Alert: Next decades Netherlands will be the new Hungary of Europe. Once great, but slipped into mediocrity.

Also wrong is the amount of talents they claim that are for 100% nurtured at the Barcelona academy. In reality, many of them joined at a later age. While the academy can still make the difference between reaching the top or stay below radar, the foundations are laid elsewhere.

And there is not such a thing as 'facts speak for themselves'. That is a real fallacy of your side.

 

If we employed only local footballers we'd have no chance of winning the league. Same applies to every single other Dutch club by the way. If a local player is good enough he gets into the starting XI. See Ola John who played Chadli out of the squad. If he's not, we'll look elsewhere. Twente is now at a level where we can't give youngsters time to ease into the first team, they have to be ready straight away. Not even Tadic is certain of his spot in the starting XI.And this is shameful how, exactly? We're doing exactly what every other professional club in the world does. Twente is not a charity organisation, we're a club that a) wants to win things and b) wants to stay financially healthy.

Again DRB, with all due respect, but you have no clue about club fandom. You seem to look at all sports from a nationalist perspective. I love having local boys in our team. But if we won the league with 11 players from some island off the West African coast, I'll be just as happy.

The identity of a club is NOT determined by footballers. They're ALL passers by. WIth our limited budget, as soon as a player stands out he's gone. You can't build an identity on players even if you wanted to. The identity of Twente is determined by the long term vision of our board of directors, and even more so, by the fans. Both aren't going anywhere any time soon.

 

I'm telling you that Twente fans and the Twente community are perfectly happy with the identity and authencity of Twente the football club, we consider it our national team regardless who plays in it. You're now going to disagree with me of course because you know more about this subject than a lifelong match-going Twente fan hehehe.

And don't put words into my mouth. What I said is that it cracks me up that Feyenoord fans constantly feel the need to point out they're a bigger club than Twente. Who are they trying to convince? We know Feyenoord are a bigger club. We ain't bothered.

In the same vein we don't care about how you or any other non-Tukker feels about Twente's 'authencity and identity'. It only strengthens our belief in the Vak P motto: Wij Tegen Iedereen.

All of that said, in the annual CPM club index based on a survey among the Dutch population, which as you know partly determines the distribution of tv money in Dutch football, Twente has very high scores, and is considered more likeable and fascinating than PSV, to name just one example. We actually have a good nearing on excellent image in this country. You might want to think about that for a bit, as the majority of the Dutch population has different ideas than you about what a likeable football club is.

 

I meant: in addition to the mistake you pointed out.

Other than that I pointed at another flaw: it is not part of an annual series. Those often have as advantage that they tend to use specific criteria and methods. The reader can also compare reports and see whether they have changed something. A good example is the economic freedom index by the Heritage Foundation. Yes, they are a right-wing think-tank but they update the index annually and are open about their measurements, indicators, criteria and methods. That makes a crucial difference because the reader can make up their minds and even use parts of the index when he doesn't share the same sense of 'freedom'.

I don't like the aggressive tone you use so for me this discussion is over.

Your quotes:

You only think in terms of right and wrong facts while most of the times lobby groups distort facts, select facts, present it in a different way (the question of half-empty/half-full and so on) and many other things that create 'half-truths'. It is for example clear that they make a case for more spending on the education. Barcelona spends 20 million, according to them - but how exactly did they measure it? Is it a consistent indicator throughout all cases or has cherry-picking a role? Do they perhaps use an inflated number to strengthen their argument? That are all relevant questions and unclear.
That is why I look at the intentions in particular when it is not part of an annual series.

 

Let I play a bit the devil's advocate:

It is funny how people are satisfied with the game against Dortmund. Of course, many expected a more negative result and a easy win for Dortmund but if you look at it from an youth perspective it is a different picture.


Dortmund has a greater budget but is just at Ajax not (yet) able to make big signings other than Reus. Hence, they played with quite a few youth players. Reus and Gotze are completely raised within the Dortmund ranks and then they also have someone like Schmelzer and Leitner who joined Dortmund after the age of 15 but before their senior career. Players as Hummels, Gundogan, Weidenfeller and Kehl had their education elsewhere in Germany; Dortmund is after all just one of the many good youth facilities in Germany.

