Considering we have the 3rd most expensive roster in the league, one might think that we have amassed some serious experience.
You'd be wrong.
Our starters (defined as a player that plays half the minutes available) are the youngest in the league at an average age of 24.9 years. The MLS average is 27.1.
Team Avg Age Starters Toronto 24.9 NE 25.5 Portland 25.7 SKC 26.1 PU 26.3 Dallas 26.5 DC United 26.5 Columbus 26.7 SJ 27.1 Houston 27.1 Seattle 27.5 Colorado 27.7 RSL 27.8 LA 27.8 VAN 27.8 MTL 28.1 Chicago 28.5 NY 28.7 Chivas 29.1
If you go further and look at the distribution of minutes (ie. do the younger guys play) it gets more interesting. Since there are 900 minutes to be distributed in a game (outside of Goalkeepers... 10 players x 90 minutes each) how many minutes do teams give to "rookies"?
Even taking a very liberal definition of rookie as someone out of NCAA and under 24 years of age, check this out:
Team % Game Inexperienced
PlayToronto 53.8% Dallas 51.4% PU 42.5% NE 38.7% Chivas 35.7% DC United 34.3% LA 34.1% Portland 33.1% Columbus 31.4% RSL 28.9% MTL 28.0% Seattle 25.8% SJ 25.6% SKC 20.2% Chicago 17.9% Colorado 15.9% NY 10.5% VAN 10.5% Houston 10.4%
Is this a function of:
- Lack of investment in scouting/identification programs?
- MLSE putting all the eggs in a DP basket as a quick fix to sell tickets?
- Rushing kids through the Academy?
- a solid element of future team building?
Anyway you put it, the 3rd most expensive roster in the league should not be the most inexperienced when it comes to starters and minutes available. Fundamental issue for me in terms of the team going forward.
I'm hoping that the boys (and Winter) can come together to overcome the odds that have been stacked against them by MLSE mis-management of our resources.