Youth football

[Eastside Urchin]

Just been thinking about youth football,especially at our level and I think more could be done to get kids playing at a decent level

Personally,I think that all teams from the premiership down to minimum ryman level should be made to have a youth section in the club,starting from a minimum of under 12's & working up to Under 18's

All clubs should play in their relative league structures,say ryman level,you could split prem/1north & south into 4 regional leagues. And if the first team moves up a league then so does the junior teams of those clubs

[UD161]

Interesting topic Rob, but what makes you think that would improve the standard and what would your aims be from such a set up??

 

For instance, West Ham (this may pain you to admit, as it does me!!!) have good youth teams, always have done, especially in the last say 15 years, and there U16s and U18s now are good sides. Say West Ham go down this year (their 1st team), their youth teams would suffer as well and so they would then next year either lose their best players to bigger/higher placed clubs, or they would stay and be playing against inferior oppositon thus stunting their development.

 

Now I know you mean this for lower league/non-league sides, but the theory and situation could be the same, I was just using the above as an example which could happen at any level.

 

Is one of the major problems not (and this may be more for the higher levels again) that technique and perceptive skills are ignored until to later stage in favour of winning leagues. By this I mean playing on big pitches and eleven a side games from 10 years old and trying to win every game where at that age people who are physically stronger will often come out on top, and thus technique and other important aspects are ignored??

Edited March 2, 2011 by UD161

[Eastside Urchin]

We shouldn't be playing on big pitches until kids are say 14

I was at maldon last night and they had a good youth set up

I would like to see clubs bringing more youth players through,some clubs do it,others don't.Romford had a good youth section,think it's still the case but not sure.

We have an under 15 team,under 16 team and under 18 team,but I would like to see us bringing players through from a very early age and those players having Hornchurch in their blood,maybe having 2 teams at different age levels to start with and the withering it down to one team from say under 15's

Just think that teams associated with clubs would be more professional with their approach than the likes of many local clubs who play Sunday morning football.Players would probably be monitored better than your average Sunday league teams

[Eastside Urchin]

At any young age,player development is more important than results ultimately,unfortunately how do you drum that into youngsters,both must be worked on equally as without one you risk the other

With regards to leagues and youth teams moving up or down them,it would be hard to penalise a junior team that has won their league by relegating them because the first team has been relegated,perhaps we should have regional leagues for youths from non league down

Many of the clubs that our under 15's,16's & 18's play are basically Sunday morning sides and after watching our juniors win 17-0 a couple of months ago,I wonder how much they actually get out of that???

[UD161]

Mate, agree with most of that. U15s (so 14 and up) should be youngest they start using full size pitches for a start. I believe in Holland and Germany this is the case in a lot of youth leagues.

 

With regards to the other comments, I think you are spot on, but why would the promotion and relegation of clubs depending on their 1st team help this?? I think it could hinder it. Like you say, Romford have a good youth team but if their youth team (or anyone elses in same position) was relegated/penalised because of the performance of their first team then these smaller clubs would find it even harder to hang on to good quality players and we get back to the big get bigger and the small get smaller??

 

I think the ideas of quotas of home grown players (registered with said Club for certain time) would help enforce the idea that you mention about encouraging clubs to produce their own players??

[Eastside Urchin]

Yeah mate,I addressed the relegation/promotion issues before you posted the last post

Perhaps we should have county leagues with maybe the natural progression going from Sunday league into Sunday non league (county) then you could have 4 regional premier leagues,then having football league clubs adopt the same structure regionally with the cream playing in premier academies which I believe already happens

[Hasbeen]

Yeah mate,I addressed the relegation/promotion issues before you posted the last post

Perhaps we should have county leagues with maybe the natural progression going from Sunday league into Sunday non league (county) then you could have 4 regional premier leagues,then having football league clubs adopt the same structure regionally with the cream playing in premier academies which I believe already happens

 

 

TBH I think the set up is not too bad at the mo. My son currently plays for Brentwood Town u16s in the Eastern Junior Alliance. All the teams need to be associated to a senior club and a certain level of 'professionalism' must be adhered to, Changing rooms avialable, pitches roped off for matches, refreshments after the game etc. The standard is quite good and certainley at my son's team it is as much about development as winning. Most of the local senior clubs, including Hornchurch, have teams in this league and hopefully the majority of these players will play a decent level of football when they are older

Edited March 2, 2011 by Hasbeen

[Eastside Urchin]

I agree but I know it's not neccessariky like that all across the country.Personally I feel that every senior club from step 5 upwards should have junior teams wherever possible associated to their club.We have so many junior teams round here but from those junior teams the cream that doesn't make it to football league clubs doesn't necessarily end up at ryman clubs.

