|
Proud Dad
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 234,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+xAs mentioned before the best kids will want to be in these aleague academies as it gives them the best pathway towards pro football in Oz. There will always be outliners in the NPL system, which is why more opportunities are needed in the game. If you are in WSW academy and NPL players got invited to trial in you position and you didn’t, you would have to question why would you stay wouldn’t you? May as well be playing seniors somewhere and getting paid rather than training 5 times a week for free and getting overlooked? https://www.ftbl.com.au/news/robinson-welcomes-npl-and-a-league-trialists-as-rebuild-begins-554961
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team?
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xThe logic of playing up a year is simply an assumption that an A League (or State) Academy will have the majority of the best players available in a given age group - therefore to find better competition/challenges you play them up a year.
Some coaches argue this is effective in aiding development, others that it doesn’t. But it’s nothing new in football (or other sports) and has been done for many decades around the world.
My opinion is a blanket policy of playing an entire team/squad up is wrong eg U15 teams playing in U16 comps because this fails to take in to account individual player needs - each player has a differing physical, social and psychological development level.
The better approach imo is to play teams where they should be and elevate players an age level based on development needs of that player, not assume an entire team will benefit. very good point in general of the "mix" in a team. Its not new playing "up" thats for sure, my days whenever it was obvious a player stood out they would be played up the next age level. No issues with that just as you explain Waz, it doesn't suit "all"..... So the poor kid who is just that lkittle slower/smaller/lacking that bit more skill is exposed playing up and therefore judged in time he can't make it - unfair to him eh and the many others for IF they stayed in their age group how many more prosper. In the end I see the appeal playing up a whole squad but yer its not for all. Understand what you're saying and would certainly apply in a lot of clubs. But this is the elite of Qld juniors with no restrictions applied, such as Mum and Dad not being able to pay fees. The comp is quite uneven and some score lines blew out horribly with the Roar keepers in some games doing very little. They should play up, but that's simply my view, always keen to hear other views. Playing up makes sense if you are trying to develop players and with the ability to pick the cream of the crop you would expect that to be the case, but AL academies are not really interested in developing players and so for some of them it is more important for their junior teams to be winning junior championships than being prepared for elite football. In Vic I have heard of several players who were already playing up for NPL teams being recruited by MV to play down in their actual age group because they wanted trophies. I have also heard of a few players being released by MV because of their size and told they could make it back once they "develop". Increasingly in Vic, there are more players rejecting offers of playing with MV & MC and staying with their NPL clubs as they have seen AL academies are a dead end. The number of players going from AL Academies to paid gigs in NPL in significant, so they’re defiantly not a dead end. And with an increasing number of kids going from AL Academies to overseas clubs picking up in this last 12 months that reinforces the opportunities. So AL academies are where kids go to if they want to play NPL? Here I am thinking playing for NPL juniors normally gets you a gig in the NPL seniors.... Also probably more kids going from NPL teams OS than AL academies at the moment. You just have to look at the number of ex-AL academy players playing in NPL and getting paid for it.
So it’s not a “dead end” which was the original comment.
You might also be surprised how few NPL club juniors go on to play NPL as well.
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Some people (not me mind you) think getting 1 point and coming last in your group at the World Cup is success as well so it’s all relative....
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe logic of playing up a year is simply an assumption that an A League (or State) Academy will have the majority of the best players available in a given age group - therefore to find better competition/challenges you play them up a year.
Some coaches argue this is effective in aiding development, others that it doesn’t. But it’s nothing new in football (or other sports) and has been done for many decades around the world.
My opinion is a blanket policy of playing an entire team/squad up is wrong eg U15 teams playing in U16 comps because this fails to take in to account individual player needs - each player has a differing physical, social and psychological development level.
The better approach imo is to play teams where they should be and elevate players an age level based on development needs of that player, not assume an entire team will benefit. very good point in general of the "mix" in a team. Its not new playing "up" thats for sure, my days whenever it was obvious a player stood out they would be played up the next age level. No issues with that just as you explain Waz, it doesn't suit "all"..... So the poor kid who is just that lkittle slower/smaller/lacking that bit more skill is exposed playing up and therefore judged in time he can't make it - unfair to him eh and the many others for IF they stayed in their age group how many more prosper. In the end I see the appeal playing up a whole squad but yer its not for all. Understand what you're saying and would certainly apply in a lot of clubs. But this is the elite of Qld juniors with no restrictions applied, such as Mum and Dad not being able to pay fees. The comp is quite uneven and some score lines blew out horribly with the Roar keepers in some games doing very little. They should play up, but that's simply my view, always keen to hear other views. Playing up makes sense if you are trying to develop players and with the ability to pick the cream of the crop you would expect that to be the case, but AL academies are not really interested in developing players and so for some of them it is more important for their junior teams to be winning junior championships than being prepared for elite football. In Vic I have heard of several players who were already playing up for NPL teams being recruited by MV to play down in their actual age group because they wanted trophies. I have also heard of a few players being released by MV because of their size and told they could make it back once they "develop". Increasingly in Vic, there are more players rejecting offers of playing with MV & MC and staying with their NPL clubs as they have seen AL academies are a dead end. The number of players going from AL Academies to paid gigs in NPL in significant, so they’re defiantly not a dead end. And with an increasing number of kids going from AL Academies to overseas clubs picking up in this last 12 months that reinforces the opportunities. So AL academies are where kids go to if they want to play NPL? Here I am thinking playing for NPL juniors normally gets you a gig in the NPL seniors.... Also probably more kids going from NPL teams OS than AL academies at the moment. You just have to look at the number of ex-AL academy players playing in NPL and getting paid for it.
