Experience

[Rosco]

Kind of a side shoot from the Dempsey thread. Some people have mentioned it as one of the reasons to sign him.

I can't help but wonder though, is experience a quality that should increase the price of a player? I think it's the most overvalued commodity in football (leaving aside Fernando Torres for now).

I understand the theory, the more you play the more comfortable and confident you feel, the better you know the opposition etc. Given how prevalent football analysts are nowadays and we hear about how often players watch videos of both themselves and opposition why can't a smart young player learn more quickly than players from past eras?

I firmly believe that the most important thing for a player is their physical condition, they'll play their best when they're at their fittest. Every time we cite experience as a reason to sign a player we end up with an overpriced decent player.

 

[Mystic]

It is valuable, the likes of Gerrard, Carragher, Reina, Agger and co have always helped us through with there experience of big occasions in the past. I don't think we should buy experience though, experience should be developed in the team over the years, just like the four I mentioned have done.

 

[Woland]

Well there's different grades. Dempsey doesn't have the league winning / CL winning experience that would seem to attract a premium, he's just old.

Having said that, I'd like him in the side because he's a good footballer.

 

[keniget]

I think you are largely right. I do think experience helps in key moments in a competition or a match but generally you just need quality.

People have talked about Arsenal needing experience a lot when what they've needed more than anything is quality in one or two key areas.

 

[Richey]

Every time we cite experience as a reason to sign a player we end up with an overpriced decent player.

Gary McAllister?

 

[FoxForceFive]

It's a tricky one.

There is no doubt that having at least one older head in the side helps ease younger players through difficult times, & deal with pressure of fighting for titles etc.

I have no doubt the amount of winners city have in their squad helped them keep going last season.

However it's unquantifiable really, cos I have no doubt some winners, like Adebayor for example,wouldnt help in that regard.

So, in summary, yes & no!

 

[Woland]

RACIST

 

[FoxForceFive]

Gary McAllister?

Great example. He won us games through talent & no doubt bolstered the squad with experience in relieving tension through relaxing them & arm round the shoulder.

That's a rare find though.

 

[FoxForceFive]

RACIST

I'm a princess, I'm allowed to be racist.

*should stop referring to himself as a princess*

 

[Rosco]

Go with deaf instead Jon

 

[FoxForceFive]

Go with deaf instead Jon

WHAT? SPEAK UP!

*gets coat*

 

[peterhague]

It's an interesting question. I think the evidence is that experience is fairly important, though, at least as far as I can see. If peak condition was the dominant factor we'd see far more players at their best around 22 or 23, wouldn't we, rather than 25-28? As in old enough to have got that small amount of requisite experience Ross mentioned but still at absolute prime fitness. It's different from a sport like tennis where players decline younger.

Although, tbh, I'm not sure when a person actually reaches the peak of their physical powers. Aren't sprinters quite often 30+, for example?

 

[Rosco]

It's different for everyone, studies have shown agility and acceleration etc peak at around 25 - with the mention of tennis, that's probably why so few win majors in their late twenties. strength is something that peaks later and lasts longer.

So Usain Bolt set the 100m record aged 23 or something like that.

 

[Rosco]

There are plenty of players who have peaked in their early twenties btw, we've had three pact strikers that did it.

It's no surprise that each of them dropped off significantly after the pace was gone, with the one who lacked any real skill or technique falling the furthest, he's touted his experience as a selling point in his brochure. Nobody valued it, quite correctly.

 

[hmmmmm1]

The Ajax team of mid 90's that won the European had the perfect mix

 

[FoxForceFive]

There are plenty of players who have peaked in their early twenties btw, we've had three pact strikers that did it.

It's no surprise that each of them dropped off significantly after the pace was gone, with the one who lacked any real skill or technique falling the furthest, he's touted his experience as a selling point in his brochure. Nobody valued it, quite correctly.

Going a little off topic here, so don't ban me Ross please.

Kinda fits here though, apparently Bellamy puts down his ability in keeping his pace down to his trainer.

That same trainer uses the exact same methodology in deciding when Bellamy should play & what training he should do as Rodgers now uses for the full team.

I like that, cos it hopefully means it'll help Stevie keep his burst of pace for a while.

 

[Woland]

Playing football is a lot like making love to a beautiful woman.

When I was younger I'd just get in there, get the job done, fuck it, wipe my dick on the curtains and off. A sort of Carragher of a shag. Now I'm older, I mightn't have the jackhammer skills, my arse mightn't be buzzing like a bee's wing, but I'll be gentle, shove a finger up her arse, lick her minge as if I care, take the time and effort to withdraw and blort all over her tits. - more of a Zidane, refined kind of lover.

So yeah. I was on about something then.

