football for all the romance we see as spectators is ruthless in the way it discards young players.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

George Street-Bridge wrote:Reading around Chelsea's playing staff, I got the impression they are ruthless with players coming through the youth programme who they decide don't fit the bill, don't go out on loan but still have time on their contracts.

It looks like you only get a squad number if there's a role they can see you playing which will benefit the club, and using permitted over-age players in this cup isn't part of the programme.

I suppose that from Chelsea's point of view it allows them to guage just how well their undoubtedly more skillful players hold up against the more physical element of the adult game.

In terms the very top players have to be as tough as they are talented. Football for all the romance we see as spectators is ruthless in the way it discards young players.

Indeed.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

George Street-Bridge wrote:Reading around Chelsea's playing staff, I got the impression they are ruthless with players coming through the youth programme who they decide don't fit the bill, don't go out on loan but still have time on their contracts.

It looks like you only get a squad number if there's a role they can see you playing which will benefit the club, and using permitted over-age players in this cup isn't part of the programme.

I suppose that from Chelsea's point of view it allows them to guage just how well their undoubtedly more skillful players hold up against the more physical element of the adult game.

In terms the very top players have to be as tough as they are talented. Football for all the romance we see as spectators is ruthless in the way it discards young players.

Well yes but I must say we played some very good football on Tuesday and didn’t just out-physical them. The average age of our team moreover, was 22 so not such a great disparity in age either. Good performance from us alround I’d say.

Tbh after the previous two Swansea games I was pretty disappointed with the Chelsea equivalents.

On another note I thought Pring was excellent and I predict he’ll be in a starting x1 sooner rather than later.