So it’s not a “dead end” which was the original comment.
You might also be surprised how few NPL club juniors go on to play NPL as well. If that is how we measure the success of the AL academies then suggest they are a failure
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Some people (not me mind you) think getting 1 point and coming last in your group at the World Cup is success as well so it’s all relative.... The World Cup is not a development competition. Literally the polar opposite of one in fact.
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Some people (not me mind you) think getting 1 point and coming last in your group at the World Cup is success as well so it’s all relative.... The World Cup is not a development competition. Literally the polar opposite of one in fact. Waz I know you have coached and are still involved so tell me, if you could hand pick a team of U18s from Qld could you win the U20’s comp and still “develop” the kids?
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe logic of playing up a year is simply an assumption that an A League (or State) Academy will have the majority of the best players available in a given age group - therefore to find better competition/challenges you play them up a year.
Some coaches argue this is effective in aiding development, others that it doesn’t. But it’s nothing new in football (or other sports) and has been done for many decades around the world.
My opinion is a blanket policy of playing an entire team/squad up is wrong eg U15 teams playing in U16 comps because this fails to take in to account individual player needs - each player has a differing physical, social and psychological development level.
The better approach imo is to play teams where they should be and elevate players an age level based on development needs of that player, not assume an entire team will benefit. very good point in general of the "mix" in a team. Its not new playing "up" thats for sure, my days whenever it was obvious a player stood out they would be played up the next age level. No issues with that just as you explain Waz, it doesn't suit "all"..... So the poor kid who is just that lkittle slower/smaller/lacking that bit more skill is exposed playing up and therefore judged in time he can't make it - unfair to him eh and the many others for IF they stayed in their age group how many more prosper. In the end I see the appeal playing up a whole squad but yer its not for all. Understand what you're saying and would certainly apply in a lot of clubs. But this is the elite of Qld juniors with no restrictions applied, such as Mum and Dad not being able to pay fees. The comp is quite uneven and some score lines blew out horribly with the Roar keepers in some games doing very little. They should play up, but that's simply my view, always keen to hear other views. Playing up makes sense if you are trying to develop players and with the ability to pick the cream of the crop you would expect that to be the case, but AL academies are not really interested in developing players and so for some of them it is more important for their junior teams to be winning junior championships than being prepared for elite football. In Vic I have heard of several players who were already playing up for NPL teams being recruited by MV to play down in their actual age group because they wanted trophies. I have also heard of a few players being released by MV because of their size and told they could make it back once they "develop". Increasingly in Vic, there are more players rejecting offers of playing with MV & MC and staying with their NPL clubs as they have seen AL academies are a dead end. The number of players going from AL Academies to paid gigs in NPL in significant, so they’re defiantly not a dead end. And with an increasing number of kids going from AL Academies to overseas clubs picking up in this last 12 months that reinforces the opportunities. So AL academies are where kids go to if they want to play NPL? Here I am thinking playing for NPL juniors normally gets you a gig in the NPL seniors.... Also probably more kids going from NPL teams OS than AL academies at the moment. You just have to look at the number of ex-AL academy players playing in NPL and getting paid for it.
So it’s not a “dead end” which was the original comment.
You might also be surprised how few NPL club juniors go on to play NPL as well. do you know why is that ?
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe logic of playing up a year is simply an assumption that an A League (or State) Academy will have the majority of the best players available in a given age group - therefore to find better competition/challenges you play them up a year.
Some coaches argue this is effective in aiding development, others that it doesn’t. But it’s nothing new in football (or other sports) and has been done for many decades around the world.
My opinion is a blanket policy of playing an entire team/squad up is wrong eg U15 teams playing in U16 comps because this fails to take in to account individual player needs - each player has a differing physical, social and psychological development level.
The better approach imo is to play teams where they should be and elevate players an age level based on development needs of that player, not assume an entire team will benefit. very good point in general of the "mix" in a team. Its not new playing "up" thats for sure, my days whenever it was obvious a player stood out they would be played up the next age level. No issues with that just as you explain Waz, it doesn't suit "all"..... So the poor kid who is just that lkittle slower/smaller/lacking that bit more skill is exposed playing up and therefore judged in time he can't make it - unfair to him eh and the many others for IF they stayed in their age group how many more prosper. In the end I see the appeal playing up a whole squad but yer its not for all. Understand what you're saying and would certainly apply in a lot of clubs. But this is the elite of Qld juniors with no restrictions applied, such as Mum and Dad not being able to pay fees. The comp is quite uneven and some score lines blew out horribly with the Roar keepers in some games doing very little. They should play up, but that's simply my view, always keen to hear other views. Playing up makes sense if you are trying to develop players and with the ability to pick the cream of the crop you would expect that to be the case, but AL academies are not really interested in developing players and so for some of them it is more important for their junior teams to be winning junior championships than being prepared for elite football. In Vic I have heard of several players who were already playing up for NPL teams being recruited by MV to play down in their actual age group because they wanted trophies. I have also heard of a few players being released by MV because of their size and told they could make it back once they "develop". Increasingly in Vic, there are more players rejecting offers of playing with MV & MC and staying with their NPL clubs as they have seen AL academies are a dead end. The number of players going from AL Academies to paid gigs in NPL in significant, so they’re defiantly not a dead end. And with an increasing number of kids going from AL Academies to overseas clubs picking up in this last 12 months that reinforces the opportunities. So AL academies are where kids go to if they want to play NPL? Here I am thinking playing for NPL juniors normally gets you a gig in the NPL seniors.... Also probably more kids going from NPL teams OS than AL academies at the moment. You just have to look at the number of ex-AL academy players playing in NPL and getting paid for it.
