There is an interesting article in todays Age
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/young-is-the-new-black/2007/12/22/1198175414021.html
To parahrase, its about who has the youngest list and what that means. What the article goes on to say is that its more important about games played than which team is 24.5 years old across the board. Also how important list management and devleopment is (duh!). Anyhoo, it does not mention the Tiges being in the top 3, so i can only guess were are 4, 5, 6 somewhere round there.
What i would like to know is everyone's thoughts on age vs games played and which is more important. Youth or experience? Discuss.
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/young-is-the-new-black/2007/12/22/1198175414021.html
To parahrase, its about who has the youngest list and what that means. What the article goes on to say is that its more important about games played than which team is 24.5 years old across the board. Also how important list management and devleopment is (duh!). Anyhoo, it does not mention the Tiges being in the top 3, so i can only guess were are 4, 5, 6 somewhere round there.
What i would like to know is everyone's thoughts on age vs games played and which is more important. Youth or experience? Discuss.