what do you want, 50% of the players to be youth, regardless of ability ?
I don't think 20% is an unrealistic expectation for a club that is "bringing through well" the youths. That's 3 players out of the 14 (including used subs) instead of the 5% or so we've had for the last year and a half.
Ted Smith represented England at u18 and u20 level, that suggests that he's not lacking in ability.
Elvis Bwomono by all accounts handled himself well in the first team.
Dru Yearwood shone in pre-season playing amongst the firsts.
Jack Bridge was linked with a move to the Premiership.
It's not regardless of ability. These players have ability.
Also, you totally swerved the point of youngsters that were taken by bigger Clubs !
The issue is that we are not bringing players through to the first team.
You really are looking for any hook to look for negativity, because, we've won our last 2 league games and are actually better off this season, points wise, at the same stage as last season.
No, I'm looking long term because the club is going to get screwed by this short term approach. I don't really care if we finish 10th or 16th this season when next season we'll be in a worst position with the increased debt and a squad a year further away from their prime.
You must hate it when we win, you really must.
Also, explain why its important to say that Walsall had 3 youngsters, you don't get more points for fielding youngsters, they didn't beat us .. so I fail to see how that point is at all relevant.
If you read my post you'd have seen the point I was responding to (I even bolded it) was the claim that we are doing well at bringing through players. I was pointing out that we don't.