So it’s not a “dead end” which was the original comment.
You might also be surprised how few NPL club juniors go on to play NPL as well. do you know why is that ? It’s not strictly true as where do you think all the NPL players actually come from? bigger issue is that at 18 if you are any good you can get a senior spot in a state league squad and get paid min $2K per season to play versus having to pay $2,500 to play U20’s in NPL. Again if you are any good you will get picked up by a NPL team eventually so many follow this route
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players?
|
|
|
|
|
RoyalDave
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 359,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players? An academy is a business at the end of the day. Parents pay fees for their kids to enter the academy, but the academy sets the fees based on the possibility of their parent club getting use out of their developed players, or being able to on-sell a developed player ... however ... Latter point being without transfer fees being permitted between Australian clubs the incentive for academies is limited, as is the incentive for NPL clubs to do as much as they can. Frank Lowy set up a system that rips off "old football" to supply the franchises with free players. Its broken football in this country.
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players? 3 reasons, 1) FFA made them do it as it is part of their license conditions (much like W-L) 2) AFC makes them do it as it is a condition of participation in ACL 3) they make money from it, BR has a “pre-academy” program where they charge other clubs in QLD and NSW allegedly $50K per year for a license to run a BR training program. These clubs then charge local U9 kids $2K to play community league in a for a BR tracksuit and the “opportunity” to be scouted by BR.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players? That wasn’t intended to be condescending - but arguably in any football club there are only two teams where ladder position matters and that’s the senior men’s and women’s team at that club.
Everyone else is trying to develop players for those two teams with the junior section there to give individual players the necessary skills and the U18/U20 there to give them the necessary game skills.
You asked the question - if not ladder position how else do you measure the success of an Academy and I thought I’d answered it for you?
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players? 3 reasons, 1) FFA made them do it as it is part of their license conditions (much like W-L) 2) AFC makes them do it as it is a condition of participation in ACL 3) they make money from it, BR has a “pre-academy” program where they charge other clubs in QLD and NSW allegedly $50K per year for a license to run a BR training program. These clubs then charge local U9 kids $2K to play community league in a for a BR tracksuit and the “opportunity” to be scouted by BR. So its not so much "for the love of the game" and more "we have to do it so might as well make a profit"? Interesting, thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Gyfox
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players? With the average career for a professional footballer being 8 years and a squad size of say 24, theoretically on average 3 new players are required each year. Those players can be bought in or promoted from the academy. From this it is obvious that most of the players in the academy will move on elsewhere. Clubs normally run academies to find the players that will make it to the higher level. Some of the exceptional ones can make them "big" dollars by eventually selling them overseas, lesser ones they keep in house and other players they might be able to sell on to other clubs in Australia. It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs. Even if they are not making money out of selling on players top tier clubs have a responsibility to be developing players for the wider good of the game.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players? With the average career for a professional footballer being 8 years and a squad size of say 24, theoretically on average 3 new players are required each year. Those players can be bought in or promoted from the academy. From this it is obvious that most of the players in the academy will move on elsewhere. Clubs normally run academies to find the players that will make it to the higher level. Some of the exceptional ones can make them "big" dollars by eventually selling them overseas, lesser ones they keep in house and other players they might be able to sell on to other clubs in Australia. It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs. Even if they are not making money out of selling on players top tier clubs have a responsibility to be developing players for the wider good of the game. " It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs." I agree with this that's why I am asking about their purpose here in Australia. Depending on which side of the divide your opinion sits, I believe our playing pool for the Socceroos is fairly shallow at the moment and am wondering if one of the reasons is that these players who are developed "for the good of the game" don't have any professional destinations to play for? Not asking about what happens in the rest of the world. I know why Ajax has a youth academy or why Red Star Belgrade or what La Macia is for etc etc, but why do the A-League teams?
|
|
|
|
|
General Ashnak
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 18K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe logic of playing up a year is simply an assumption that an A League (or State) Academy will have the majority of the best players available in a given age group - therefore to find better competition/challenges you play them up a year.
Some coaches argue this is effective in aiding development, others that it doesn’t. But it’s nothing new in football (or other sports) and has been done for many decades around the world.
My opinion is a blanket policy of playing an entire team/squad up is wrong eg U15 teams playing in U16 comps because this fails to take in to account individual player needs - each player has a differing physical, social and psychological development level.
