Loans, Game Time, Experience – The difference between Manchester United and Chelsea youngsters

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on whatsapp
Share on reddit

Loan and youth policies at top clubs in the Premier League took a significant change with the appointments of Ole Gunnar Solskjaer and Frank Lampard. Both took up a policy of using their youth than putting them straight into the loan market as their predecessors have done.

Frank Lampard’s Chelsea, as a team, look better than Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s Manchester United and most of the fans from both clubs are terribly affected by this syndrome I would love to call ‘recency bias’.

Why are Chelsea looking like a better team than United?

Chelsea’s Policy up until this season has been to buy, buy and buy the best of best talents from across the world for their first team. Their youth teams were also built with the best of the local lads from across the nation.

When the youth of Chelsea youth should have been playing age group football, like the United youngsters were playing over the last few years, they were playing first team football somewhere in Europe.

This is where Manchester United’s lack of imagination, foresight, structure comes into light. Chelsea have a feeder club in Vitesse Arnhem in the Dutch Eredivise. Manchester United don’t have anything of that sort. Manchester City group own clubs in the USA, Australia amongst other countries with India being their next target. All over the world. Manchester United don’t even have a local structure in regards to loans for youngsters.

One of Chelsea’s best performers this season, Mason Mount has had 2 first team loans. He is just 19.

Public, as expected, have been very quick to form an opinion as to how Solskjaer “overrates” his youngsters. They also as usual make a comparison with any compatriot that has a same philosophy by pointing out how Lampard’s young blues have been bright.

When the youngsters at Chelsea were playing for first teams across Europe, United’s youngsters were playing in the PL-2. (with all due respects). Solskjaer, in his latest interview, has pointed out the same point.

Image result for Angel Gomes
Angel Gomes has been playing reserve team football for 2-3 years now. He would have had 2 first team loans if he was at Chelsea.

Simply put, Chelsea’s youngsters know the levels of how a first team would operate. United’s youngsters may very well be more talented than the Chelsea boys. But, they don’t have experience and are in a place where the entire team is dependent on them.

Harsh Lessons good for long term.

United are reportedly looking to loan out some more youngsters in the near future.

Lampard’s Chelsea are a rude yet much needed awakening for Ole Gunnar Solskjaer and his football men. It taught them that even the youth need experience to handle the Premier League pressure.

More to explore

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.