Who are the pure youth products of Ajax, the so-called flagship of Dutch youth football?

Ryan Babel, Van Rhijn, Daley Blind and Vermeer are 'pure' Ajax products.

Siem de Jong, Eriksen (their biggest talent), Boerrigter, Alderweireld joined Ajax at an 'advanced' age.

All others such as Sana, Schone, Moisander, Poulsen and Sulejmani joined Ajax after their youth career.

So, Ajax played with slightly more youth products as Dortmund, and Dortmund was better (10 shots on target versus 6).

If people talk about the Ajax academy they often think about the top cream as Bergkamp and Kluivert but also the level below is important. Players of the caliber Marciano Vink, Brian Roy, and John van 't Schip. If Ajax had more players of that level (who would succeed abroad), then they had been much stronger.

It is just a thought but something tells me that a Dutch club has every opportunity to win from Dortmund because Dortmund has (yet) not the money to make big signings too. It all depends on the quality of your scouting (which Dortmund does very well) and youth education.

Just my thoughts.

 

Saw yesterday the exploits of Isco. Spain is really strong now through all generations ranging from 17 to early 30s.

 

Reus is not a Dortmund youth product. He was bought this summer.

 

Having money is about being able to keep your best talent. That's the whole point. Numerous young (Dutch) talents play one good season in the eredivisie and then leave. Simply because they can earn twice as much at some mediocre mid-table club in a bigger league.

If Ajax, PSV, Feyenoord and even Twente had managed to hold on to all of its talent over the past six years we'd have no problem competing in the CL. That's just not how it is.

 

Sorry but I need to correct you here. Reus was raised in the youth ranks before his teens, at the age of 7 he joined Dortmund to be precise. But somewhere around the age of 16 he was regarded as not good enough. He was indeed bought back in this summer.

A bit like Elia, with as difference that Ajax could not close the deal.

 

But who of those talents had really the Gotze, Reus and Hummels potential? And remember that Dortmund is just one of the talent-producing clubs in Germany whereas Ajax has always been key for Dutch football. Whether you like it or not, at one point in time, in the mid-90s, over 40% of the Eredivisie players enjoyed their career at Ajax for at least a few years.

There has always been a gap between the top 3 and the others (with sometimes clubs as Groningen and Twente breaking into the top three). Some applauded that this hegemony was ripped apart in the last couple of years and did three times an hurray for the 'nivellering'. If anything, many see that the hegemony does not exist any more.

 

I stand corrected.

 

What are those flaws?

 

This is a good piece
http://fourfourtwo.com/blogs/halfti...oes-champions-league-grp-d-mean-for-ajax.aspx

 

No revelations there. I don't see what's so good about that article.

Blind and Overmars as well. Sloppy...

 

When your academy/scouting fails to recognize talents playing within 3km of the Arena such as Maher, Assaidi and Narsingh, you're gonna have a bad time. Thankfully, as part of the massive overhaul at De Toekomst, head scout Hennie de Regt (who also sent away the likes of Lens, Narsingh, Elia, Boussoufa and more "difficult" kids) has been put on inactive.

 

The report states that nowadays 30% of Eredivisie players have attended the Ajax academy.

 

More the sentiment.

What all those name have in common is that they have a foreign background and that seems to be a really big problem, the white flight (80% of population) to other sports.

 

Unfortunately, not every sport is cost effective. NOC-NSF has abandoned track cycling for a good reason. It was once one of their key programs but it is simply too expensive. Interestingly, the relatively inexpensive and most prestigious sport Track & Field athletics is a joke in this country.

Furthermore, most of the sporters choose a sport at a late age. It is not simply 'doing what they like' - you end up like Africa by the way if everyone 'does what they like' - but also a question of choosing. Most of them exercise multiple sports before they make a definite choice. Which is good.

To conclude, not every medal counts equally. Gold in the 100 meter sprint counts more than gold in equestrian, archery or wind surfing - with all due respect for the ones who practice it full-time.

This includes senior and veteran figures.


Excellent that you mention the case of Portugal; they don't have much money too but perform better in European football at the moment. This as reply to johanneeskens.