The better approach imo is to play teams where they should be and elevate players an age level based on development needs of that player, not assume an entire team will benefit. very good point in general of the "mix" in a team. Its not new playing "up" thats for sure, my days whenever it was obvious a player stood out they would be played up the next age level. No issues with that just as you explain Waz, it doesn't suit "all"..... So the poor kid who is just that lkittle slower/smaller/lacking that bit more skill is exposed playing up and therefore judged in time he can't make it - unfair to him eh and the many others for IF they stayed in their age group how many more prosper. In the end I see the appeal playing up a whole squad but yer its not for all. Understand what you're saying and would certainly apply in a lot of clubs. But this is the elite of Qld juniors with no restrictions applied, such as Mum and Dad not being able to pay fees. The comp is quite uneven and some score lines blew out horribly with the Roar keepers in some games doing very little. They should play up, but that's simply my view, always keen to hear other views. Playing up makes sense if you are trying to develop players and with the ability to pick the cream of the crop you would expect that to be the case, but AL academies are not really interested in developing players and so for some of them it is more important for their junior teams to be winning junior championships than being prepared for elite football. In Vic I have heard of several players who were already playing up for NPL teams being recruited by MV to play down in their actual age group because they wanted trophies. I have also heard of a few players being released by MV because of their size and told they could make it back once they "develop". Increasingly in Vic, there are more players rejecting offers of playing with MV & MC and staying with their NPL clubs as they have seen AL academies are a dead end. The number of players going from AL Academies to paid gigs in NPL in significant, so they’re defiantly not a dead end. And with an increasing number of kids going from AL Academies to overseas clubs picking up in this last 12 months that reinforces the opportunities. So AL academies are where kids go to if they want to play NPL? Here I am thinking playing for NPL juniors normally gets you a gig in the NPL seniors.... Also probably more kids going from NPL teams OS than AL academies at the moment. You just have to look at the number of ex-AL academy players playing in NPL and getting paid for it.
So it’s not a “dead end” which was the original comment.
You might also be surprised how few NPL club juniors go on to play NPL as well. Have you forgotten that almost every single one of those players actually came from an NPL club, spent 1 or 2 seasons in the academy and then returned to their NPL club? I don't think your suggestion is the full picture.
The thing about football - the important thing about football - is its not just about football.
- Sir Terry Pratchett in Unseen Academicals
For pro/rel in Australia across the entire pyramid, the removal of artificial impediments to the development of the game and its players.
On sabbatical Youth Coach and formerly part of The Cove FC
|
|
|
|
|
Barca4Life
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players? With the average career for a professional footballer being 8 years and a squad size of say 24, theoretically on average 3 new players are required each year. Those players can be bought in or promoted from the academy. From this it is obvious that most of the players in the academy will move on elsewhere. Clubs normally run academies to find the players that will make it to the higher level. Some of the exceptional ones can make them "big" dollars by eventually selling them overseas, lesser ones they keep in house and other players they might be able to sell on to other clubs in Australia. It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs. Even if they are not making money out of selling on players top tier clubs have a responsibility to be developing players for the wider good of the game. " It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs." I agree with this that's why I am asking about their purpose here in Australia. Depending on which side of the divide your opinion sits, I believe our playing pool for the Socceroos is fairly shallow at the moment and am wondering if one of the reasons is that these players who are developed "for the good of the game" don't have any professional destinations to play for? Not asking about what happens in the rest of the world. I know why Ajax has a youth academy or why Red Star Belgrade or what La Macia is for etc etc, but why do the A-League teams? Those clubs you mention make money from the transfer system that’s being presented to them, they know their players will go to bigger clubs and that’s how it works in the football chain. Ajax made around 200 million in transfers in the last 12 months, and often they invest that back into their academies, coaches, facilities, first team players whatever they feel it’s important to them. Clever strategy...
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe logic of playing up a year is simply an assumption that an A League (or State) Academy will have the majority of the best players available in a given age group - therefore to find better competition/challenges you play them up a year.
Some coaches argue this is effective in aiding development, others that it doesn’t. But it’s nothing new in football (or other sports) and has been done for many decades around the world.
My opinion is a blanket policy of playing an entire team/squad up is wrong eg U15 teams playing in U16 comps because this fails to take in to account individual player needs - each player has a differing physical, social and psychological development level.
The better approach imo is to play teams where they should be and elevate players an age level based on development needs of that player, not assume an entire team will benefit. very good point in general of the "mix" in a team. Its not new playing "up" thats for sure, my days whenever it was obvious a player stood out they would be played up the next age level. No issues with that just as you explain Waz, it doesn't suit "all"..... So the poor kid who is just that lkittle slower/smaller/lacking that bit more skill is exposed playing up and therefore judged in time he can't make it - unfair to him eh and the many others for IF they stayed in their age group how many more prosper. In the end I see the appeal playing up a whole squad but yer its not for all. Understand what you're saying and would certainly apply in a lot of clubs. But this is the elite of Qld juniors with no restrictions applied, such as Mum and Dad not being able to pay fees. The comp is quite uneven and some score lines blew out horribly with the Roar keepers in some games doing very little. They should play up, but that's simply my view, always keen to hear other views. Playing up makes sense if you are trying to develop players and with the ability to pick the cream of the crop you would expect that to be the case, but AL academies are not really interested in developing players and so for some of them it is more important for their junior teams to be winning junior championships than being prepared for elite football. In Vic I have heard of several players who were already playing up for NPL teams being recruited by MV to play down in their actual age group because they wanted trophies. I have also heard of a few players being released by MV because of their size and told they could make it back once they "develop". Increasingly in Vic, there are more players rejecting offers of playing with MV & MC and staying with their NPL clubs as they have seen AL academies are a dead end. The number of players going from AL Academies to paid gigs in NPL in significant, so they’re defiantly not a dead end. And with an increasing number of kids going from AL Academies to overseas clubs picking up in this last 12 months that reinforces the opportunities. So AL academies are where kids go to if they want to play NPL? Here I am thinking playing for NPL juniors normally gets you a gig in the NPL seniors.... Also probably more kids going from NPL teams OS than AL academies at the moment. You just have to look at the number of ex-AL academy players playing in NPL and getting paid for it.
