Birmingham have confirmed that they have been awarded Category 1 status.

Meanwhile, Accrington Stanley have announced they are closing their academy.

The broader picture looks pretty grim for Accy.

I assume the fact we haven’t announced that we have been awarded Category One means the one area we needed to improve is still being implemented/assessed?

Really quite surprised that Birmingham have achieved it as a League One club really, given the expense and presumably other priorities in the short term. Well done them though.

distortiondave wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 11:13 am

The broader picture looks pretty grim for Accy.

Really grim - they won't even be running their under-18 team any longer.

Weren't Birmingham another one like us who got the provisional Category 1 during covid and then lost it again when inspections started back up again.

I've not really been following the story but looks like some serious investment going on at Birmingham. Looks like it might be tough in the Championship next season.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 11:14 am

I assume the fact we haven’t announced that we have been awarded Category One means the one area we needed to improve is still being implemented/assessed?

Really quite surprised that Birmingham have achieved it as a League One club really, given the expense and presumably other priorities in the short term. Well done them though.

Birmingham appear to have a lot of money behind them and have been pushing for it. Their technical academy director is Mike Rigg who was at Burnley for three years until summer 2021.

aggi wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 11:21 am

Weren't Birmingham another one like us who got the provisional Category 1 during covid and then lost it again when inspections started back up again.

I've not really been following the story but looks like some serious investment going on at Birmingham. Looks like it might be tough in the Championship next season.

It was a strange one at the time because I think they wanted to drop down from Cat 1. But it's a different Birmingham now to the one then.

aggi wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 11:21 am

Weren't Birmingham another one like us who got the provisional Category 1 during covid and then lost it again when inspections started back up again.

I've not really been following the story but looks like some serious investment going on at Birmingham. Looks like it might be tough in the Championship next season.

Yeah, you’d expect Wrexham will get a few quid thrown at them. Might be a good home for some of our fringe players too, with the JRod link. Really glad we’re out of it to be honest.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 11:23 am

Birmingham appear to have a lot of money behind them and have been pushing for it. Their technical academy director is Mike Rigg who was at Burnley for three years until summer 2021.

Ah didn’t know Mike Rigg was there. Interesting.

Yes, appreciate they appear to have some real money behind them now, even so, thought their dollars might be invested elsewhere in the short term. Well done them though for investing in the right places, great to see.

How does Birmingham's wealth compare to PL standards?

With accy closing the academy, does anyone know if the women's and junior grassroots teams are going too?

Only one way accy are going now. Shame for em

Sure is a shame for Stanley but as I said on another post owners need deep pockets and not be afaid to back their teams with serious investment. Reading scapped all women's teams and players had to bring sandwiches to training as their catering staff at the training ground were all sacked too to save wages. The guy allegedly taking over formally owned Wycombe. I have a feeling this is not the end of Readings financial fiasco.

Spijed wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 11:35 am

How does Birmingham's wealth compare to PL standards?

Aston Villa level - they have billions.

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 2:03 pm

Aston Villa level - they have billions.

Why can't we attract billions? Far more heritage and history than the second team in Birmingham

Longsider wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 4:29 pm

Why can't we attract billions? Far more heritage and history than the second team in Birmingham

not a City club mate, growth potential is different for us.

Birmingham City are the fourth time in Brum with Villa, Wolves and WBA all ahead of and Wallsall just behind them

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 4:57 pm

not a City club mate, growth potential is different for us.

Birmingham Council are looking at building a new £1Bn tramline to connect various parts of the city, one of them being the new Sports Quarter costing £2.9Bn housing Birmingham City’s new stadium.

The gap is already ridiculous, and we have clubs coming up behind us with far deeper pockets too.

There really needs to be a long term plan in place with regards to how we are going to continually develop as a club both on and off the field.

For a club with such a big fan base available on the doorstep they have never been as big as Villa and have lagged behind Wolves and West Brom in the West Midlands for quite a while.

TsarBomba wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 5:56 pm

Birmingham Council are looking at building a new £1Bn tramline to connect various parts of the city, one of them being the new Sports Quarter costing £2.9Bn housing Birmingham City’s new stadium.