 

[Rosco]

I consider Bellamy an unusual case, how many footballers take that much of an interest into finding out what works for them to the point where they're willing to fall out with a manager and club over it? Even still, I don't think anyone would argue that Bellamys best seasons are already behind him.

Players who look after themselves the way he does will last longer at the top. Not many do though, a great non football example of it is Steve Nash, NBA player now with the Lakers. 37 years old, still playing really well and just got a three year deal. He studied diet and sleep in particular to help himself along.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

It's tough to use the NBA as an example b/c how often we see players playing well into their mid 30s (Garnett does it, Malone did it, Stockton did it, Kobe is 33? etc)

 

[peterhague]

On another slight tangent, I've wondered before whether it'd be a soccernomics kind of thing to try and avoid buying pacy players as much as possible. Given that pace is probably the most precarious of a footballer's assets, is it better to invest in other assets they're less likely to lose? If 2 players, one with pace and one without, both cost £20m, it follows that the one without pace has other attributes (let's say technique, keep it simple) that the fast player doesn't. So in theory you're more likely to have a better player in 5 years if you go for the slow one, because he's less likely to suffer an important loss.

I dunno, maybe pace is just too important a part of the modern game to make it work in practice, but it's an interesting idea.

 

[FoxForceFive]

I consider Bellamy an unusual case, how many footballers take that much of an interest into finding out what works for them to the point where they're willing to fall out with a manager and club over it? Even still, I don't think anyone would argue that Bellamys best seasons are already behind him.

Players who look after themselves the way he does will last longer at the top. Not many do though, a great non football example of it is Steve Nash, NBA player now with the Lakers. 37 years old, still playing really well and just got a three year deal. He studied diet and sleep in particular to help himself along.

Undoubtedly he is, but the fact Rodgers understands what his trainer does & will be using it has to be effective at getting more out of older players & increasing longevity of others.

It may even mean we get better value out of the likes of Dempsey then we would automatically assume we would.

 

[FoxForceFive]

On another slight tangent, I've wondered before whether it'd be a soccernomics kind of thing to try and avoid buying pacy players as much as possible. Given that pace is probably the most precarious of a footballer's assets, is it better to invest in other assets they're less likely to lose? If 2 players, one with pace and one without, both cost £20m, it follows that the one without pace has other attributes (let's say technique, keep it simple) that the fast player doesn't. So in theory you're more likely to have a better player in 5 years if you go for the slow one, because he's less likely to suffer an important loss.

I dunno, maybe pace is just too important a part of the modern game to make it work in practice, but it's an interesting idea.

Depends on the position, as Rodgers system needs some pace in key areas to work effectively. They don't need to be the fastest players on earth, but some need to be able to get into space & stretch pretty fucking quickly.

 

[Woland]

I really don't think that Rodgers is a good advert for longevity. Unless he knows tons about health and nutrition and just chooses to eat pie butties and drink WKD for breakfast. He looks about 50.

 

[Vlads Quiff]

I mentioned this in another thread but it didn't draw comment.
I don't think Dempsey's 29 should be viewed with concern, he only signed pro when he was 22, as he was a product of the USA University/collegiate system, by that age all our too player's had lumps kicked out if them and over worked themselves for five years. He had a pretty cotton wooled existence until then.
I think it is a key factor.

regards

 

[Athens]

I mentioned this in another thread but it didn't draw comment.
I don't think Dempsey's 29 should be viewed with concern, he only signed pro when he was 22, as he was a product of the USA University/collegiate system, by that age all our too player's had lumps kicked out if them and over worked themselves for five years. He had a pretty cotton wooled existence until then.
I think it is a key factor.

regards

You've done too much, much too young...

I think you could be on to something there.

 

[Modo]

I mentioned this in another thread but it didn't draw comment.
I don't think Dempsey's 29 should be viewed with concern, he only signed pro when he was 22, as he was a product of the USA University/collegiate system, by that age all our too player's had lumps kicked out if them and over worked themselves for five years. He had a pretty cotton wooled existence until then.
I think it is a key factor.

regards

This.

 

[RolandG]

Depending on the needs of the team, experience is a valuable commodity but must be balanced with potential and quality.

 

[Frogfish]

Well there's different grades. Dempsey doesn't have the league winning / CL winning experience that would seem to attract a premium, he's just old.

Having said that, I'd like him in the side because he's a good footballer.

Which is totally irrelevant unless you are in the title race or up against continental teams.

However we often cite Sami, Mac and Didi as great players whose experience helped them retain their quality well past their sell-by dates. However that said it depends on the player. Some just get older and lose their quality, others can use that experience to prolong their careers. good luck to you deciding which is which until after they have proven which type they are !