So it’s not a “dead end” which was the original comment.
You might also be surprised how few NPL club juniors go on to play NPL as well. Have you forgotten that almost every single one of those players actually came from an NPL club, spent 1 or 2 seasons in the academy and then returned to their NPL club? I don't think your suggestion is the full picture. Ha Ha - most NPL Academy players don’t “come from NPL clubs” either .... they’re poached from the clubs around them at lower levels who nurture the kids from miniroos in to juniors and then see the good ones poached by NPL clubs.
(And then the junior clubs get to listen to the NPL clubs bitch about how they dont get transfer fees even though they don’t pay transfer fees themselves).
But putting my statement back in to the context in which I made it - I was replying to the statement that AL Academies are a “dead end” when they’re clearly not: some kids progress, some go overseas, some return to NPL ....
And yes, the full picture is kids moving from junior club Academies, to NPL academies, to AL academies, and in some cases to overseas academies .... that’s a perfect example of a normal football economy in play.
And before anyone says “transfer fees” FIFA (and many national governments) put restrictions on transfer fees for young players to prevent exploitation. So Australia is no different to the football economy in the rest of the world
|
|
|
|
|
General Ashnak
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 18K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe logic of playing up a year is simply an assumption that an A League (or State) Academy will have the majority of the best players available in a given age group - therefore to find better competition/challenges you play them up a year.
Some coaches argue this is effective in aiding development, others that it doesn’t. But it’s nothing new in football (or other sports) and has been done for many decades around the world.
My opinion is a blanket policy of playing an entire team/squad up is wrong eg U15 teams playing in U16 comps because this fails to take in to account individual player needs - each player has a differing physical, social and psychological development level.
The better approach imo is to play teams where they should be and elevate players an age level based on development needs of that player, not assume an entire team will benefit. very good point in general of the "mix" in a team. Its not new playing "up" thats for sure, my days whenever it was obvious a player stood out they would be played up the next age level. No issues with that just as you explain Waz, it doesn't suit "all"..... So the poor kid who is just that lkittle slower/smaller/lacking that bit more skill is exposed playing up and therefore judged in time he can't make it - unfair to him eh and the many others for IF they stayed in their age group how many more prosper. In the end I see the appeal playing up a whole squad but yer its not for all. Understand what you're saying and would certainly apply in a lot of clubs. But this is the elite of Qld juniors with no restrictions applied, such as Mum and Dad not being able to pay fees. The comp is quite uneven and some score lines blew out horribly with the Roar keepers in some games doing very little. They should play up, but that's simply my view, always keen to hear other views. Playing up makes sense if you are trying to develop players and with the ability to pick the cream of the crop you would expect that to be the case, but AL academies are not really interested in developing players and so for some of them it is more important for their junior teams to be winning junior championships than being prepared for elite football. In Vic I have heard of several players who were already playing up for NPL teams being recruited by MV to play down in their actual age group because they wanted trophies. I have also heard of a few players being released by MV because of their size and told they could make it back once they "develop". Increasingly in Vic, there are more players rejecting offers of playing with MV & MC and staying with their NPL clubs as they have seen AL academies are a dead end. The number of players going from AL Academies to paid gigs in NPL in significant, so they’re defiantly not a dead end. And with an increasing number of kids going from AL Academies to overseas clubs picking up in this last 12 months that reinforces the opportunities. So AL academies are where kids go to if they want to play NPL? Here I am thinking playing for NPL juniors normally gets you a gig in the NPL seniors.... Also probably more kids going from NPL teams OS than AL academies at the moment. You just have to look at the number of ex-AL academy players playing in NPL and getting paid for it.
So it’s not a “dead end” which was the original comment.
You might also be surprised how few NPL club juniors go on to play NPL as well. Have you forgotten that almost every single one of those players actually came from an NPL club, spent 1 or 2 seasons in the academy and then returned to their NPL club? I don't think your suggestion is the full picture. Ha Ha - most NPL Academy players don’t “come from NPL clubs” either .... they’re poached from the clubs around them at lower levels who nurture the kids from miniroos in to juniors and then see the good ones poached by NPL clubs.
(And then the junior clubs get to listen to the NPL clubs bitch about how they dont get transfer fees even though they don’t pay transfer fees themselves).
But putting my statement back in to the context in which I made it - I was replying to the statement that AL Academies are a “dead end” when they’re clearly not: some kids progress, some go overseas, some return to NPL ....
