You don't win anything with kids...

[mightyspur]

Alan Hansen infamously said that 20 years ago in the 95/96 season after Man U lost to Villa 3-1. Of course they went on to claim the premier league crown that season.

I checked the stats and apparently United won the league with six players under the age of 23 playing over 10 games that season and since then no other side in the Premier League has even matched that figure. The average number of U23s playing regularly in a title-winning squad since 1992 stands at just 2.5. Manchester's average age that year was 24.

Only five premier league sides have won the title with an average age of under 27 and no side has achieved that feat for 9 years!

Looking at Spurs' squad of 29 players our average age is 24.7, but if you compare it to the stat where by Utd won the league with 6 players playing over 10 games that season, I calculate we have (or will have) at least 7:

Harry Kane (22) 29 appearances
Eric Dier (22) 28 appearances
Son Heung-min (23) 21 appearances
Dele Alli (19) 27 appearances
Carroll (23) 16 appearances
Ben Davies (22) 15 appearances
Kevin Wimmer (23) only 7 appearances so far, but I'm sure he'll play at least 3 of the last 8

There is also an argument to include Lamela seeing as he only turned 24 10 days ago, so that would make 8 players.

Let's hope we prove Mr Hansen wrong as Man U did 20 years ago!

The future is bright though eh? So even if we miss out on the title I can't help but think this group of players can go on and do something special for us over the next few years...

 

[TaoistMonkey]

From what I read on here we will be so obsessed with the league we won't take anything else seriously enough and will probably end up like Arsenal.

 

[yido_number1]

Lets win the league first and then worry about the age of the team.

 

[mightyspur]

Lets win the league first and then worry about the age of the team.

Who's worrying?

 

[beats1]

Alan Hansen infamously said that 20 years ago in the 95/96 season after Man U lost to Villa 3-1. Of course they went on to claim the premier league crown that season.

I checked the stats and apparently United won the league with six players under the age of 23 playing over 10 games that season and since then no other side in the Premier League has even matched that figure. The average number of U23s playing regularly in a title-winning squad since 1992 stands at just 2.5. Manchester's average age that year was 24.

Only five premier league sides have won the title with an average age of under 27 and no side has achieved that feat for 9 years!

Looking at Spurs' squad of 29 players our average age is 24.7, but if you compare it to the stat where by Utd won the league with 6 players playing over 10 games that season, I calculate we have (or will have) at least 7:

Harry Kane (22) 29 appearances
Eric Dier (22) 28 appearances
Son Heung-min (23) 21 appearances
Dele Alli (19) 27 appearances
Carroll (23) 16 appearances
Ben Davies (22) 15 appearances
Kevin Wimmer (23) only 7 appearances so far, but I'm sure he'll play at least 3 of the last 8

There is also an argument to include Lamela seeing as he only turned 24 10 days ago, so that would make 8 players.

Let's hope we prove Mr Hansen wrong as Man U did 20 years ago!

The future is bright though eh? So even if we miss out on the title I can't help but think this group of players can go on and do something special for us over the next few years...

I did a post on this ages ago, here it is:

"Having too many games often does take its toll on teams hence why even the great teams don't win all competitions. We are a young team but worth noting there is a lack of experience and you don't win anything with kids. That united team had won the PL in 1996 still had Schmeichel(32/33), Irwin(29/30), Bruce(34/35), Pallister(30), Cantona(29/30) and McClair(31/32), all first team player who were over 30 as the season ended. Meanwhile we have one player over 30 and thats Vorm and he hasnt won anything of note in his career.

The youngest premier league team to win the title is Chelsea with an average squad age of players who made 10 appearances or more is 25 years and 312 days. Our current first 11 age is about 24 years and 302 days but worth noting that the players we are bringing on are younger and my rough calculation on players who have played this season 10 times already would have our average at 24.3 years old. If you consider that these players will get this amount of games till the end of the season Bentaleb(5), Onomah(4), N'Jie(3), Trippier(6), then that average age will go down to 23.74 years old.

Where us or Leicester to win the PL title it would be imo the biggest thing/achievement to happen in english football since Nottingham Forest winning the title in 1979. Since the 80's a select privileged few have dominated football mainly by being richer than their opponents especially in the PL era. However this would send a message saying that you don't need to spend to win the league and rather you either need spend wisely or invest in young talent and build a team, which isn't a very english thing."

So my point is that Alan Hansan wasn't wrong and that no team has won anything with kids as most teams that have won it at least had a lot of older players and Man Yoo doesn't count since they had 6 first team players that were 30 or over that season that played 10 games or more whereas we will have none!!!

Also that Chelsea team had these players over the age of 30: Makelele (31/32) and Cudicini (31). Though worth noting they did have a lot of experience in Carvalho(CL winner), Ferreira(CL winner) and Geremi (2x CL winner)

 

[yido_number1]

Who's worrying?

It's a saying, not literal. Age of the team and being the youngest to win it is all irrelevant if we don't win it.

 

[mightyspur]

It's a saying, not literal. Age of the team and being the youngest to win it is all irrelevant if we don't win it.

