Quote Originally Posted by thnhouse View Post
What would the actual saving be from downgrading from a Cat 2 to a Cat 3?
I understand that there are differences in terms of what facilities the club has to offer and the amount of coaches the club has to have, but what would the actual cost drop be?
What are the advantages of having a Cat 2 rather than a Cat 3?
From reading the EPPP it seems to suggest that the main advantage is that you compete against better youth teams and that it affects the amount of compensation we're due if a player gets poached. I'd also say that it's a major selling point to young players when choosing where to go.



Can we stop touting round the idea that the academy doesn't pay for itself , it clearly does? Add up player sales for the last 10 years, it comes to over 15 million. That is easily more than the academy has cost us and we're not counting the amount of money it saves us as the young players are on a third of the wages of an established pro.

What the concern is for me is that we have a manager that is destroying the development of our youngsters, since Davis started we've not had one young player establish himself and leave for money. This calls Davis into question not the academy.
The other difference is the coaching of boys from a younger age. It's not only Dario who would argue that this is important. The FA, in offering a greater subsidy to Category 2 Academies, than to lower categories, obviously feel that such a set-up is to be encouraged.

I doubt it's a simple matter to downgrade either. It's taken a long time to develop the facilities required; some key contracts will be in place. There's a lot of conjecture on the figures involved; on the face of it, the lower costs would suggest a big saving, but would a Category 3 Academy develop enough players to fill, say, half the places in the team?

Without having researched the matter thoroughly, I think there are only a few clubs of a similar size (crowd potential I mean), with a Category 3 Academy, who regularly develop sufficient players of their own to guarantee taking up to half of the first team places. It's usually the case, under Crewe's current set-up, that they will have up to half-a-dozen, sometimes more, home-produced players in the first team; that's part of the reason for running the Academy. In addition, historically at least, some of these players have been sold for decent fees, to help sustain the Academy, or improve it. Some people will complain that the sales don't directly benefit the first team. Another view would be that an improved Academy would indirectly improve the first team, over time. It is this latter view that is disputed - with good evidence of course: the team is in the bottom half of the fourth division!

So, what would a Crewe Alexandra with a downgraded Academy look like? Would the coaching staff required still be populated by ex-Crewe players, as it tends to be now? Would they still show the same loyalty to what would be a different kind of project? They wouldn't be required to run an under 23 squad - a mixed blessing? There would be a residue of coaching expertise left in the Academy; there would be fewer boys, and all those younger boys would be seeking other clubs of Category Two status.

The odds are that the first team manager would need to be looking at a greater number players from elsewhere to form his squad. What size of contracts could be afforded? Would the total of the new wage-bill equal the apparent savings from the lower academy costs? Or exceed them? The better the contracts, the more the chance of challenging for promotion, logically. Could the club afford that?

I believe, in reality, that the 'new' Crewe would still be careful/cautious with their finances. They would be trying to compete against similar-sized clubs, and some bigger ones, as now, for free transfer players, and for those players, maybe young ones, left adrift by Premiership and Championship clubs. Fees paid for players would be few and far between. They would be in much the same boat as they were in 1982. There would be the slight chance, of course, of attracting an ambitious, maverick type manager, who might, just might, bring short term success before moving on.

Some would argue that that would be preferable to running an Academy that they can't afford, in a season where the first team is still in the bottom division, and with no chance of a reprieve should they slip as far as 23rd or 24th by the final day. That is a perfectly valid view. The club would still survive as a National League club. There would still be games to go to.

My own view is that it would just be far less interesting, and offer less hope of greater things. The Academy is still producing good players, but, like thnhouse, I'm of the view that they're not being used or encouraged as well as they might, by the current manager, but that's a different matter.