And yes, the full picture is kids moving from junior club Academies, to NPL academies, to AL academies, and in some cases to overseas academies .... that’s a perfect example of a normal football economy in play.
And before anyone says “transfer fees” FIFA (and many national governments) put restrictions on transfer fees for young players to prevent exploitation. So Australia is no different to the football economy in the rest of the world
QLD must be completely different to SA.
The thing about football - the important thing about football - is its not just about football.
- Sir Terry Pratchett in Unseen Academicals
For pro/rel in Australia across the entire pyramid, the removal of artificial impediments to the development of the game and its players.
On sabbatical Youth Coach and formerly part of The Cove FC
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe logic of playing up a year is simply an assumption that an A League (or State) Academy will have the majority of the best players available in a given age group - therefore to find better competition/challenges you play them up a year.
Some coaches argue this is effective in aiding development, others that it doesn’t. But it’s nothing new in football (or other sports) and has been done for many decades around the world.
My opinion is a blanket policy of playing an entire team/squad up is wrong eg U15 teams playing in U16 comps because this fails to take in to account individual player needs - each player has a differing physical, social and psychological development level.
The better approach imo is to play teams where they should be and elevate players an age level based on development needs of that player, not assume an entire team will benefit. very good point in general of the "mix" in a team. Its not new playing "up" thats for sure, my days whenever it was obvious a player stood out they would be played up the next age level. No issues with that just as you explain Waz, it doesn't suit "all"..... So the poor kid who is just that lkittle slower/smaller/lacking that bit more skill is exposed playing up and therefore judged in time he can't make it - unfair to him eh and the many others for IF they stayed in their age group how many more prosper. In the end I see the appeal playing up a whole squad but yer its not for all. Understand what you're saying and would certainly apply in a lot of clubs. But this is the elite of Qld juniors with no restrictions applied, such as Mum and Dad not being able to pay fees. The comp is quite uneven and some score lines blew out horribly with the Roar keepers in some games doing very little. They should play up, but that's simply my view, always keen to hear other views. Playing up makes sense if you are trying to develop players and with the ability to pick the cream of the crop you would expect that to be the case, but AL academies are not really interested in developing players and so for some of them it is more important for their junior teams to be winning junior championships than being prepared for elite football. In Vic I have heard of several players who were already playing up for NPL teams being recruited by MV to play down in their actual age group because they wanted trophies. I have also heard of a few players being released by MV because of their size and told they could make it back once they "develop". Increasingly in Vic, there are more players rejecting offers of playing with MV & MC and staying with their NPL clubs as they have seen AL academies are a dead end. The number of players going from AL Academies to paid gigs in NPL in significant, so they’re defiantly not a dead end. And with an increasing number of kids going from AL Academies to overseas clubs picking up in this last 12 months that reinforces the opportunities. So AL academies are where kids go to if they want to play NPL? Here I am thinking playing for NPL juniors normally gets you a gig in the NPL seniors.... Also probably more kids going from NPL teams OS than AL academies at the moment. You just have to look at the number of ex-AL academy players playing in NPL and getting paid for it.
So it’s not a “dead end” which was the original comment.
You might also be surprised how few NPL club juniors go on to play NPL as well. Have you forgotten that almost every single one of those players actually came from an NPL club, spent 1 or 2 seasons in the academy and then returned to their NPL club? I don't think your suggestion is the full picture. Ha Ha - most NPL Academy players don’t “come from NPL clubs” either .... they’re poached from the clubs around them at lower levels who nurture the kids from miniroos in to juniors and then see the good ones poached by NPL clubs.
(And then the junior clubs get to listen to the NPL clubs bitch about how they dont get transfer fees even though they don’t pay transfer fees themselves).
But putting my statement back in to the context in which I made it - I was replying to the statement that AL Academies are a “dead end” when they’re clearly not: some kids progress, some go overseas, some return to NPL ....
And yes, the full picture is kids moving from junior club Academies, to NPL academies, to AL academies, and in some cases to overseas academies .... that’s a perfect example of a normal football economy in play.
And before anyone says “transfer fees” FIFA (and many national governments) put restrictions on transfer fees for young players to prevent exploitation. So Australia is no different to the football economy in the rest of the world
QLD must be completely different to SA. I would image it might be.
The Football Brisbane zone alone has 77 clubs and 30,000 players in it. The NPL clubs only make up 20% of that and tend to be smaller than non NPL clubs when it comes to juniors. So they do a lot of poaching.
