|
|
Post by Hilds on Mar 23, 2004 9:10:36 GMT -5
Next season I am planning to run two teams. The "A" team will be in the Mitcham and District 2nd division (this is NOT up for debate on this thread) and will consist of the players that want to win every week and get pissed whenever they lose. I am aiming to bring in a new manager/co-manager for this team.
The "B" team will be for the members that just want to play. Winning is good, but is not the most important thing as they just want a kick around. Team morale will be the most important thing here. I will manage the reserve side, althou I am sure I will be the first choice striker for either club...
I will be able to promote/relegate 3 players from each side every week, so if a reserve player is playing out of his skin he will get a chance in the 1st team and if a player is off form in the 1st team they can move down to regain their confidence.
The two teams are all dependant on signing enough players to have two squads, for the sake of this thread assume that we already have enough players to make this work.
What are your thoughts?...
|
|
|
|
Post by MariaMeager on Mar 23, 2004 12:00:30 GMT -5
OK explain how you are going to co-ordinate 2 teams both playing on a Sunday I take it? Is one team going to be in the League and the B team have no real game apart from friendlies?  Ok use me as your test subject convince me this is a good idea as to me doesn't seem fair, because from what I remember all players are at different levels of fitness and skill and you can not just pick the good players and kick the not so good players to the side to play constant friendlies? I do not know why I am even voicing my opinion as it is nothing to do with me as I am not a player, but for an outsiders point of view I do not think it is fair. I think everyone should be seen as being on the same level otherwise it will cause arguements. Maybe I am having a Maria moment but this is my opinion and I have a habit of voicing it. Even doing this pomotion renegation thing, how crap would you feel if you felt you had played really well and then Joe Bloggs gets picked over you to be put in the A Team. And Vise Vera how would you feel if you felt you played blinding and then you get told that that you are going down to the B team. Sorry Darryl I think this is a very bad idea you are going to lose mates over this one if you are not careful. And considering most of your players are your mates I would knock this idea on the head before it gets out of hand and you end up with no team. I understand that you are trying to give players an incentive to play well every week and to work hard in every game to keep there place in the team, but I think this is the worng way to go. I will shut up now, as I may be the only person who thinks this way. Maria |
|
weavster
Junior Member
Steve Hilder
Posts: 21
|
Post by weavster on Mar 23, 2004 12:33:41 GMT -5
think im going to stick with maria on this one, if players are constantly getting relegated and promoted then you wont be able to build a team that learns to play together, lets try an get one team winning consecutivly before we try and raise another! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Hilds on Mar 23, 2004 12:56:56 GMT -5
Fair points from both of you. I'll try alleviate as many concerns as possible.
First, the easy one.
Maria, the idea isn't to have one team playing in the league and one playing friendlies. As you say that would be pointless. The "A" team will be in the Mitcham abnd District league 2nd division. The "B" team will be in the MItcham and District league 3rd division. So both will play a full league programme.
You also make reference to everyone being on the same level at the moment. This isn't true. We have two very different types of player in the squad. You have players like me, Gimp, Taff, Jimbob and others who play for fun. Winning is great, but for us and others it is more about playing regardless of score. Then we have players like Chris, Pat, Aubrey and others where winning is everything, if they play well but we loose they don't enjoy it. Therefore by splitting the roster we can cater for both types of player, the "A" team goes out to win, and if they loose they get bollocked (as they would expect) the "B" team go out to have fun regardless of the score.
Promotion/Relegation between teams would not happen every week, the 3 best players in the "B"'s would not automatically go up every time. Both teams would be run like two different clubs, but loan signing can happen if both managers agree. I'll give you a situation. Pat is playing for the "A" team up front and has failed to score in 10 games. Luke is playing for the "B" team and has 15 goals in the last 10 games. The two managers (me for the "B"'s and someone new for the "A"'s) would get together and maybe swap the two players for a game or two, this means Pat gets the chance to re-build his confidence against weaker opposition and Luke gets the chance to show what he can do against harder opposition. Win - win situation, as long as it's handled properly by the two managers.
Gimp, your point about not being able to build a team if players are going up and coming down constantly doesn't really stand up. We haven't had a settled side this season, we have a core of around six players and the rest rotate around. I think with two teams there would be less rotation.
From a numbers point of view it will work as currently there are two clubs that look like they are going to fold and it looks like I will be getting most of their players, obviously if we don't have two teams I'll only sign about 4 new players.
From a monetary point of view it works better with two teams as it is cheaper to register two teams in one league. It will also be better for our sponsors as we will have more players going into O'Neills etc.
I have a new manager lined up for the first team (althou this isn't guarenteed) so that should be ok and Paul can either be a co-manager or remain with the "B"'s and help me.
