Arsenal & Man U have, clearly, the best youngsters. Which one of these teams is the better ?

Question

Ages in brackets

Arsenal: GK- Fabiansky (22)
RB- Eboue (22)
CB- Senderos (20)
CB- Toure (25)
LB- Clichy (21)
RM- Van Persie (23)
CM- Fabregas (19)
CM- Denilson (19)
LM- Merida (16)
CF- Adebayor (22)
CF- Walcott (18)

Man Utd: GK- Foster (23)
RB- Bardsley (20)
CB- Vidic (24)
CB- Brown (25)
LB- Cathcart (18)
RM- Ronaldo (22)
CM- Fletcher (22)
CM- Carrick (25)
LM- Eagles (20)
CF- Rooney (21)
CF- Dong (22)

Answer 1

well... man utd of course... its youth team beat arsenal's...

Answer 2

Arsenal may have a 16 year old and 18 year old but United's youth are just better then Arsenal's. As much as I love Fabregas (btw hes 20 now)... I think he and Van Persie are the two on Arsenal that stand out. Btw, damn Adebayor and Ebou are 22? I thought they were older for some reason.

I can't believe people are saying Arsenal.. I think Man Utd has by far the better team, including youth players. If Ronaldo, Rooney and Vidic don't do it for you, then who else do you need? Brown? Fletcher? Carrick? On Arsenal, the only ones that stand out are Van Persie and Fabregas. Walcott still has to prove himself and Eboue? Not that great. United's squad is much more superior. Sometimes it is even hard to believe how young United's squad really is, whereas with the Arsenal squad you can tell.

Answer 3

While Man U may have a better senior squad, I think that Arsenal have by far the better youngsters. I consider a youngster under 25, so, ruling out Brown, Carrick and Toure, it is clear that Arsenal's youngsters have more experience and have recieved more first team play than most of Manchester's.

While Ronaldo and Rooney are two of the best young players out there, Fabregas is already the mainstay of Arsenal's midfield, and the young van Persie has a higher return rate per game than Rooney (and an equivalent to Ronaldo at 1 goal per 2 games played), and would most likely have scored more than Rooney if his season hadn't been plagued by injury.

Adebayor started perking up at the end of the season, scoring more goals, and before his surgery, Theo Walcotts excellent pace and vision brought him the lable as one of the youngsters with the greatest potential in football.

Denilson is also an excellent center mid, and has started to break into the first team at the tender age of 19, and while Fletcher may currently be the more experienced midfielder, I don't think that many would argue that Denilson doesn't have more potential.

As for the goalkeepers, I would have to tip my hat to Man U, if only because I haven't had much chance to see Fabianski play. While he is rumoured to be quite good, I would place my bet on Foster for this one, because I have seen him put on some excellent performances, while I haven't seen Fabianski play at all.

While I have not discussed many of the players listed, I think that the general gist of my argument has been put forth: while Manchester may have the greatest young talent in the world (Ronaldo), a team cannot be based around one player, and the youngsters of Arsenal have, for the most part, greater potential than those of United, and for this reason I would have to say that the Gunners have a greater potential to win future seasons than Manchester.

Answer 4

Arsenal have the better young talent. However, in the system that Sir Alex instills, Man U will have a far better team in terms of success. Look at when he got rid of old Ruud (though still a very capable CF at Madrid) and then how everyone else on the team started to score this season--a reflection of the system of play. Whereas in Arsenal the system of play has not proven consistent in scoring goals for anyone other than the players up front, namely Henry, and this will not likely change unless they bring in someone else, not on your list, like Eto'o.

No offense to the beautiful play of Arsenal. It's just that SAF's 442 is far more potent. I have a hard time believing that Arsenal will ever dominate the league in the way ManU can unless they bring in a completely self involved, agressive CF, which pretty much rules out any of the players of the young roster you have listed.

Answer 5

Manchester United

Answer 6

Arsenal by far - theyvedone well bby using most of their youth squad. Man United - the only young player they have that is worth anything is Cristiano Ronaldo, Rooney's off form badly, and Foster played for Watford most of the season/

Answer 7

They look like formidable opponents on paper. But that does not always equate into performance and fluidity on the pitch. Man U's youth team had good success this season and both lists have enormous talent and potential. However on form this year and results I would tip United if they were to play but in a very close and well contested match.

Answer 8

There is no contest, Manchester United have, currently, the better side. Arsenal have experienced a few problems this year and have not shown the consistency of previous campaigns. Even Chelsea supporters would agree that Manchester United are by far and away the best English team. That is English by being based in England and not by the nationality of their players.
Ian

Answer 9

i'd say it is man utd because
1. They reached the Fa cup youth final
2.They came a respectable 4th in the league table
3.In the reserve league this is there record for the last 5 years 1,2,11,2

Answer 10

It's difficult to decide which one is better, but I think Arsenal's squad is slightly better, because their youngsters got more experience as starter, and, for most of them, their performance is proven. For Man U, there is a performance level gap between top-class youngsters like Vidic, Carrick, Rooney, & Ronaldo, and other players.

Answer 11

i don't probable care. i'm a guy Utd fan and that i don't hate Aston Villa. i think of they seem to be a solid area. would be interior the staggering 4 on the top of the season. yet as a guy Utd fan we can Win The League!! 2d - Chelsea third - Aston Villa 4th - Liverpool 5th - Arsenal