 

If I had my own way clubs could start from under 7's and league and premier league clubs couldn't touch those players until they are at least 12,with compensation and clauses put in should each player make it in football,that way local clubs would receive some of the riches that they tend not to receive,like smalling,when he left Maidstone.But I realise this may be too hard to change now

[Hasbeen]

I agree but I know it's not neccessariky like that all across the country.Personally I feel that every senior club from step 5 upwards should have junior teams wherever possible associated to their club.We have so many junior teams round here but from those junior teams the cream that doesn't make it to football league clubs doesn't necessarily end up at ryman clubs.

 

If I had my own way clubs could start from under 7's and league and premier league clubs couldn't touch those players until they are at least 12,with compensation and clauses put in should each player make it in football,that way local clubs would receive some of the riches that they tend not to receive,like smalling,when he left Maidstone.But I realise this may be too hard to change now

 

 

One of the main issues stopping clubs is costs. Normally the club will find it difficult to offer financial support to their junior teams quite obviously. This leaves it up to the 'team' to fund themsleves which although every junior club has to do becomes more problematic when associated with a senior club for the reasons I mentioned earlier, pitch availability, having to have changing rooms available, refreshments, further travel etc...

[Eastside Urchin]

They are all problems but maybe lottery funding and funding from the Fa should be looked at.Obviously you couldn't have every team playing at the bridge as the pitch wouldn't hold up,you could have the under 18's & 16's playing on it on alternate Sundays.

The plateau up the top could be looked after and used by all age groups up to under 14 as you could use that space for 7 a side.Therefore all sides could use the clubs facilities.On another note,with relevant funding,could the plateau pitch at the top be turned into Astros turf with fencing around it,it already has floodlights so I guess there's a possibility

If the government and FA are serious about getting more kids involved in sport then why don't they get clubs involved in these sort of schemes

[UD161]

Am not aware of how the funding works from the FA for grassroots stuff, but this is where the problem lies, but the greed of those at the top of the game (players, owners, FA, administrators, sponsors etc) means these radical changes, which I reckon to some extent most football fans would agree on, won't ever happen. All those people I listed are out for themselves so why should they care (I am playing devils advocate here)??

 

At Dagenham there is an Academy structure, but I am not aware of the exact details mate. I now they have sides from U11s but what games they play etc I don't know. There is then the U18/Academy/Youth Team at the top of this. They play in the South East Academy League and that is made up of other League Two and League One Clubs in the South East, and also Luton (from one step lower) and QPR (from one step higher). The Dagenham side are currently lower mid table I think. I know that they are on contracts/agreements of some sort and the Club arrange for them to do some sort of qualifications at College on the days/times they don't train. The Academy has a separate sponsor which covers some of this, but whether there is any funding from the FA or that, I don't know??

 

Just to look at another perspective is to compare with other sports. Cricket has a different outlook on it, and the counties and the ECB DO HELP grassroots clubs in a variety of ways. We (Upminster) have had funding for coaching and youth faciliries from the ECB and other bodies, and also take part in a scheme called Chance 2 Shine which is aimed at taking cricket into State Schools. It has increased participation massively and really helped our Club. Whether it benefits Essex or England in the future is hard to judge. HOWEVER, the main difference is that the whole idea is to get people playing and eventually help the National side, and that is the big difference with football (bad timing I guess after that shambles earlier!!!). Yes, the Counties have got greedy with 20/20 to an extent in the last few years, but generally this is ploughed back in to development. Essex for instance have done well from 20/20 but they as a County have also always done a lot to promote young English talent (Cook and Bopara for instance). It's another difference with football??

[Eastside Urchin]

I think changes will happen,but it could be a long time,our league system used to be the envy of the footballing world but thanks to those greedy merchants you have mentioned,anyone below the football league are simply not looked after well enough.Saying that,some clubs probably could do more but the FA are the authority that overlooks the clubs and they at times actually hinder clubs progress