PDA

View Full Version : Squad size limit? (The Spurs Issue)


GreatGonzo
15-06-2005, 12:59 PM
Personally i think their should be a limit on the size of 1st team squads, a club could always ask for special dispensation if their squad is ravaged by injury etc etc but surely a squad of 25 should get you through a season for example.

IMHO too many young players are joining sides where they will not get any time on the pitch, thuis stunting their development, there is also far less chance for players to come through.

Am I alone on this or do other people think it is an issue?

Here is an example (Spurs)

1. Thimothee Atouba (D)
2. Lee Barnard (F)
3. Michael Brown (M)
4. Goran Bunjevcevic (D)
5. Robert Burch (G)
6. Michael Carrick (M)
7. Calum Davenport (D)
8. Sean Davis (M)
9. Michael Dawson (D)
10. Jermain Defoe (F)
11. Erik Edman (D)
12. Nicky Eyre (G)
13. Marton Fulop (G)
14. Anthony Gardner (D)
15. Emil Hallfredsson (M)
16. Mark Hughes (M)
17. Philip Ifil (D)
18. Johnnie Jackson (M)
19. Frederic Kanoute (F)
20. Robbie Keane (F)
21. Stephen Kelly (D)
22. Ledley King (D)
23. Dean Marney (M)
24. Noureddine Naybet (D)
25. Noe Pamarot (D)
26. Pedro Mendes (M)
27. Andy Reid (M)
28. Dean Richards (D)
29. Paul Robinson (G)
30. Jamie Slabber (F)
31. Paul Stalteri (M)
32. Mark Yeates (F)
33. Reto Ziegler (M)

They signed the youngster from Leeds today, and have Routledge still to join - that is 35 players! :eek:

You could say 9 of them are probably not 1st team players but the fact is they are young players who do not have the opportunities to come through - is there any need for all these players to be given squad numbers?

Dom303
15-06-2005, 01:08 PM
You have a point, but no.

In the end this will come back to haunt Spurs. Too big a squad makes some players unhappy, and morale in young players drops cos they can't get into the first team.

Players will go anyway to balance the books.

brb rule
15-06-2005, 01:17 PM
Well they have the sucess of the mighty mid table finish every year.

Also think Jol is no fool & Carrick has come on & Andy Reid got to play. They have some good youngsters. At end of day it would be unfair to limit the number of employees to any company.

As much as i hate Spurs id back them to finish in the top 7 next year.

GreatGonzo
15-06-2005, 01:26 PM
I don't really care on the effect is has on spurs and players becoming unhappy it is more the effect it will have on England.

Davenport, Dawson and Huddlestone are 3 of teh most promising young central dfenders in the country at teh moment - however with Naybet, King, and Gardener in teh squad as well are they likely toplay and develop? NO, hence England lose the development of their best young players.

They have good midfielders in Davis, Brown, Mendes, Reid, Atouba and Ziegler. So how do Routledge, the young leeds player, Stalteri poushing Kelly down teh pecking order etc etc - it is not good for the game!

davematt
15-06-2005, 01:32 PM
Gonzo you are worrying too much about Spurs' problems. Lets concentrate on the problems at Palace, trying to get back in the Premiership.

IW_Eagle
15-06-2005, 01:41 PM
or they loan the younger players out?

Balti Man
15-06-2005, 01:42 PM
For these sake of English players there should be smaller squads with less foreign players so these young players can break through and impress and possibly do well at international level. but how may times has this been said (and im boring myself saying it)

GreatGonzo
15-06-2005, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by davematt
Gonzo you are worrying too much about Spurs' problems. Lets concentrate on the problems at Palace, trying to get back in the Premiership.

As i said i do not care about Spurs, i do care about young players in this country who should be playing competitive football!

edit: Incidentally that is why i have lost all respect for Arsenal since 14th Feb and am pleased Chelsea have reversed their foreign policy, but Liverpool are heading that way now!

Reps AJ
15-06-2005, 01:58 PM
Do you mean 25 players and that's it? Do you not think that clubs would fill their 25 places with established players, therefore restricting the chances offered to younger players? What about young players who develop through the season and wouldn't have been included in the original 25? Players such as Rooney and Routledge spring to mind.

GreatGonzo
15-06-2005, 02:04 PM
Reps - good point but the FA should be looking at a situation whereby the 25 must include

5 players U20
10 British Players
8 players brought through the clubs youth system

In teh case of Routledge he counts as 1 in each of those catagories, Rooney counts for Manure in 2 of them.

Benzhiyi
15-06-2005, 02:07 PM
I think there should be a squad size limit on the BBS, and that someone should boot Gonzo asap.

Not literally. Though I won't reprimand them if they choose to.

GreatGonzo
15-06-2005, 02:13 PM
Thats not very nice now is it - you not have an opinion on the topic? ;)

The Omen
16-06-2005, 05:14 AM
Originally posted by GreatGonzo
Reps - good point but the FA should be looking at a situation whereby the 25 must include

5 players U20
10 British Players
8 players brought through the clubs youth system

In teh case of Routledge he counts as 1 in each of those catagories, Rooney counts for Manure in 2 of them.

Thats not really a realistic option given the amount of foreign players in our game now, is it?

Arsenal would have to sell everyone! And what about some of the foreign players? Are we going to force them to return home and earn 1/3 of the wage they would be on if they worked in England?

Popester
16-06-2005, 12:27 PM
No-one is forcing Lennon, Routledge or anyone else to go to Spurs. If they want to go to a club where there is a high risk that they will play reserve team football then let them do it.

If a player is too stupud to realise that his development will be affected by moving to a club where he wont play regularly, then is he the sort of player who will ever be that good anyway?

Pezzadoner
16-06-2005, 12:36 PM
How about a wage cap instead of squad restrictions?

GreatGonzo
16-06-2005, 12:36 PM
Popester that is not the issue in my mind.

The issue is that so few good young English, Scottish, Welsh kids are coming through into top flight football. Their path is blocked by forign players and oversized squads - this is bad for the NATIONAL game!

Why are Brazil so succesful? Because the very best of their players play in Europe and their own league which is very strong brings through MOSTLY Brazilian players - they have far more young talent being found and developed!

chelmsfordeagle
17-06-2005, 03:40 AM
Originally posted by GreatGonzo
Popester that is not the issue in my mind.

The issue is that so few good young English, Scottish, Welsh kids are coming through into top flight football. Their path is blocked by forign players and oversized squads - this is bad for the NATIONAL game!

Why are Brazil so succesful? Because the very best of their players play in Europe and their own league which is very strong brings through MOSTLY Brazilian players - they have far more young talent being found and developed!

I don't agree with this. the best players are still coming through and they get train with players from different backgrounds. I think the amount of foreigners in the prem has actually improved the young players coming through.

Brazil are so successful because for so many kids there football is the only way out of poverty way worse than anything in the UK.

chelmsfordeagle
17-06-2005, 03:42 AM
I do think there should be both a squad limit (like with europe) and a wage cap for squads. this would create a more equal enviroment and help to stop what is becoming a very boring premier league.