So if a club is great at developing players, what does it say about that club if they develop a kid who bought in to the system and did everything asked of him for 5 years, but then is cut for a hold-back who not even marginally better?
Who are these 2 players? Would love to compare as an outsider and not the players dad.
Hypothetically: You are a club owner and/or coach. You have trained and developed a kid to perfectly reflect your mold and he does everything asked and performs great on the field. You have to choose between the kid you developed and a new kid who may be older, but not much difference in size or skill. Do you go with the new kid or stick with the kid you developed?
Do you work in media? This is a very leading and poorly framed hypothetical used to try to prove a point you think you already have an opinion on. The issue is your framing of "not much difference in size or skill." If there were truly not much or no difference the player who knows the O and D would be the clear choice. IQ is the most important trait in this game. However, coaches see differences that parents can't. Therefore when they bring in a new player they do see a difference. Size can be overrated but not IQ and skill. Coaches, like MM know gamers when they see them.
Not a MM situation we’re talking about. I agree MM knows talent when he sees it. Then he buys talent a plane ticket and tells the local kid to not bother showing up.
