Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
yellowrider120

'Young side' - RUBBISH

Recommended Posts

On 07/08/2020 at 21:11, hogesar said:

So just to clarify, contrary to this weird attempt to attack Farke and Webber in the original post, turns out, comparatively speaking, yes, we were a young side last season:

https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/canaries-premier-league-top-dogs-academy-minutes-played-1-6783447

Not that the above should have been needed to evidence that.

Except that just shows players from academies and is nothing to do with age - the two don't necessarily go hand in hand. Our "youth" are actually not quite as young as, for instance Man Utd's or Chelsea's - and clearly they are also not quite as good as Greenwood, Rashford, Abraham, Mount etc, or as experienced.

What is particularly interesting is the beginnings of a change of model by the top clubs, who are finally starting to develop some of their own talent rather than buy all of it in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sgncfc said:

Except that just shows players from academies and is nothing to do with age - the two don't necessarily go hand in hand. Our "youth" are actually not quite as young as, for instance Man Utd's or Chelsea's - and clearly they are also not quite as good as Greenwood, Rashford, Abraham, Mount etc, or as experienced.

What is particularly interesting is the beginnings of a change of model by the top clubs, who are finally starting to develop some of their own talent rather than buy all of it in.

No but my post was yet another bit of evidence to go along with the fact the average age of our starting eleven was the third youngest. So still, we had one of the youngest teams last season. That's a fact..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hogesar said:

No but my post was yet another bit of evidence to go along with the fact the average age of our starting eleven was the third youngest. So still, we had one of the youngest teams last season. That's a fact..

Was it the third youngest? As per my previous post, it was third youngest in September, but by March it was seventh youngest. This is a link to a Man Utd website article from March which has us as joint sixth average youngest starting xi (although Southampton also in joint sixth have a younger squad). 

Interestingly, that article also lists youngest average age of the squad as a whole - it only lists the top ten, but we have the oldest squad of all on that list.

https://www.manutd.com/en/news/detail/man-utd-are-the-youngest-team-in-the-premier-league

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Was it the third youngest? As per my previous post, it was third youngest in September, but by March it was seventh youngest. This is a link to a Man Utd website article from March which has us as joint sixth average youngest starting xi (although Southampton also in joint sixth have a younger squad). 

Interestingly, that article also lists youngest average age of the squad as a whole - it only lists the top ten, but we have the oldest squad of all on that list.

https://www.manutd.com/en/news/detail/man-utd-are-the-youngest-team-in-the-premier-league

So it’s not a fact we had the third youngest squad? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

So it’s not a fact we had the third youngest squad? 

Well looking at the graph Hogesar used previously it would appear that it was a fact in September after a handful of games.

The article I posted a few weeks ago was actually from May, during the lockdown - I said March above in error. The Man Utd link is from March. I haven’t seen any stats including the post-lockdown restart games, but would doubt we played a side young enough in those eight games to push us up to third youngest. And even if it did, we certainly haven’t got the third youngest squad - 10th youngest at best according to the man Utd article.

Edited by Aggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Aggy said:

Well looking at the graph Hogesar used previously it would appear that it was a fact in September after a handful of games.

The article I posted a few weeks ago was actually from a May, during the lockdown - I said March above in error. The Man Itd link is from March. I haven’t seen any stats including the post-lockdown restart games, but would doubt we played a side young enough in those eight games to push us up to third youngest. And even if it did, we certainly haven’t got the third youngest squad - 10th youngest at best according to the man Utd article.

Would have been nice to claim that after such a miserable season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/07/2020 at 16:37, yellowrider120 said:

One of the long standing myths perpetuated by Farke, Webber, the owners and even the gullible local media is that City are 'such a young team'. It is straightforward garbage yet no fan seems to pick this up and query it.

Take the starting line up on Saturday. FIVE players were age 30 or over and the average age was just short of 27 and a half. 'Young side', do me a favour. Not one single teenager in the starting line up. 'Inexperienced at PL level' yes but 'young' most definitely not.  Those who perpetuate this myth do so purely as an excuse for this seasons embarrassing shambles. Expect to here more of this truck over the next few days from those in power.

Completely agree with this well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...