Found this interesting article on the NY Times about globalization in the Premier League and what the FA intends to do about it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/02/u...2000&bicmet=1419773522000&_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0
I'm contrary to the opinion that more foreigners in the Prem make England weaker as a national team. At the end of the day, you can only field 11 players and I'll be damned if you can't find a top squad in a country with the population and football tradition of England.
By raising barriers to imported players, the FA would be creating a "handicap" that would put English players in a comfort zone instead of instigating improvement through increased competitiveness.
Also, as the article observes, the globalization is the very reason why English Premier League is the most successful sporting product worldwide. If you reduce the number of foreign players too drastically, you're meddling with a winning formula and you could see a drop in the interest from overseas, and therefore less foreign investment and lesser broadcasting contracts.
The FA shouldn't say English football is the victim here while they have the most exciting league in the world. This is better for the fans and for the association as well. Not to mention that the English players that do break through to become top players in the league should be considered the very best, elite players that the country can count on to send their 23 men squad to World Cups.
If they're not satisfied with the National Team performances, I'd say the problem lies elsewhere judging by the way the team has been playing and their approach to the game.
If Dyke and the FA bosses really are toying with this idea, I'd say this is pretty much backwards thinking and a shame if it comes to that.