Sorry Gings but ... over do. In fact, clubs are moving towards a more academy-like approach: Coastal Spirit, FC 20, Technical Cashmere no doubt.
This is good .... worth the extra hard-earned.
I reckon Mainland Academy will exist only as long as the clubs fail to offer an alternative.
What's more important? Developing a good player or having that player play in my club strip v your club strip?
This is good .... worth the extra hard-earned.
I reckon Mainland Academy will exist only as long as the clubs fail to offer an alternative.
What's more important? Developing a good player or having that player play in my club strip v your club strip?
Some facts SE -
The Mainland Academy was established to counter the Coastal Academy (Sporting Futures - staffed by Ed Baranowski who Mainland then pinched from Sporting Futures). So many clubs whinged and moaned about losing players to Coastal Mainland set up a "centralised" academy in response to appease the other clubs. This caused Coastal to propose a motion of no confidence to the Mainland Football AGM in 2010 with the support of other clubs. So don't go getting it around the wrong way.
The School of Football does not meet with NZ Football approval and sits completely outside the Whole of Football plan which is a club based development programme. The SOF is in direct opposition to clubs who run academies and exists despite clubs offering an alternative - the School of Football exists in spite of the existence of club based academies, not because of the lack of them and that is an irrefutable fact.
What's more important - having strong clubs with excellent development programmes for players of all ages and abilities or clubs continually losing their better players to elite schemes and constantly being told "leave it to us - you don't know what you're doing"?
Get Ed Baranowski and his world class ideas and programmes around the clubs, why restrict him to 90 players a year? That is such small minded thinking it beggars belief.