|
|
|
|
|
Gyfox
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players? With the average career for a professional footballer being 8 years and a squad size of say 24, theoretically on average 3 new players are required each year. Those players can be bought in or promoted from the academy. From this it is obvious that most of the players in the academy will move on elsewhere. Clubs normally run academies to find the players that will make it to the higher level. Some of the exceptional ones can make them "big" dollars by eventually selling them overseas, lesser ones they keep in house and other players they might be able to sell on to other clubs in Australia. It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs. Even if they are not making money out of selling on players top tier clubs have a responsibility to be developing players for the wider good of the game. " It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs." I agree with this that's why I am asking about their purpose here in Australia. Depending on which side of the divide your opinion sits, I believe our playing pool for the Socceroos is fairly shallow at the moment and am wondering if one of the reasons is that these players who are developed "for the good of the game" don't have any professional destinations to play for? Not asking about what happens in the rest of the world. I know why Ajax has a youth academy or why Red Star Belgrade or what La Macia is for etc etc, but why do the A-League teams? The A-League clubs run academies for the same reason as everyone else... to develop players. They obviously produce more players than they can use themselves so the extras get moved on to get picked up by clubs that are generally in the lower standard leagues like NPL1, NPL2, NPL3 etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players? With the average career for a professional footballer being 8 years and a squad size of say 24, theoretically on average 3 new players are required each year. Those players can be bought in or promoted from the academy. From this it is obvious that most of the players in the academy will move on elsewhere. Clubs normally run academies to find the players that will make it to the higher level. Some of the exceptional ones can make them "big" dollars by eventually selling them overseas, lesser ones they keep in house and other players they might be able to sell on to other clubs in Australia. It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs. Even if they are not making money out of selling on players top tier clubs have a responsibility to be developing players for the wider good of the game. " It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs." I agree with this that's why I am asking about their purpose here in Australia. Depending on which side of the divide your opinion sits, I believe our playing pool for the Socceroos is fairly shallow at the moment and am wondering if one of the reasons is that these players who are developed "for the good of the game" don't have any professional destinations to play for? Not asking about what happens in the rest of the world. I know why Ajax has a youth academy or why Red Star Belgrade or what La Macia is for etc etc, but why do the A-League teams? The A-League clubs run academies for the same reason as everyone else... to develop players. They obviously produce more players than they can use themselves so the extras get moved on to get picked up by clubs that are generally in the lower standard leagues like NPL1, NPL2, NPL3 etc. Not many tend to filter through in Victoria from what I can observe but ok I'll let that part slide as I'm sure it will get pounced on by the number crunchers.. So how many ifvthwirvoqn products do the actual franchise's use? No one wants to give a straight answer? Watching Marconi and now Sydney Croatia get stripped of players this week I'm wondering why they don't use their own academy players?
|
|
|
|
|
Gyfox
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe logic of playing up a year is simply an assumption that an A League (or State) Academy will have the majority of the best players available in a given age group - therefore to find better competition/challenges you play them up a year.
Some coaches argue this is effective in aiding development, others that it doesn’t. But it’s nothing new in football (or other sports) and has been done for many decades around the world.
My opinion is a blanket policy of playing an entire team/squad up is wrong eg U15 teams playing in U16 comps because this fails to take in to account individual player needs - each player has a differing physical, social and psychological development level.
The better approach imo is to play teams where they should be and elevate players an age level based on development needs of that player, not assume an entire team will benefit. very good point in general of the "mix" in a team. Its not new playing "up" thats for sure, my days whenever it was obvious a player stood out they would be played up the next age level. No issues with that just as you explain Waz, it doesn't suit "all"..... So the poor kid who is just that lkittle slower/smaller/lacking that bit more skill is exposed playing up and therefore judged in time he can't make it - unfair to him eh and the many others for IF they stayed in their age group how many more prosper. In the end I see the appeal playing up a whole squad but yer its not for all. Understand what you're saying and would certainly apply in a lot of clubs. But this is the elite of Qld juniors with no restrictions applied, such as Mum and Dad not being able to pay fees. The comp is quite uneven and some score lines blew out horribly with the Roar keepers in some games doing very little. They should play up, but that's simply my view, always keen to hear other views. Playing up makes sense if you are trying to develop players and with the ability to pick the cream of the crop you would expect that to be the case, but AL academies are not really interested in developing players and so for some of them it is more important for their junior teams to be winning junior championships than being prepared for elite football. In Vic I have heard of several players who were already playing up for NPL teams being recruited by MV to play down in their actual age group because they wanted trophies. I have also heard of a few players being released by MV because of their size and told they could make it back once they "develop". Increasingly in Vic, there are more players rejecting offers of playing with MV & MC and staying with their NPL clubs as they have seen AL academies are a dead end. The number of players going from AL Academies to paid gigs in NPL in significant, so they’re defiantly not a dead end. And with an increasing number of kids going from AL Academies to overseas clubs picking up in this last 12 months that reinforces the opportunities. So AL academies are where kids go to if they want to play NPL? Here I am thinking playing for NPL juniors normally gets you a gig in the NPL seniors.... Also probably more kids going from NPL teams OS than AL academies at the moment. You just have to look at the number of ex-AL academy players playing in NPL and getting paid for it.
So it’s not a “dead end” which was the original comment.
You might also be surprised how few NPL club juniors go on to play NPL as well. Have you forgotten that almost every single one of those players actually came from an NPL club, spent 1 or 2 seasons in the academy and then returned to their NPL club? I don't think your suggestion is the full picture. Ha Ha - most NPL Academy players don’t “come from NPL clubs” either .... they’re poached from the clubs around them at lower levels who nurture the kids from miniroos in to juniors and then see the good ones poached by NPL clubs.
(And then the junior clubs get to listen to the NPL clubs bitch about how they dont get transfer fees even though they don’t pay transfer fees themselves).
But putting my statement back in to the context in which I made it - I was replying to the statement that AL Academies are a “dead end” when they’re clearly not: some kids progress, some go overseas, some return to NPL ....
And yes, the full picture is kids moving from junior club Academies, to NPL academies, to AL academies, and in some cases to overseas academies .... that’s a perfect example of a normal football economy in play.
