274 changes were made by teams across 19 matches in Tuesday's second round EFL Cup ties. Six teams changed their entire starting XI from their preceding league game.
Crystal Palace and Brighton were among the many sides with grounds well below capacity.
"If the fans know their manager is not going to pick the strongest team then they don't want to turn up," said former Everton midfielder Leon Osman. Osman was at Sheffield United for Radio 5 live, where 11,280 fans turned up in a stadium with a capacity of 32,702. He added, "Tonight's a top game against Premier League opposition but the supporters haven't come. Maybe the changes devalue the competition in that way."
The question I'd ask is if teams treat competitions in this way then what benefit are sponsors going to derive from associating themselves with game? Media coverage of the games will thus decline, so sponsors will become harder to find and the income derived by clubs from these games will also reduce.
Astonishingly it isn't only top teams that field weakened sides. Brighton changed their entire team. Considering their start in the league I could understand trying out a few changes, but what do you learn by playing eleven new players? Surely you want to see whether you have players who can fit into what was, until your previous defeat, your best eleven? In the First Round of the competition even Accrington made big changes from their winning eleven the previous Saturday, they met Preston, who had also won in the league, and who also fielded a changed side. Surprisingly Accrington Stand-ins versus Preston North-East Enders didn't draw in the crowds. And what do Accrington permanently lack but crowds? And then Accrington won, but of course because of all the changes it isn't the huge shock that revitalises football in the town, gets everyone talking, and becomes a glorious part of local sporting history. It slides quietly off the page into an anonymous second-round defeat.
What do you think? Would you make changes? And if so, what would you do?
Crystal Palace and Brighton were among the many sides with grounds well below capacity.
"If the fans know their manager is not going to pick the strongest team then they don't want to turn up," said former Everton midfielder Leon Osman. Osman was at Sheffield United for Radio 5 live, where 11,280 fans turned up in a stadium with a capacity of 32,702. He added, "Tonight's a top game against Premier League opposition but the supporters haven't come. Maybe the changes devalue the competition in that way."
The question I'd ask is if teams treat competitions in this way then what benefit are sponsors going to derive from associating themselves with game? Media coverage of the games will thus decline, so sponsors will become harder to find and the income derived by clubs from these games will also reduce.
Astonishingly it isn't only top teams that field weakened sides. Brighton changed their entire team. Considering their start in the league I could understand trying out a few changes, but what do you learn by playing eleven new players? Surely you want to see whether you have players who can fit into what was, until your previous defeat, your best eleven? In the First Round of the competition even Accrington made big changes from their winning eleven the previous Saturday, they met Preston, who had also won in the league, and who also fielded a changed side. Surprisingly Accrington Stand-ins versus Preston North-East Enders didn't draw in the crowds. And what do Accrington permanently lack but crowds? And then Accrington won, but of course because of all the changes it isn't the huge shock that revitalises football in the town, gets everyone talking, and becomes a glorious part of local sporting history. It slides quietly off the page into an anonymous second-round defeat.
What do you think? Would you make changes? And if so, what would you do?