View Full Version : Average Ages/Games
George Washington
5 Apr 2010, 23:52
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/5548/agesib.jpg
Saw this on the Freo board, props to Speedwagon for making it.
Interesting to see where we are placed against these teams, and if you take Fletch out our games average plummets down below West Coast. Fremantle definetly have a lot more experience in that 24+ age bracket.
Donakebab
6 Apr 2010, 00:17
Without Fletch the average age is 23.84 and games is 69.23.
Forget just how young and old some players are. Stants might make it to 300! :thumbsu:
The Herald sun have a nifty feature when digging through this kind of data on their gameday pages- ie: http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/gameday/0,,5015556,00.html
If you scroll down a little, you can check out the age brackets of each team as well as the games played.
It's a very handy cross section of information.
Frothies Mcveigh
7 Apr 2010, 10:59
Interesting to see how we compare to those teams.
i think theres a lot more to it then average age and games, Its more about the core groups average age/games. I think our main group is below 22.06 with a few exeptions like Watson. (main group is the core to lead up to a premiership).
i think theres a lot more to it then average age and games, Its more about the core groups average age/games. I think our main group is below 22.06 with a few exeptions like Watson. (main group is the core to lead up to a premiership).
LOL I love that you seem to have a thing about making sure everyone knows we shouldn't be compared on ages/experience or anything that might show that actually we do not have the "young" excuse any more.
Our core group are now hitting 22-24 with 50 games.. start to accept that..
Look at the lists in the OP.. they are very similar in age and experience across all "core groups" and they just destroyed us, at home, by a heap of points.. no more hiding.. no more confusion.. stark, cold and hard facts.
Ben the Gooner
7 Apr 2010, 15:44
I love the fact that the Freo fan included West Coast.:D
Daytripper
7 Apr 2010, 16:12
Its a misleading statistic.
You could be an 20yo average player at say Richmond and have 40 games under your belt because they are going for a youth policy or you are better than the rest of the rabble.
Yet if you were at Geelong you might not have played a game.
The only thing that counts is players ability. Peolple who rabbit on about how young their list is or what the average age/games played are generally just looking for an excuse.
What I would be curious to see is what Geelongs looked like 3 years ago.