And before anyone says “transfer fees” FIFA (and many national governments) put restrictions on transfer fees for young players to prevent exploitation. So Australia is no different to the football economy in the rest of the world
QLD must be completely different to SA. I would image it might be.
The Football Brisbane zone alone has 77 clubs and 30,000 players in it. The NPL clubs only make up 20% of that and tend to be smaller than non NPL clubs when it comes to juniors. So they do a lot of poaching.
That is similar to FNSW in Sydney. There are 350 District Association clubs with 170k registered players in Sydney and 70 NPL clubs with 12k registered players. Although most of the NPL clubs have kids playing in the DA competitions the vast majority of players are introduced to the game by the other DA clubs and the talented kids are poached by the NPL clubs at some stage through their development.
|
|
|
|
|
Gyfox
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xPretty sure most AL clubs already do You'd think so but apparently not. Which ones? I believe the Roar this past season decided to play the academy teams back in their age groups after previous years of playing up an age group. Naturally enough all the academy squads have won their comps apart from the U16's who unfortunately, finished 3rd after their performance drastically plateaued towards the end of the season. It is also worth mentioning that the academy players pay no fees, thereby giving club unrestricted access to the best players, as should be the case. Strange that the new academy boss seems to have adopted the opposite approach to other clubs, for what benefit? So, do you think it wasn’t good year for BR academies then? Sure, they might of won across their age groups but they certainly didn’t dominate. In fact, in our age group I think they were lucky to win. I think it has been a competitive competition all round and it only makes it stronger for the future. Of course, It would of been different if they were flogging everybody and it’s not like they weren’t playing kids up. They were still playing kids up, just not the whole team. For me, if they were focusing on players individually like physical, mental readiness etc then that is better approach to development than just playing the whole team up. What determines a successful season for a jnr academy team? I don't think you'll get the answer for a couple of years yet. It's a shame Coffs got cancelled, it's not a bad barometer. Was just interesting to see the new philosophy this year and contrasting comments from Sydney FC, nothing else. Sorry but isn't a successful season one where your team finishes on top of the table? Is there another measure of success for a team? Yes. For development teams they should NOT focus on table position. So what would define success then? I'm baffled by this. Is this development methodology common in other sports? Do swimming coaches throw the kids in the pool and say "f%ck winning the race just as long as you don't drown" ? Sport by it's very definition is the competitive outcome of a result between two players or teams. Everything lyou do to make you competitive for that game-match-bout or whatever is just training. You’re either just baiting the conversation or you know nothing about development coaching?
The purpose of an Academy is to develop players, not win titles. The measure of an Academy should be the quality of players it develops, the number of quality players it develops, not whether it finishes 1st or not.
No need to be so condescending I have mentioned previously that I have no coaching experience. My question however still stands, you say that academy players are being developed for free by, in this case, Brisbane Roar.... Why? I assume a squad of say 23 each year "graduates" out of this system or is too old to play in the NPL setup. What happens to them? What does Brisbane get back for its investment into these players? With the average career for a professional footballer being 8 years and a squad size of say 24, theoretically on average 3 new players are required each year. Those players can be bought in or promoted from the academy. From this it is obvious that most of the players in the academy will move on elsewhere. Clubs normally run academies to find the players that will make it to the higher level. Some of the exceptional ones can make them "big" dollars by eventually selling them overseas, lesser ones they keep in house and other players they might be able to sell on to other clubs in Australia. It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs. Even if they are not making money out of selling on players top tier clubs have a responsibility to be developing players for the wider good of the game. " It can be quite lucrative in a more normal league that allows transfers between clubs." I agree with this that's why I am asking about their purpose here in Australia. Depending on which side of the divide your opinion sits, I believe our playing pool for the Socceroos is fairly shallow at the moment and am wondering if one of the reasons is that these players who are developed "for the good of the game" don't have any professional destinations to play for? Not asking about what happens in the rest of the world. I know why Ajax has a youth academy or why Red Star Belgrade or what La Macia is for etc etc, but why do the A-League teams? The A-League clubs run academies for the same reason as everyone else... to develop players. They obviously produce more players than they can use themselves so the extras get moved on to get picked up by clubs that are generally in the lower standard leagues like NPL1, NPL2, NPL3 etc. Not many tend to filter through in Victoria from what I can observe but ok I'll let that part slide as I'm sure it will get pounced on by the number crunchers.. So how many ifvthwirvoqn products do the actual franchise's use? No one wants to give a straight answer? Watching Marconi and now Sydney Croatia get stripped of players this week I'm wondering why they don't use their own academy players? Why would kids stay at Marconi or Sydney United if they can get a gig with one of the A-League academies? I'm not sure about Sydney FC but at Wanderers they don't pay for their spot in the academy unlike at the NPL clubs. The A-League is the pinnacle of club football in Australia so the clubs are always scouting to get the best young players into their system so its a pretty cutthroat environment. The average career for a professional footballer is about 8 years so with squads of 24 a club would need on average 3 replacement players each year but the academy players have to compete for those spots against players from everywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
Haven't read the whole thread so this might be covered. The Newcastle emerging Jets all play up one year in the NPL comp in each age group. Under 13's through under 17's.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|