FAI running the league.

I'm not sure that the gap between U19 and First Team will be bridged. While it may see like that FAI are instilling a system to help League of Ireland clubs produce players, its more down to the centralisation of elite players to have them face each other at an earlier age (which is brilliant), in order to help players compete at international level.

Is a player going to make international standard beyond U19 if they haven't played first team by the age of 19? Unlikely. Even the LOI players recently called into the U19 Qualifying Campaign all had first team exposure at their clubs (O'Hora - Bohs, Farrugia - UCD)

The average age of a First Division team is 23. An u23 team would be utterly redundant for half the league

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

The average age of a First Division team is 23. An u23 team would be utterly redundant for half the league

---

Is it really that young??

If so, fair point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

The average age of a First Division team is 23. An u23 team would be utterly redundant for half the league

---

What about the other half of the league ?
There are a lot of players around when finished with the Under 19's but are not good enough for Senior grade who have nowhere to play except go back to junior.
Given some experience these players might be able to move up to the senior squads.
As has been said elsewhere clubs shouldn't be made enter an Under 23 team if they don't wish or can't afford it but we have to bridge the gap from Under 19 to Senior in some way.

Could make it mandatory for PREM div and optional for 1st div.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

The average age of a First Division team is 23. An u23 team would be utterly redundant for half the league

---

That is incredibly far from the point.

The average age of Harps starting team last season was in around 24, but there were still about 10 players within the squad seeing no game time, and another 6 or 7 players from last seasons under-19 squad that had to be released as there was no football for them.

We've also had to bring in an Ulster Senior League team for players who didn't see game time for their under-17 or under-19 side at any given weekend, and they would probably benefit from an under-23 league too over an intermediate league.

This is before we even get into players returning from injury who may benefit from gaining match fitness in an under-23 squad the same as English teams, allowing for three overage players in the match day squad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosophizer

Could make it mandatory for PREM div and optional for 1st div.

---

That would never work. Take this season and next: ourselves, Harps and Drogheda would probably look to fold the u23 set-up as it’s not mandatory and cash could go elsewhere. Waterford would have to scramble together an u23 set-up. The folllowing season, it would be Cobh (my tip for First Div title in 2018) that would have to put together an u23 squad. Either every club has one or not, can’t have a Premier/First split

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954

There's nothing to stop clubs from having players in from 12 years of age for their under-15 squad if they're that keen to keep them away from the likes of Joeys and Kevins, but it's utterly ridiculous that we have these great underage structures coming in and expecting players to step up from under-19s to senior once they get that far. Clubs may as well be burning money as spending on players that'll have to leave the club because they're not ready for the first team yet.

We should be looking at an under-23 league and then, and only then, if clubs can spare the extra cash, bring in the under-13 league.

---

Well many clubs wanted the plug pulled on the old A Championship. Then some in their wisdom started complaining afterwards!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

The average age of a First Division team is 23. An u23 team would be utterly redundant for half the league

---

For those clubs, yes, that probably is the case. Possibly only about 5 Premier clubs have to get on board for it to be a viable league. I think at least 3 First Division clubs optionally took part in the defunct A Championship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosophizer

Could make it mandatory for PREM div and optional for 1st div.

---

No, not at all. They went down that road before with the A Championship. Pat's who had some influence for a while were chief cheerleaders in getting the plug pulled. Some Premier clubs treated it with contempt. They were looking for any players to fill up a team and make up a fixture.

After U19s, it's got to be clubs own decision if they want to be involved in an intermediary league or not. It will give players the choice as well of sticking with the club or going on loan in the First Division.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954

That is incredibly far from the point.

---

It really isn't.

UCD for example would have literally no players for an u23 team. Others too - Wexford, Cabo, etc.

I made up the bit about the average age of the First Division, but I'd say it's not far off. It's a very young division because it's a shambles. Once players start working (about 21/22), they either are earning a few quid playing LoI or they've dropped down to LSL or equivalent where they don't have to give up half their week training to travel half way across the country to sit on the bench.

An u23 league would hold no interest for many First Division clubs and players, and there'd be scratches all over the shop. (The Premier sides can knock themselves out if they want, but it'd be a small league)

The reason the Premiership have one is because the standard is so high that youth players on average break into a first team at the age of 21/22, so the extra league is needed for extra development

Would agree with PineappleStu. Last year, Wexford would have had about half the team aged 20 or under depending on the players selected with most of the subs also twenty or under. You couldn't see any prospect of involvement in an U23 league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForzaForth

Would agree with PineappleStu. Last year, Wexford would have had about half the team aged 20 or under depending on the players selected with most of the subs also twenty or under. You couldn't see any prospect of involvement in an U23 league.

---

You are lunging in with a two footed challenge when no one is suggesting a mandatory U23 league. Once the U13 league is fully integrated, consideration should, possibly will, be given for an intermediary league between U19s and senior. It should be completely optional. Possibly only a quarter of LoI clubs would be in a position to enter along with non-LoI entities already integrated through the youth leagues.

