The_Lions_Roar Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 The problem with building such a young squad is young players are notoriously inconsistent and that has shown in our results. It does take the mick though the ridiculous extremes of results we've had in his tenure and it doesn't reflect well on his managerial ability imo that we always flop badly after a result against a top team during his 18 months here. .....but these young 'uns ain't so young anymore....The argument is valid,( when they are c 20's) but waning. I think its more about mentality and approach to the game. As an average age for a premier league side they are still young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romavillan Posted March 25, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted March 25, 2014 these are average ages before the Jan transfer window... 1. Aston Villa | 24y 64d 2. Southampton | 24y 342d 3. Tottenham | 25y 33d 4. Arsenal | 25y 110d 5. Liverpool | 25y 160d 6. Sunderland | 25y 298d 7. Cardiff | 26y 20d 8. Swansea | 26y 86d 9. Norwich | 26y 202d 10. Newcastle | 26y 220d 11. Everton | 26y 354d 12. Man City | 26y 356d 13. Chelsea | 26y 362d 14. Hull | 27y 40d 15. Man United | 27y 112d 16. West Brom | 27y 295d 17. Stoke | 28y 23d 18. Crystal Palace | 28y 84d 19. West Ham | 28y 228d 20. Fulham | 29y 30d ...so can we stop saying that the youngsters aren't young anymore and shoudl be playing consistently every week? It's not just one or 2 youngsters, our SQUAD is young, if we keep the best elements together for a few years and add quality we're looking good long term IMO. We have the youngest squad by nearly 300 days, so nearly a year. Everyone's upset after the Stoke game, probably more so after we'd won 2 on the bounce thinking we should batter them after beating Chelsea etc. Let's not lose sight of where we are though, and that's near the start of something long term. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Yes the squad is young but the mix (or lack there of) is all wrong, that's what's causing the problems. We have loads of 23-25 year old but still inexperienced players but very young or older experienced players. If you look at Southampton it's not the 300 days the are older that is the difference, it's that the have the right mix of young talented players and more experienced ones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romavillan Posted March 25, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted March 25, 2014 Yes the squad is young but the mix (or lack there of) is all wrong, that's what's causing the problems. We have loads of 23-25 year old but still inexperienced players but very young or older experienced players. If you look at Southampton it's not the 300 days the are older that is the difference, it's that the have the right mix of young talented players and more experienced ones I agree, that's why it's ballsy, if we keep a core group of this squad that play together for 5 more years getting more experienced and improving etc. Adding youth from the academy and buying quality where we need it. Then you'd think in a few years we'd have some experienced heads who are villa through and through, know each other's game inside out and be a solid unit that we could integrate academy prospects into without as now having to chuck a load in at the deep end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Yes the squad is young but the mix (or lack there of) is all wrong, that's what's causing the problems. We have loads of 23-25 year old but still inexperienced players but very young or older experienced players. If you look at Southampton it's not the 300 days the are older that is the difference, it's that the have the right mix of young talented players and more experienced ones Southampton have been building that core for many yrs, they didn't just turn up and throw young kids in. They've also spent the same money as us but on 3 players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Southampton are now a rich club. Their "more experienced" players cost an arm and a leg, and I bet their "young talented" players are on good wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Young is not the problem. Professional maturity is the problem. Yes they are often related, but they are also often independent as well. Take me for example. I'm 56 years old and have 22 year old students that are much more mature than I. I've also looked at the ages of some of the VT posters of the most immature tantrums. Age is often independent of professional maturity. (You know who you are ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 We've struggled against physical teams for quite some time now, even way before Lambert and most of the current squad. I mean look at our record against Stoke - this is their 6th season in the Premier league yet we've only beaten them twice in that time, which is pretty poor when you consider that for the most part they've always been just a bunch of lower-midtable cloggers. I cant agree. we handled West Ham and Stoke well in the back end of last season. Stoke didn't even have to be physical on sunday as they outplayed us and the words stoke and outplay you should never go together 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) We've struggled against physical teams for quite some time now, even way before Lambert and most of the current squad. I mean look at our record against Stoke - this is their 6th season in the Premier league yet we've only beaten them twice in that time, which is pretty poor when you consider that for the most part they've always been just a bunch of lower-midtable cloggers. I cant agree. we handled West Ham and Stoke well in the back end of last season. Stoke didn't even have to be physical on sunday as they outplayed us and the words stoke and outplay you should never go together I'm not saying we can never beat physical teams, but generally we struggle against them. I mean, I can't really think of any physical teams that we have a good record against. Not sure Stoke outplayed us that much. I think the most decisive factor was that they proved to be simply too strong for us physically. Edited March 25, 2014 by Mantis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) Southampton are now a rich club. Their "more experienced" players cost an arm and a leg, and I bet their "young talented" players are on good wages. Which ones would those be? Boruc (Free) Fonte (£1.2m) Davies (Free) Lambert (£1m) Edit: I assume by 'more experienced' you are referring to players over the age of 24, or maybe even higher? Edited March 25, 2014 by Isa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArteSuave Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) Southampton are now a rich club. Their "more experienced" players cost an arm and a leg, and I bet their "young talented" players are on good wages.Which ones would those be? Boruc (Free) Fonte (£1.2m) Davies (Free) Lambert (£1m) That psycho Italian was expensive and so was Lovren I think. Most of their big fees went on young players like Gaston and the best tackling forward in world football though rather than experience. Edited March 25, 2014 by ArteSuave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) Lovren had just turned 24 when they signed him though which would render him 'inexperienced' and a 'kid' by VT standards. Osvaldo I'll give you but his career there is basically already over. Edited March 25, 2014 by Isa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordSepulchrave Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Well Southampton are leagues ahead of us in bringing through youngsters and playing them consistently - Lallana (25) and Schneiderlin (24) have been first team players for six years for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 That probably has something to do with them actually giving their youngsters a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Southampton are now a rich club. Their "more experienced" players cost an arm and a leg, and I bet their "young talented" players are on good wages. Which ones would those be? Boruc (Free) Fonte (£1.2m) Davies (Free) Lambert (£1m) Edit: I assume by 'more experienced' you are referring to players over the age of 24, or maybe even higher? that Lambert fee was when they were in 3rd division and was probably a record transfer for teams in that divison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArteSuave Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 That probably has something to do with them actually giving their youngsters a chance. True but that is easier to do when you're in League 1 (and your academy produces the quality of Bale, Walcott, AOC and Lallana). Which of our youngsters should have gotten more of a chance? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) 24 is ancient by Aston Villa signing standards. Edited March 25, 2014 by CrackpotForeigner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) Our academy graduates like Weimann, Baker, Clark,Albrighton and Gardner are all floating around the first team, what is clear they are no way near good enough to command a starting place, so if they are that standard, lets just bring in the kids below them. We need to face it, our youth set up really isn't as good as we think it is. Edited March 25, 2014 by SikhInTrinity 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 That probably has something to do with them actually giving their youngsters a chance. That probably has something to do with Southampton being in League One four seasons ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArteSuave Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Our academy graduates like Weimann, Baker, Clark,Albrighton and Gardner are all floating around the first team, what is clear they are no way near good enough to command a starting place, so if they are that standard, lets just bring in the kids below them. We need to face it, our youth set up really isn't as good as we think it is. And it probably never will be now EPPP is doing its thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts