Age of footballers: How old is too old?

[jt64]

I was quite surprised to read in the Philip Billing post in the rumour section several comments stating that at aged 29 he is too old and not worth the potential fee we would be paying.

This sounds like the sort of thing I would have posted, although I don't recall weighing in on the Billing thread. I think there is a disconnect between someone being too old to be good enough for the level we are at, it is more than he is too old to provide value for money given the output we would be getting.

Simply, a player at 29:

• has almost certainly peaked in terms of ability (at least for outfielders, I'll allow keepers develop later and can play much longer arguments), so you have no magic upside in terms of him rising to new levels
• is almost certainly at the peak of what he can demand in wages. Outside of those who have been at Chelsea, they will be on their third/fourth contract and demanding the highest package they'll have ever been on, knowing they are in the window for "last big contract"

Stick these two things together and you get a combination of someone only (at best) being good enough for the present level, and you are paying a relative fortune for the privilege. In what way is that sort of signing in any way a sensible use of resources, regardless of where you intend to go in the league? If you were to nick promotion, player needs replacing and he will not be easy to offload. If your expectation is to stick around the same level for the life of the player's contract, why would you not buy someone younger and cheaper, even if they might not be as good now, in the knowledge that 2-3 years there is a fair chance they will be better than the older player at that point.

Now I'm not going to throw all older players under the bus, there's a time and a place for them. Ings coming in on a one year rental is probably fine. Mee, if that happens, would be similar. But at the same time, you have to be completely aware that they are stop gaps, nothing more, and can not stop you investing and planning in getting younger and better in the longer term - and you need to be aware that said buys will have a "development blocking" effect which will just slow down what should be the long term goal (and no, just loaning out younger players who would be affected by this, just so that they are playing football, is usually not the answer)

 

[FMBlade1]

Quiz question: Who was the oldest player we signed before Ben Mee?

This discussion about older players is across football- I've seen comments that fees paid for Eze (27!) and Wissa (28) are too high because of their age- absolutely ridiculous as the amounts paid are what proven premier league players cost.

 

[Silent Blade]

Quiz question: Who was the oldest player we signed before Ben Mee?

This discussion about older players is across football- I've seen comments that fees paid for Eze (27!) and Wissa (28) are too high because of their age- absolutely ridiculous as the amounts paid are what proven premier league players cost.

We signed Stuart McCall when he was 38

 

[FMBlade1]

We signed Stuart McCall when he was 38

True but thinking more recently- Gary Speed was also 38 when he signed for us in January 2008.

Has there been anyone else signed for first team aged 35+ since then? (for everyone, without looking it up )

 

[bonobo]

I think players can really prolong their careers these days. With fitness conditioning, the ability to return players from serious injury and the added importance of tactical knowledge which all players now need, going strong into the mid thirties is not unusual.

 

[Sheffsteel]

I think players can really prolong their careers these days. With fitness conditioning, the ability to return players from serious injury and the added importance of tactical knowledge which all players now need, going strong into the mid thirties is not unusual.

Agree it depends on the player.

I expect Messi to continue playing in the MLS at a decent level until he’s 40.

Also it wouldn’t surprise me if Ronaldo breaks all kinds of records and plays football at a decent level until he’s almost 50.

 

[FMBlade1]

Agree it depends on the player.

I expect Messi to continue playing in the MLS at a decent level until he’s 40.

Also it wouldn’t surprise me if Ronaldo breaks all kinds of records and plays football at a decent level until he’s almost 50.

Ronaldo will go for Pele's 1000 goal record- I'm sure he'll even play in the Andorran first division to get it if necessary.

I imagine Messi will probably retire after the 2026 World Cup

 

[jt64]

Quiz question: Who was the oldest player we signed before Ben Mee?

This discussion about older players is across football- I've seen comments that fees paid for Eze (27!) and Wissa (28) are too high because of their age- absolutely ridiculous as the amounts paid are what proven premier league players cost.

There's two things at play here potentially:

a) Arsenal are at, and Newcastle aspire to be at, a level where "proven premier league players" are not what they need to progress. They need players who are near, or have the potential to be near, a world elite level. Picking up someone who can tear Brighton, Everton or West Ham a new one doesn't particularly help them. They need players who can go toe to toe with Real, Bayern, PSG and the teams who are legitimately contending for the domestic title. It is the same thing you see in Scotland, except more pronounced - Rangers and Celtic have no domestic rivals apart from Rangers and Celtic - their goal is to get better than a team like Roma, Feyenoord, Bruges, Basel etc in order to advance in Europe where for them the real money is. Buying someone from Aberdeen who is proven of being fine against Hearts, St Johnstone, Dundee United etc would be the most pointless thing they can do.

Not to say the players in question can't do what I'm suggesting. I think Eze could, Wissa I'm not so sure, but to put it bluntly, at their age right now they either can or they can't, and in both cases it is very much a punt as to whether it will work.

b) It could also just be that the buying clubs are in a particularly good PSR position, and they're effectively in a use it or lose it situation, and sticking on an extra 10% to get something done for sure doesn't actually "cost" anything.

Edited for weird auto incorrect error