Clarke doona Bolger o Connor all teenagers playing for rovers if you are good enough your old enough at 19

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbgawa

Clarke doona Bolger o Connor all teenagers playing for rovers if you are good enough your old enough at 19

---

That's also a very fair point. The outstanding u19 guys like those mentioned above and Sule and Hoare and Jamie McGrath can make the jump without much difficulty.
We're probably still losing a few who could have become good enough with a few years of u23 football to bridge the gap, but if it takes those guys an extra few yrs of u23 football to make the transition they're probably not outstanding players.
No doubt a few guys are falling through the gap but at least there is a pathway now for the most talented guys to get through. And really, those are the guys that the FAI cares about the most because many of them can go on to play for the national team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gormacha

I have a vague recollection that there is either a UEFA or FIFA regulation that stipulates that the elite league of a jurisdiction has to be governed by the body that is affiliated to UEFA/FIFA, so the FAI *have* to run the league?

It is entirely possible I have misremembered that. It wouldn't be the first time, and won't be the last.

Anyone?

---

The Premier League in England is not run by the FA. All they need is to be sanctioned by the association, which even as petty as they are I can't see the FAI denying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

I made up the bit about the average age of the First Division, but I'd say it's not far off.

---

I'd say you're probably overestimating a bit. Even with clubs like Longford and Waterford who had older players, they still had a lot of teenagers in there. Cabo, Cobh and UCD would be struggling to field a team breaking an average age of 20 I'd say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

The Premier League in England is not run by the FA. All they need is to be sanctioned by the association, which even as petty as they are I can't see the FAI denying.


I'd say you're probably overestimating a bit. Even with clubs like Longford and Waterford who had older players, they still had a lot of teenagers in there. Cabo, Cobh and UCD would be struggling to field a team breaking an average age of 20 I'd say.

---

We would have had 3 teenagers in our team towards the end of last season even after that tho average age probably wasn’t much more than 24 with the likes of Kevin o’connor And Davy O’Sullivan the exception

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

UCD would be struggling to field a team breaking an average age of 20 I'd say.

---

I'd have pencilled UCD in if an Intermediary-U23 league is formed in the next 3 years or so. They competed well in the defunct A Championship. They won 2 titles and were runners-up in another.

Cork, Dundalk, Shamrock Rovers and Limerick are 4 others I would pencil in the likely category. There have been comments from Cork and Dundalk officials in recent years regards a reserve side. Shamrock Rovers had a B team for a year in the First Division. Limerick participated in the A Championship though they had no obligation to do so when they were in the First Division.

As I've said in a previous post, the league wouldn't need big numbers. 8 teams playing over 3 series would have 21 games a season. The Premier League 2 in England consists of two divisions of 12 playing 22 games.

I'm very much open to correction but I don't think Limerick would be looking to take on any optional teams at this stage. We're finding out how much it costs to stay competitive in the Premier the last few seasons and there's enough levels requiring a team now that I don't think the extra cost would outweigh any benefits for us. In practical terms we make a habit of picking up Cork's fringe players anyway, the trickle down of players isn't the worst thing where we are.

I can see the logic in extending the leagues downwards- get the top players playing against each other and with better coaching from as early an age as possible. In large parts of the country this wasn't happening enough, players were staying with local clubs that might not have the greatest coaches or opportunity to really stretch them. In other parts you had the schoolboy superpowers that hoovered up players and had no outlet at the top end at all- the main objective being to send players across the water. In terms of football overall in the country, it's a good thing and I'm certainly for it.

As for an under 23 league.. more expense for clubs but there are late bloomers that U19 is a bit early for. But ultimately every youth system will see the majority of players not make it. It's harsh but it's reality. If you're getting one player into your first team every year that's pretty good. Can see the argument for an older age group but unless there is more support for clubs it's probably a non runner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gormacha

I have a vague recollection that there is either a UEFA or FIFA regulation that stipulates that the elite league of a jurisdiction has to be governed by the body that is affiliated to UEFA/FIFA, so the FAI *have* to run the league?

It is entirely possible I have misremembered that. It wouldn't be the first time, and won't be the last.

Anyone?

---

Your memory is not playing tricks. I am not sure it is a 'must', but at the very least UEFA frown on such. Hence one of the reasons the League in the North split from the IFA, having been previously incorporated with it for a number of years.

And to help answer a previous question, the clubs in the Irish League still receive their Solidarity payment.

Overall, it was like a breath of fresh air splitting from the IFA. While not perfect, it certainly has seen many improvements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr A

As for an under 23 league.. more expense for clubs but there are late bloomers that U19 is a bit early for. But ultimately every youth system will see the majority of players not make it. It's harsh but it's reality. If you're getting one player into your first team every year that's pretty good. Can see the argument for an older age group but unless there is more support for clubs it's probably a non runner.

---

Many clubs - including Harps I think? - have a reserve team in the local leagues which covers this. Ditto Cork (?), Rovers, UCD, Derry and maybe others.

Clubs that don't already operate a team in the LSL/MSL surely wouldn't have the interest in a 23s league. And clubs that do operate such a team would get more out of it than a half-arsed national 23s league.

Honestly not seeing any reason for it