I think that's all of your questions answered, are you convinced?
|
|
|
|
Post by MariaMeager on Mar 24, 2004 3:34:04 GMT -5
I still think it is a bad idea. You are splitting the current team up just as they are getting used to playing with each other. And do you honestly think that anyone in the A team will happily play for the B team? If they are so set of winning they are not going to want to go from playing (in your words) the team that wants to win to the team that just want a kick about.
Also how are you going to register all of the players for both leagues as you can not play ringers all session, it is too risky.
I am not convinced and you are forgetting the most important fact Darryl, most of these players are your mates. Can you happily renegate players who you know will be cheesed off (I am not sure if you can swear on here?) if you send them off to the B team? By doing this I believe that you will lose players and if you are not careful mates.
I think you are trying to take on too much, one team is enough Darryl, Steve is right focus on the team you have got and keep them winning before you take on other responsibilities.
Sorry Darryl that is 2 people against.
Maria
|
|
|
|
Post by MariaMeager on Mar 24, 2004 3:36:44 GMT -5
Oh and PS, the level thing I was not talking about who wants to play for what reason I was talking about people playing for the same team.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hilds on Mar 24, 2004 6:01:55 GMT -5
You are making too much of the promotion/relegation aspect of running two teams. The current team are not being split up, we will all train together and also we will all be in the pub together. The only difference is some of the team will play in the "A"'s and some in the "B"'s. This split really isn't that big! You will also see that most of the players who are mates will stay together as well. The "B"s would have me, Col, Gimp, Jim, Taff, Wallis, Bill (maybe) and a few others. The "A"s would have Claws, Ian, Aubs, Pat and a few others. This isn't definate and some of the players may not be in the specified teams but I'm sure you get the idea.
And your point about learning to play together, our team work was actually worse towards the end of the season!!
I don't understand your point about it being risky to register all players and not playing ringers?
To quote you:
"Also how are you going to register all of the players for both leagues as you can not play ringers all session, it is too risky."
I really don't understand? Do you think I am going to change every player in both squads every week?
Ok, this is how it works. Stop me if I'm going too fast.
League rules state that I can move three players from my "A" squad down to my "B" squad and three players up from the "B" side into the "A"s. Both squads will be registered as O'Neills players so transfers are ok.
I know of two clubs that look like they are going to fold and a senior source at one of those clubs has told me him and his players want to sign for me. If my squad stays together (and so far everyone has said they are staying) and I get the players from the other two squads then I have the basis of two good clubs.
In order to keep the better players I currently have I need to run the club to win. Chris has stayed for a few seasons but I think we now need to do well to keep him, I think the same can be said for Luke, Aubs, Pat and a few others. If I stay as one club I need to run it to win games, going this way could cost me the services of Taff, Gimp and others (they have already said they are not sure about next season). So staying as one club will cause me to loose players, and the ones that go will prob be friends and family! Two clubs lets me keep everyone happy!
Again, back to the promotion/relegation issue. If, for example, Pat is relegated to the reserves he would rightly be pissed off. But, because Pat wants to be in the "A"s he will do everything he can to move back up and I don't think he would take it personally (in fact I have discussed it with him, so I know he wont).
It also means if one club is struggling for players than the second club can loan them players. So no more 9 Vs 11!!
From a money point of view, it works out more cost effective to run two clubs as I get a price break when registering with the Mitcham league and also when registering with Surrey County. It will probably save me about £80 overall, which equates to three paid training sessions, or a paid for Christmas do (like last year) or part payment towards an end of season tour.
In my opinion, two clubs will make more paperwork, but it is the same stuff as one club so it will be easy (plus the majority of it will be dealt with by the new "A" manager) and will mean more players to deal with. But it will bring in far more revenue for the club, training will be achievable, our sponsor will be happier (O'Neills pub) and the players will be happier as the team they are in will be taylored for their needs and wants and they will have the oppurtunity to move between the clubs.
I see it as working out on all levels and working well, but to be honest it will only happen if I can get enough players to sign next season.
|
|
|
|
Post by MariaMeager on Mar 24, 2004 6:30:20 GMT -5
Sorry I am still against, but you will do what you want to anyway so what does it matter. You asked for opinions and that is mine.
I am not stupid and I undestand what you are saying but it is not going to work either way you are going to lose players. I haven't seen the team this year so I can not judge the team as it stands now, but from previous experience with all the teams you have run you should know by doing this people will get angry and argue, people will decide half way through the season they no longer want to play for fun or maybe they no longer want to play a serious game. You by that time may have used your 3 renegation/Promotions thurs people can not move, so they will leave. Or they just might leave regardless.
