Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Parksider

Feeder clubs? - Eaton speaks

204 posts in this topic

Pretty irrelevant point. They will buy nearly a full squad of new players anyway.

I assume that the dual reg clubs have/will abandon any idea of promotion to Superleague, as for them being able to buy nearly a full squad of new professional players, none of the clubs mentioned so far have the money to do anything like that. How much money have York got for buying a professional side?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think exactly that, what incentive does it give any club outside super league to try and grow, this system will keep the clubs not wanted by the RFL in super league well and truely in their place

The current system pretty much does that and a drop to 12 SL clubs will also do that too.

Powell and Aston were worried that the dual reg clubs could get an advantage over their clubs - enough to knock them off the top spots in CC? We'll have to see....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume that the dual reg clubs have/will abandon any idea of promotion to Superleague, as for them being able to buy nearly a full squad of new professional players, none of the clubs mentioned so far have the money to do anything like that. How much money have York got for buying a professional side?

They havent. Until York get their new stadium in 2015 they won't even consider SuperLeague.

So if Fev use DR players next season, like they did this season, have they abandoned their aspirations for SuperLeague too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically it's one or two CC clubs whinging about their own problems at the expense of the wider game?

Thought so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically it's one or two CC clubs whinging about their own problems at the expense of the wider game?

Thought so.

Wider game :lol: The wider game is just the super league.and the couple of clubs who just happen to be whinging are the ones who have played ball and built a club that was going in the right direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. They havent.

2. So if Fev use DR players next season, like they did this season, have they abandoned their aspirations for SuperLeague too?

1. Thanks, that leaves the question how will they get the money acting as Hull's "A" team?

2. Well, with respect Gav you miss the point. The current moves have been dismissed as just a few loan players, Hunslet and Rochdale are just doing what Fev already do.

Eaton doesn't see it that way, he sees two clubs working together to develop a strong SL side and a strong Championship side.

Blackpool Hawk quite rightly stated that the initial purpose of the move was to guarantee Hunslet's survival. But will Rochdale and Hunslet just sit back and be happy with that? Will York be simply happy with "survival" as a result of a proposed Hull tie up (I saw one if not York's last game at SLS before they gave up, can't remember the year). You yourself say that they are chasing a stadium, surely they want to be chasing the Championship Grand Final??

This is what Eaton's eyes are on. That's a taken surely?

No matter how many "tie ups" and "arrangements" are put in place the number of quality players having to step down to Championship won't change much. Featherstone signed lads like Kaye and Manning from Leeds, in the "new order" of things Eaton is looking for those sort of lads to sign at Hunslet.

Powell himself baulks at the idea that the new arrangements will affect his clubs ability to compete for players to stay in pole position for SL. This may not be just the ability for his rivals to "spend more" when you have dual reg players (I appreciate there's some doubt as to this point he makes) but Eaton wants it to extend to Hunslet getting first pick. He wants the next Kaye and Manning to be Hunslet players.

This could in theory lead to clubs with no SL ambition (how can you even qualify when your "joint" academy system is designed to only feed you scraps) replacing independent clubs at the top of the Championship who need to be there to qualify for SL even under a P & R system. Imagine Hunslet winning the Grand Final again and having to decline promotion?

Or do we believe they will throw away the survival link with Leeds and enter SL with no money for a years worth of thumpings?

It's an interesting thought that the Chapionship may see a shift in the balance of power. However I don't believe it will happen because IMHO I don't see crowds rising for clubs who have thrown their lot's in with SL clubs to become "A" teams. Featherstone are likely to still be able to offer better deals than Hunslet.

But I could be wrong, 2,000 crowds may be possible again at Hunslet and other smaller Championship clubs.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically it's one or two CC clubs whinging about their own problems at the expense of the wider game?

Thought so.

so the superleague clubs are entering into this for the good of the wider game. right, got that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty irrelevant point. They will buy nearly a full squad of new players anyway.

How many DR players did Widnes use in 2011?

Did clubs the last time P & R was being used go out and buy a complete new team, "NO" they built a team around the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if Fev use DR players next season, like they did this season, have they abandoned their aspirations for SuperLeague too?

Who did we sign on DR last year Gav?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who did we sign on DR last year Gav?

As far as I know, Jack Briscoe was. Andy Ellis was on a month by month loan, not DR. The season before, we in theory had Zak on DR, however in practise, we saw very little of him. Off the top of my head, that's been about it, though I may be mistaken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, Jack Briscoe was. Andy Ellis was on a month by month loan, not DR. The season before, we in theory had Zak on DR, however in practise, we saw very little of him. Off the top of my head, that's been about it, though I may be mistaken.

For me, loans and DR are not the same thing.

in 2010 Fev had Michael Coady on DR, Dan Manning on a season long loan, and Ben Kaye on short loan.

in 2011 Fev had Zak Hardaker on DR, Ben GLeadhill and Dave Williams on short loans.

in 2012 Fev had Kyle Briggs on a season long loan, and Jack Briscoe and Andy Ellis on short loans.

Both DR's worked out so badly we stopped doing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've also had Michael Coady & James Davey on DR.

James Davey never played for Rovers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James Davey never played for Rovers.

We still had him on DR though, pointless as it turned out to be. :lol:

I agree about the difference between DR and loans. I was also under the impression that Jack was on DR last season, but I'm happy to stand corrected. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We still had him on DR though, pointless as it turned out to be. :lol:

I agree about the difference between DR and loans. I was also under the impression that Jack was on DR last season, but I'm happy to stand corrected. :)

Aye. ;)

TBH I think we'll have to wait and see how this new system works out. I would say at this point the chances of it working out well are NOT good, for the following reasons.

