Matthew Le God

Well those clubs are clearly happy with it, hence why they played a large part in the creation of EPPP. The whole thing is mainly so that Premier League clubs can save money by getting the best youth players early and cheap in light of financial fair play regulations coming in. It was originally the FA's idea to improve the England side but the Premier League are using it for their own benefit. These teams aren't spending money on the academies and facilities for nothing, they intend to use their own youth players. Man Utd already have a very good record for this so it is odd you picked them.

No he wasn't. Butland is rated by many in the game to be a competitor for Joe Hart in future years for the England keeper jersey. Forecast has never had such a billing.

They aren't dictated to, clubs can pick who they want. However if they refuse to use any youth players in the first team they lose cat 1 status. Sounds entirely reasonable to base an academy rating partly on the production line rather than solely the bricks/mortar and staffing. Ofsted don't award schools "outstanding" overall, if their students don't get good grades despite having superb teachers and facilities.

The audits are carried out by an independent company, the rules were written and largely influenced by the heads of the top academies. Even still, Newcastle look to be missing out on cat 1 status after the first audit. That decision will stand if that is what the audit company tell the FA to do.

See post #345

I actually said this... "I don't see that number rising hugely over the coming years as it is hard for a Championship club to afford to maintain the running costs and build up in the first place and when some smaller Premier League teams drop out of the top flight they may downgrade to tier 2 so it could end up evening itself out." You decided to cherry pick and take the opening words of my statement out of context.

The top clubs are the ones that forced through EPPP in the first place. They have pretty much written it as it stands. Does that not suggest to you they are happy with it?

Because it will be accessed over a period of seasons, if they don't meet the requirements and make excuses they will simply lose their cat 1 status. As I've already asked... I've read a draft of the EPPP document, have you?

If the manager doesn't play any youth products, the club run the risk of losing category 1 status. They aren't forcing clubs to use youth products, but they will lose category one privileges if they don't.

It will be enforced because every 2 to 3 years an independent organisation will perform another audit on each club. I've read a draft of the EPPP document, have you?

That isn't what I said at all. Read it again.

Well Cortese revealed plans for Staplewood whilst we were in League One, started building it whilst in the Championship. It doesn't appear that Saints having category one status is reliant on Premier League status. As for "if we keep signing teenagers, we will". Can you name some we have signed to go straight into the first team? Also in order to maintain category one status it is a requirement that youth products play for the first team or you can lose cat 1 status in the future.

I don't have a "new position", my view is the same as my old position. i.e. as things stood on the day I posted in summer 2011, only Chelsea, Man City and Saints would get cat one if the official audits took place the next day. I said at the time a number of other clubs would also get cat 1 status by the time the official audits took place this year. My "position" hasn't changed.

As I said a few posts back... Currently the number of youth systems in the same tier as Saints is 40, under EPPP this will be under 20. It is quite a significant cut in numbers. I don't see that number rising hugely over the coming years as it is hard for a Championship club to afford to maintain the running costs and build up in the first place and when some smaller Premier League teams drop out of the top flight they may downgrade to tier 2 so it could end up evening itself out.

Again, you haven't read my post. Of course the number was never going to stay at 3 clubs, I said that at the time! The intention was always for the tier 1 clubs to play in a league against each other, it wasn't going to be a league of 3 teams. EPPP has however significantly reduced the number of top tier academies from 40 to under 20. Saints have gone over and above the requirement for tier 1.

As I have already said on numerous occasions now... in the summer of 2011 I said on this forum that I had been told as things stood only Saints, Chelsea and Man City would get cat 1 status as things stood at that time (i.e. if the audit was done the next day). I did not say that would always remain the case by the time the official audits were done this year, in fact I listed the teams I thought would also get cat 1 status. I made that quite clear at the time. Currently the number of youth systems in the same tier as Saints is 40, under EPPP this will be under 20. It is quite a significant cut. I don't see that number rising hugely over the coming years as it is hard for a Championship club to afford to maintain the running costs and build up in the first place. Southampton on the other hand have gone above and beyond what the criteria asks for and Staplewood is better than a category one training ground needs to be. This is becoming a circular argument because the like of Turkish and Thedelldays appear want to read that I said something completely different to suit their battle against me.

Can you list them please. Remember, we are talking about youngsters from the South West where we have a satellite academy in Bath. So journeys to Manchester, Liverpool etc aren't that easily workable.

You only commented on the first part, not the second. You should be looking at them combined together.

Read it in combination with the second sentence rather than cherry picking.

They do, but given Saints will be by far the closest team to the South West with category 1 status, I think that gives us the advantage. Along with having a better setup, facilities and record bringing through youngsters than a number of other category one clubs.

None of us know the full extents as to the resources currently behind Saints. Staplewood redevelopment, debt free, the Liebherr family background, record signing and big money bids, early stadium redevelopment plans are all indicators that significant money is behind the club. No, I'm not saying we are richer than Arsenal, but if Cortese thinks the club can afford to spend £6m on Butland, what has he done to make us doubt his or his scouts/management/coaching team's opinion?

I didn't say they were under 12, just raising that Saints are scouting for youth team players in that region. The new rules may now allow Saints to bring in under 12's without competition from their local clubs as there would have been before EPPP. The academic part of EPPP makes a tier 1 club more attractive for parent of young footballers as Saints employs teachers on site, allows for more football coaching time and the youngsters will be playing against other elite academies.

This may have changed, but the EPPP document I saw last year has significant differences in terms of coaching hours that a tier one club can have with youngsters and also restricts tier 3 clubs (like Pompey will be) from signing players until they are 12 iirc. If that is how it was finally decided in the final proposal then Saints have an even bigger advantage over Pompey and Bournemouth than they do already, as they can sign up players before the other clubs are even allowed to start working with them. We have already taken Sam Gallagher and Jack Stephens from Plymouth Argyle in the last year, I'd expect even more youngsters from the South West and South Wales to go to the main academy or Bath Satellite as clubs like Bristol City, Bristol Rovers, Yeovil Town, Exeter, Torquay will be restricted from working with youngsters until a later age than Saints as a cat 1 club can.

It can only be labelled overspending if you've seen him play. The Saints scouts have seen him play and if this report is correct, they feel a £6m fee is justified. They haven't got much wrong in the last 3 years.

Why the sarcasm? Why do you think they aren't rivals? Where else do you think youngsters from those regions largely go? With the 90 minute rule no longer an issue for Saints, but remaining an issue for non tier 1 clubs it does give Saints an advantage. As does for example does Portsmouth as a tier 3 club no longer being able to sign 8 year olds and work with them for as many hours as Saints can.