At the beginning of every session (and I have seen a few) with you Darryl, you start off with 20-25 players signing up, it gets cold, raining, snowing, and hangovers set in and people do not show up so by the time you are half way through the season people become unreliable, and some quit.
I am trying to tell you this for your own good Darryl I am not trying to make your idea look stupid, it would be a good idea if you have 25-30 loyal players that you know WILL turn up every week but there isn't, and deep down you know this will not work.
I am really sorry I have seen the trouble you have got into in the past and how angry you get with the whole situation of running a team and the amount of times you have threatened to stop doing it. I am really not trying to get at you and I am not trying to upset you, I am trying to get you to see that this is too much.
If I was you and if you are set on doing this, please THINK AT LEAST about doing this. Next season develop the team you have, if you are going to have lots of subs then great, and training fantastic (if people show up). Get the team moulded this season then the following season if you still have 25+ players who have shown you loyality and have stuck at it then put this idea into play. But for the moment all you are going to do is put yourself in a lot of trouble and you know what I mean.
You need to be 100% certain that people will stay and you can not do that with people who want to sign from another team and may quit after 2 weeks. They need to prove themselves to you and the team that they are going to give it their all and stay on the team.
Stop and really think about this Darryl and sorry to say but you will see I am right!
Maria
|
|
weavster
Junior Member
Steve Hilder
Posts: 21
|
Post by weavster on Mar 24, 2004 6:33:50 GMT -5
ok so u dont think this will cause arguments, well for starters u mentioned i would be in the B team, why? am i not good enough for the A team as that is where i would want to play! i personally think i am better than ian but i have had a bad season because i have had to play where he wants me to, always telling me to mark this player and that player why he is the free man, yeh that makes sense huh what with him being so quick an all! no sorry darryl this will cause arguments and i disagree stick with one team for now  |
|
|
|
Post by MariaMeager on Mar 24, 2004 6:38:33 GMT -5
Who is Ian? Hello Steve by the way! Why is someone I have never heard of giving orders to someone who is an "establised" member of the team?
|
|
weavster
Junior Member
Steve Hilder
Posts: 21
|
Post by weavster on Mar 24, 2004 6:58:21 GMT -5
Darryl- 'If I stay as one club I need to run it to win games, going this way could cost me the services of Taff, GIMP and others' I quit, if you really think im that bad then i will go to a club that does want me! |
|
|
|
Post by Hilds on Mar 24, 2004 7:06:50 GMT -5
Ian is a new centre back. He was organising the defence because I thought he was the best person for the job and to be fair he is the only new defender this season and look at our defensive record compared to last seasons (by this I am not saying he is the reason we have done well, just that my decision looks to be the right one).
The players I stated for the teams were EXAMPLES. I am intending to play with a sweeper next season, and who do you think I want as my sweeper? Steve- if you wanna be in the "A" team, fine. From what I've heard that side will be playing 4-4-2. You okay to play centre back? I named you in the "B"s for two reasons, 1 being the sweeper thing and 2 I wanted to keep you, me and Colin together. Not a bad reason in my opinion?
Steve- the quote you used. Read the whole statement. You will find I used you and Taff as examples BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALREADY SAID YOU MIGHT QUIT not because you wouldn't be good enough for the "A" team.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesh on Mar 24, 2004 10:01:59 GMT -5
i didnt personally realise that i was playing just for fun? i have been in and out the side all season playing linesman for a vast part of the time. I wouldnt be too happy in being relegated to the B team. I joined the club as a keeper.......i dont play in there as Chris is better than me so no qualms there. I then play in centre midfield in the holding role........feel i done a very good job. If you were to ask Aubrey who he likes to play centre mid with,im quite confident he would say me. So me being a keeper and playin well in midfield means i have no desire to win,if thats the case why do i shout more than most on the pitch.......cos i give a f**k. Thats why. I really do not see two teams working Darryl,i fear it would be a huge mistake. What would happen if the A team were short and the the B team had 13 players?  |
|
|
|
Post by Hilds on Mar 24, 2004 10:15:03 GMT -5
Jim, I included you as someone who plays for fun because you have been there when we have been hammered game after game and you always come back. I think you, like everyone else, wants to win but it isn't the only thing that matters. Having said that no disisions have been made regarding if we will have two teams and who will be in them. It is all hyperthetical. Oh, and I have spoken to Aubs and he perfers playing alongside you more than anyone else. So credit where it's due, you have had a great season, and have been one of our best and most consistant players. Fuck, I've just paid you a compliment...best make this right again...and you are fat. Phew, that was close.  |
|
|
|
Post by Chipskip on Mar 24, 2004 10:26:43 GMT -5
So what league do you guys play in? Do you need a centre half possibly and centre mid ball winner??
|
|
