"Coaching To Win" VS "Playing For The Future"

[Thryleon]

I doubt there is a player who is worse with 50 games under their belt than 2, so I believe senior game time equals growth. As with everything, it takes smart management. You can't look at one game in isolation, if Watto has has been told: you have 6 weeks to cement your spot, then I see no damage in that one game. If he is performing well, gets his time in the seniors, then is immediately dropped for it - I believe that causes plenty of damage and mental issues.

Murphy was rated as the best player in the game by coaches, he's hardly an example of a bad outcome and collision injuries 7 years after he started aren't a reflection of him getting early game time IMO.

Kane Lucas was no better a footballer at 42 games than he was at game 1.  In fact there was more promise about him with less games under his belt than more.

The manner in which players learn during that time is of the utmost importance.  You can learn more from 1 game than you can from 10 depending on what occurs during that match.

In any case, there is no guarantee that getting games into players is a sure fire way to make them a better footballer.  Statistically speaking there would be as many players that played many games and walked away from the game an unfulfilled talent, as there would be guys that got games and fulfilled their talent.

Experience is but one component of learning and there are plenty of people who learn nothing from experience.