I hear the same lies regurgitated over and over. The thread to try and point out lies and try to find the truth. What I say is also maybe not correct - I would appreciate an education if its wrong. Also raise any other points that the CAF believes or the general football community that are not true.
You cant win with kids - I don’t understand why people keep up this view that we should just play the kids – Chong, Gomez, Greenwood . Its been 20 years since Hansen said this and he was only wrong via a freak crop of ridiculously good young players.
Since then and before the 95/96 United the league has never been won by a group of young kids. The average number of under 23’s in a Premier league winning side is around 2. The average age is around 27. Its like someone saying Leicester will never win the league then 20 years on everyone still trying to replicate what they did. Its nonsense.
On top of it the 95/96 team were all over 20 except P Neville. And they came into a successful team. Ok the previous season was hampered by kung Fu kicks and we didn’t win but we were still second and a very successful team at that stage. Now we want to rely on Chong, Gomez, Greenwood – all under 20. 17, 18 and 19 year olds. On top of that we want them to walk into a team that came sixth. Had massive unrest in the dressing room and generally is sht.
No current top team is relying on kids. None. 0. Nada. Yes they have some youngsters coming through but the foundations are experienced pros that have proven themselves year in year out.
Why do we keep banging on about this. Its factually incorrect as a proven methodology. Win with kids was an outlier in in statistical data.
It takes time to build a team. This factually correct but its more meaningless drivel spouted out as a positive when reality it is an excuse. Yes there is a period of time between not being successful and being successful. But just saying we need time to build a team is wishy washy grey statement that has no factual basis to stand on. What does it mean? – 1 year? 2? 10? Its like going to a restaurant and they say it takes time to make your food. Yeah ok but what a stupid pointless statement. You need a concrete educated guess – 30/40 minutes Sir. Or football wise we need a plan – Year 1 fourth/ Year 2 Second /Year 3 - First. Don’t just say time.
When Chelsea were bought out in what 2003 they went from around 3/4 to second to first. When Man City were bought out 2008? They went from 10 to 5 to 1st. So lets say 3 seasons? But these were teams with no history. They were nothing clubs. Especially City. They were a nothing bottom half club so their starting baseline should be much lower than ours. Also they made massive leaps every season. We are a totally different proposition. We were Champions when Sir Alex left. The most successful and best team and with a sht load of history. Then we have had 6 years of – 7th, 4th, 5th, 6th, 2nd, 6th and a Europa thrown in. So that’s 6 years – how much longer is this rebuild going to take?
We should buy British Players – Again where is the facts to back up this statement? The number of British players has been dropping every year in the Premier league. Its around what 35 percent British players now. And in the top 6 even lower – 20 percent? What does that say? It says that there are not enough top quality British players. And it tells us the top teams are winning the Premiership not by building a British core but doing the opposite. So how does this grand theory hold up? It goes against all the actual reality of the current situation in the premier league.
We have bought some good British players – James, Maguire, WB. And we have some promising British players. But even if we win the league next year that does not support this theory. It will be a statistical outlier. Just like you cant win things with kids.
You don’t need to spend money – Chelsea after bought out Abramovich spent massively – 100 net spend over 2 or 3 seasons. Man City the same. They didn’t just go from sht teams to good teams spending on bargains here and there. They spent massively. Both teams are the amongst the top 5 spenders over the last what 10 years including Real, Baraca etc. The outlier is Leicester but you can see what happened to them after they failed to keep investing very large numbers. It shows you cannot sustain top four without a massive spend. Two other teams are up there without massive spends Liverpool and Spurs. Liverpool is a bit of a myth. They fluked by selling Coutinho for 140 mill and then spent all that cash in 2018 on top players – Van Dijk record CB signing but they also got Fabinho, Keita and Allison in 2018. Spurs has managed with little spending but what have they won? Nothing. Statistically you need to spend money to make it to the top and the lower you are the more you have to spend.
You cant win with kids - I don’t understand why people keep up this view that we should just play the kids – Chong, Gomez, Greenwood . Its been 20 years since Hansen said this and he was only wrong via a freak crop of ridiculously good young players.
Since then and before the 95/96 United the league has never been won by a group of young kids. The average number of under 23’s in a Premier league winning side is around 2. The average age is around 27. Its like someone saying Leicester will never win the league then 20 years on everyone still trying to replicate what they did. Its nonsense.
On top of it the 95/96 team were all over 20 except P Neville. And they came into a successful team. Ok the previous season was hampered by kung Fu kicks and we didn’t win but we were still second and a very successful team at that stage. Now we want to rely on Chong, Gomez, Greenwood – all under 20. 17, 18 and 19 year olds. On top of that we want them to walk into a team that came sixth. Had massive unrest in the dressing room and generally is sht.
No current top team is relying on kids. None. 0. Nada. Yes they have some youngsters coming through but the foundations are experienced pros that have proven themselves year in year out.
Why do we keep banging on about this. Its factually incorrect as a proven methodology. Win with kids was an outlier in in statistical data.
It takes time to build a team. This factually correct but its more meaningless drivel spouted out as a positive when reality it is an excuse. Yes there is a period of time between not being successful and being successful. But just saying we need time to build a team is wishy washy grey statement that has no factual basis to stand on. What does it mean? – 1 year? 2? 10? Its like going to a restaurant and they say it takes time to make your food. Yeah ok but what a stupid pointless statement. You need a concrete educated guess – 30/40 minutes Sir. Or football wise we need a plan – Year 1 fourth/ Year 2 Second /Year 3 - First. Don’t just say time.
When Chelsea were bought out in what 2003 they went from around 3/4 to second to first. When Man City were bought out 2008? They went from 10 to 5 to 1st. So lets say 3 seasons? But these were teams with no history. They were nothing clubs. Especially City. They were a nothing bottom half club so their starting baseline should be much lower than ours. Also they made massive leaps every season. We are a totally different proposition. We were Champions when Sir Alex left. The most successful and best team and with a sht load of history. Then we have had 6 years of – 7th, 4th, 5th, 6th, 2nd, 6th and a Europa thrown in. So that’s 6 years – how much longer is this rebuild going to take?
We should buy British Players – Again where is the facts to back up this statement? The number of British players has been dropping every year in the Premier league. Its around what 35 percent British players now. And in the top 6 even lower – 20 percent? What does that say? It says that there are not enough top quality British players. And it tells us the top teams are winning the Premiership not by building a British core but doing the opposite. So how does this grand theory hold up? It goes against all the actual reality of the current situation in the premier league.
We have bought some good British players – James, Maguire, WB. And we have some promising British players. But even if we win the league next year that does not support this theory. It will be a statistical outlier. Just like you cant win things with kids.
You don’t need to spend money – Chelsea after bought out Abramovich spent massively – 100 net spend over 2 or 3 seasons. Man City the same. They didn’t just go from sht teams to good teams spending on bargains here and there. They spent massively. Both teams are the amongst the top 5 spenders over the last what 10 years including Real, Baraca etc. The outlier is Leicester but you can see what happened to them after they failed to keep investing very large numbers. It shows you cannot sustain top four without a massive spend. Two other teams are up there without massive spends Liverpool and Spurs. Liverpool is a bit of a myth. They fluked by selling Coutinho for 140 mill and then spent all that cash in 2018 on top players – Van Dijk record CB signing but they also got Fabinho, Keita and Allison in 2018. Spurs has managed with little spending but what have they won? Nothing. Statistically you need to spend money to make it to the top and the lower you are the more you have to spend.