The gap is already ridiculous, and we have clubs coming up behind us with far deeper pockets too.

There really needs to be a long term plan in place with regards to how we are going to continually develop as a club both on and off the field.

Birmingham Council can’t even sort out their bin men.

Woodleyclaret wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 5:54 pm

Birmingham City are the fourth time in Brum with Villa, Wolves and WBA all ahead of and Wallsall just behind them

Birmingham and Villa are the only teams in Brum. Both Wolverhampton and West Bromwich are not in Birmingham, they are Black Country and cities in their own right..

Walsall is also Black Country, apart from that you're spot on..

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 11:23 am

Birmingham appear to have a lot of money behind them and have been pushing for it. Their technical academy director is Mike Rigg who was at Burnley for three years until summer 2021.

Mike Rigg is the key in that story.

TsarBomba wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 5:56 pm

Birmingham Council are looking at building a new £1Bn tramline to connect various parts of the city, one of them being the new Sports Quarter costing £2.9Bn housing Birmingham City’s new stadium.

The gap is already ridiculous, and we have clubs coming up behind us with far deeper pockets too.

There really needs to be a long term plan in place with regards to how we are going to continually develop as a club both on and off the field.

yep, next season is huge for us. I don't know how but if we truly want to compete then we will likely need some big backers - pretty sad really

The problem with "big backers" though is that if what other people have already said on here is correct, their ability to spend gazillions on their team diminishes as they move up the leagues because the rules are more stringent. Brum will face restrictions in the championship they didn't have in league one. Then even greater restrictions in the PL if they get there. Or is that wrong?

Dark Cloud wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 7:36 pm

The problem with "big backers" though is that if what other people have already said on here is correct, their ability to spend gazillions on their team diminishes as they move up the leagues because the rules are more stringent. Brum will face restrictions in the championship they didn't have in league one. Then even greater restrictions in the PL if they get there. Or is that wrong?

Don’t think there’s any difference between the leagues in the EFL but the EFL rules are pretty stringent. Then when clubs get to the Premier League the PSR rules deduct £22m from your allowable £35m losses, meaning a club that has spent the prior two seasons in the Championship can have a combined 3 year losses £44m less than an established Premier League team. Which inevitably makes it harder to invest to establish yourself.

Your overall point is correct though, I think, which is having a rich owner doesn’t necessarily guarantee success in the way it otherwise would without all the regulations.

Question: If immensely rich backers spend money on the ground, training facilities, club infrastructure etc, I'm assuming that stuff doesn't count in FFP, or does it? I'd expect only money spent on "first team squad" players to be counted, but how does that work if you sign an expensive player for example, who proves to be rubbish and languishes in the reserves and never makes the first team?

Dark Cloud wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 9:29 pm

Question: If immensely rich backers spend money on the ground, training facilities, club infrastructure etc, I'm assuming that stuff doesn't count in FFP, or does it? I'd expect only money spent on "first team squad" players to be counted, but how does that work if you sign an expensive player for example, who proves to be rubbish and languishes in the reserves and never makes the first team?

Infrastructure, academy and women’s team spend are deducted from your PSR calculations as ‘allowable losses’. Player purchases count so a failed expensive signing counts towards your PSR calculations.

What rules in the Premier league? Flaunted with impunity by Everton , Forest, Chelsea and Citeh

TsarBomba wrote: ↑

Wed May 07, 2025 5:56 pm

Birmingham Council are looking at building a new £1Bn tramline to connect various parts of the city, one of them being the new Sports Quarter costing £2.9Bn housing Birmingham City’s new stadium.

Birmingham City's owners are saying the REGIONAL Transport Authority should fund a new tram line via their proposed new stadium then on to Birmingham Airport (despite there already being an electrified main line route and a limited stop bus route from the city centre direct to the Airport/ NEC. HS2 will also provide a direct link into the City from the Interchange station near the Airport when it is opened.

Birmingham City Council and most other West Midland local authorities oppose the plan on the grounds of cost, though supporting it "in principle".