Whilst I agree being the youngest to win it is irrelevant if we don't win it, I was more pointing towards the fact they are so young as a team, that we have the potential to push on and dominate. Just a good position to be in.

 

[Gaz_Gammon]

Let's win something first. Pride before a fall and all that.

 

[Rocksuperstar]

 

[riggi]

No way. I was literally just going to post this.

 

[Blackrat1299]

This is what you can do with KIDS. Our KIDS

https://youtu.be/_CUFApV-Oeo

 

[Gbspurs]

This is probably one of my most randomly repeated Simpsons quotes along with "Lisa needs braces......DENTAL PLAN".

 

[yido_number1]

Whilst I agree being the youngest to win it is irrelevant if we don't win it, I was more pointing towards the fact they are so young as a team, that we have the potential to push on and dominate. Just a good position to be in.

I completely agree with that, the future is very exciting, I hope these players stay with us and continue to develop. There are probably only two players in our current squad that I would move on and I wouldn't mention their names. Just players I feel we can improve on.

I'm really excited to see the young players carry on developing and people like Son settling in and performing to their level. I hope people don't set their expectations based on this year though.

 

[Rocksuperstar]

This is probably one of my most randomly repeated Simpsons quotes along with "Lisa needs braces......DENTAL PLAN".

Saxamophone? Sax a ma phooooone!

 

[mano-obe]

Paul Scholes did agree with Hansen that you can't win it with kids, they needed the big boys like Keane and Cantona to push them even further. We have that bit of experience with Lloris, Alderwierd, Vertonghen and Dembele. Hopefully we can do it, but I know what Spurs are like. The future is bright either way

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

So my point is that Alan Hansan wasn't wrong and that no team has won anything with kids as most teams that have won it at least had a lot of older players and Man Yoo doesn't count since they had 6 first team players that were 30 or over that season that played 10 games or more whereas we will have none!!!

Man United doesn't count? How on beelzebubs testicles do you come to that conclusion when it was United he was actually talking about? I've seen some wrangling and twisting of things to fit an imaginary 'point' here on SC and this one is right up there in the suspension of reality stakes

 

[beats1]

Man United doesn't count? How on beelzebubs testicles do you come to that conclusion when it was United he was actually talking about? I've seen some wrangling and twisting of things to fit an imaginary 'point' here on SC and this one is right up there in the suspension of reality stakes

He said that after Man Utd fielded a weak team and were missing some big players that week with injuries and it was in regard to not signing new players.

“They've got problems, not major problems,” he said. “The trick is always buy when you're strong, so [Ferguson] needs to buy players. The trick to winning the championship is having strength in depth, they just haven't got it.”

How is it an imaginary point, if the fact they had 6 players over the age of 30 that won the league that season, hardly a team of kids is it?

They aren't even the youngest team to win the league and an average squad age with 10 games or more, of 26 and half years old is hardly a team full of kids

Compare that to our team which is nearly 2 and half years younger and no players over 30, we are kids. Also I said this at the start of the season as a reason why wouldn't win the title

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

He said that after Man Utd fielded a weak team and were missing some big players that week with injuries and it was in regard to not signing new players.

“They've got problems, not major problems,” he said. “The trick is always buy when you're strong, so [Ferguson] needs to buy players. The trick to winning the championship is having strength in depth, they just haven't got it.”

How is it an imaginary point, if the fact they had 6 players over the age of 30 that won the league that season, hardly a team of kids is it?

They aren't even the youngest team to win the league and an average squad age with 10 games or more, of 26 and half years old is hardly a team full of kids

Compare that to our team which is nearly 2 and half years younger and no players over 30, we are kids. Also I said this at the start of the season as a reason why wouldn't win the title

You're taking it completely out of context, he was referring to the number of young players Fergie was fielding not that the team was made up entirely of kids. And to suggest United don't count when it was specifically them Hansen was talking about is utterly ridiculous, they obviously do count and they obviously did play a lot of kids. David Beckham, Nicky Butt, Ryan Giggs, Gary Neville, Paul Scholes and Phil Neville. You're applying modern day standards to a footballing quote that's over 20 years old.

But on the other hand, as I said, its more than 20 years ago so if you want to twist and turn it like a twisty turny thing, fill your boots, its not worth losing any sleep over, I just thought it a strange thing to say

 

[Rocksuperstar]

@philip omnomnomnom - considering the theme of the gif, i take that vote as one of approval

 

[spurs9]

Man United doesn't count? How on beelzebubs testicles do you come to that conclusion when it was United he was actually talking about? I've seen some wrangling and twisting of things to fit an imaginary 'point' here on SC and this one is right up there in the suspension of reality stakes

The quote has been use out of context over the years. Hansen was actually just talking about Utd selling Hughes, Ince & Kanchelskis and replacing them with Scholes, Butt and Beckham rather than buying experienced players.

The quote gets brandished around like Man Utd had a team full of kids, which is actually out of contect as, as @beats1 said, they had Schmeichel, Bruce, Pallister, Irwin, McClair & Cantona all over 28 and Keane, Sharpe and Cole weren't exactly babies at 24 either.