1. It's not been thought through properly because it's only been introduced to save SL clubs cash. No-one is sure the effects on salary cap, playoff eligabilty issues, etc.

2. It will cause disruption to Championship teams who won't know who is in their squad on a month to month (or even week to week) basis. A side with five nearSL standard players will be a different proposition to that same side without the five. The credibility of the Championship is undermined.

3. It won't help the development of players at SL clubs from 16 to 21. Play scholarship at 16, then huge 3 year jump to academy mixing with 19 year olds, then farmed out to open age Championship club. How is that a clear pathway of development?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't he play in the first league fixture or was it a friendly?

Had a run round in a friendly and went back to Wakey.

If most loans next year are to be DR type, and it appears that is what they will be, then I think the Championship will be a total mess. Just to save SL clubs a few quid. What a shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically it's one or two CC clubs whinging about their own problems at the expense of the wider game?

Thought so.

Wider game ? By which you mean 14 (maybe less) $uperleague clubs, I take it. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What this boils down to is ... what was up with the loan system ? Minimum of a month, only registered with one club at a time .... coaches knew where they were with that.

Now we've got a system where a player might be available, might not .... how can a coach plan with that ?

One advantage - it creates a need for the play-off system. Any twinned club could be world beaters one week and dogpoop the next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically it's one or two CC clubs whinging about their own problems at the expense of the wider game?

Thought so.

Congratulations. You've won a prize for the daftest comment ever to appear on this forum. Suggest you do a bit of homework on these clubs and discover what they've achieved for the good of the wider game and without central funding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we've got a system where a player might be available, might not .... how can a coach plan with that ?

It can't work on the past record of the DR shambles to date.

The players who are signed need to be signed for the full season.

Eaton said "From the discussions we have had with Leeds we are not looking to borrow players, it's not a case of fringe players not getting a game coming to us, it's doing a LOT MORE than that".

So although he does not fully explain the deal he does intimate it's something a lot more solid.

It could be argued that if the two clubs are linked to create one player pathway then if you are one of the players Leeds don't want to release at 19 because potential is there, then you play on in the Leeds "A" team, who are Hunslet.

You are not in a position to be "called back" anywhere, you are in the Leeds player development system all along......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The decision to cut 2 junior teams from each SL side in an attempt to save money will set the game back 10 years or so in my opinion.

If we had a governing body that had any balls this ridiculous idea would have been nipped in the bud when first suggested. The amount of money for Academies and Scholarship programmes needs to be increased not decreased, how else are we going to keep up with Australia & New Zealand at international level?

Something that annoyed me regarding this situation was Leeds Rhinos (who I understand were one of the major players in pushing for the 20's to be scrapped) have signed an untried Aussie with about three NRL appearances to his name for next season. Even if he receives a modest salary, when air fares, housing, cars etc are paid, for the long term benefit of the club, would this money not be better utilised for junior player development?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The decision to cut 2 junior teams from each SL side in an attempt to save money will set the game back 10 years or so in my opinion.

If we had a governing body that had any balls this ridiculous idea would have been nipped in the bud when first suggested. The amount of money for Academies and Scholarship programmes needs to be increased not decreased, how else are we going to keep up with Australia & New Zealand at international level?

I agree with you on these points. If the Australian was all that, he would be tied up to an NRL contract. There must be someone in the whole of the UK, who has just as much potential and would cost a fraction of the expense that this is costing Leeds.

The only signings we should be making from the NRL are top class marquee players and with their new found riches, we cannot afford them. Scrap this feeder nonsense, keep your reserve teams in SL and economise on overseas signings by eliminating 98% of them.

If your junior system gives you a surplus of players and you need to loan then to CC clubs, the fine, but keep the junior teams at the SL clubs that are being scapped.

Something that annoyed me regarding this situation was Leeds Rhinos (who I understand were one of the major players in pushing for the 20's to be scrapped) have signed an untried Aussie with about three NRL appearances to his name for next season. Even if he receives a modest salary, when air fares, housing, cars etc are paid, for the long term benefit of the club, would this money not be better utilised for junior player development?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea how my post enede up in the middle of the one I was replying to. My apologies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The decision to cut 2 junior teams from each SL side in an attempt to save money will set the game back 10 years or so in my opinion.If we had a governing body that had any balls this ridiculous idea would have been nipped in the bud when first suggested. The amount of money for Academies and Scholarship programmes needs to be increased not decreased, how else are we going to keep up with Australia & New Zealand at international level?

Something that annoyed me regarding this situation was Leeds Rhinos have signed an untried Aussie with about three NRL appearances to his name for next season. Would this money not be better utilised for junior player development?

It depends on what you mean by "junior development"?

For me you can fill several teams below the first team with players and throw as much money as you want at it, but if there are not that many talented players being created in Junior Rugby League to feed this system then the returns on the money invested are poor.

It's my opinion but I'd like to hear more opinions on this that we need thousands more kids playing RL rather than throwing thousands more at the same small number.

I think it's terrible what Leeds are doing...

Or is it "have had to do".

Perhaps so many kids play RL in Australia that many of their "surplus players"are better than our developing players??

Can money open up more junior RL clubs? I think it needs the volunteers first and foremost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017