Archived

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

flyingking

First effects of the new development system

164 posts in this topic

1. Don't forget St Helens in your development hall of fame.

2. Don't also forget your constant refrain, "Money, money, money". On the one hand clubs, even Leeds and on a good day Wigan, have to be under the salary cap, so they can't just sign uo everybody in sight.

3. Also on the money front, if other clubs get big investors, as say Salford or Hull KR appear to be doing, and they cannot spend beyond the salary cap and in any case the players are not there to be signed, what is to prevent them from approaching promising juniors and offering them more than Leeds or Wigan to sign for their clubs.

4. Even Huddersfield, who you relegate to second tier status in the player development field have half a dozen England players, whom they have developed through their junior ranks or poached from the big boys like Robinson from Wigan.

5. Widnes are new to the scene. Their juniors apparently have a lot of promise but are not ready yet.

6. Hull are the next to produce talent

1. 40 years ago St. Helens, Wigan and Widnes produced the vast majority of players for the Lancashire clubs. Today Saints have seven overseas players and lads from London, Hull, Cumbria, Wigan and Oldham that forms the strength of their current forst XV11. Don't you find that worrying?

2. Once Leeds, Wigan, Wire and Saints have signed the very best talents, they have to sign ordinary players to make up the numbers. I would put it to you that most of the top stars are in the playing squads of these four clubs and that's why they are the only serious contenders for honours.

3. I don't know. I know Salford offered Richie Myler more money than he could get at the time, and Hardakers only offer came from Featherstone as he was missed. Where are these two players now???

4. Wigan didn't poach Robinson, you'd better PM Padge on that. Brett Hodgson was a sensation at Huddersfield then Warrington just took him. Why don't the big four clubs sign Cudjoe, Crabtree and Brough? Maybe they have players just as good.

5. Are you kidding me here??? Widnes were producing fantastic juniors right through the 70's and 80's. do you want me to name a GB team of Widnes born players? Do you want me to name a near all Featherstone born X111 who won the cup, then do you want to consider that these fantastic production lines have faltered and in some cases died?

6. Now you are being funny. The Hull first XV11 has only a sprinkling of Hull lads

Mr. Davey has been around for some time now and as far as I know he's no problem funding his club. When do you think they will eventually break through if ever??

The point is simple. There's a talent shortage and yes clubs need money to obtain quality players first, after that they need to find them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i was in conversation with a s'l scout. the man travels all over yorkshire, watching games at all levels, and he told me there was a dearth of talent at all levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:blink:

Maybe we should turn amateur again.

What that has to do with the points in my postm, I have ni idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What that has to do with the points in my postm, I have ni idea.

"Money" seems to be a common theme as a problem in your posts.

Pretty obvious, I thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. 40 years ago St. Helens, Wigan and Widnes produced the vast majority of players for the Lancashire clubs. Today Saints have seven overseas players and lads from London, Hull, Cumbria, Wigan and Oldham that forms the strength of their current forst XV11. Don't you find that worrying?

2. Once Leeds, Wigan, Wire and Saints have signed the very best talents, they have to sign ordinary players to make up the numbers. I would put it to you that most of the top stars are in the playing squads of these four clubs and that's why they are the only serious contenders for honours.

3. I don't know. I know Salford offered Richie Myler more money than he could get at the time, and Hardakers only offer came from Featherstone as he was missed. Where are these two players now???

4. Wigan didn't poach Robinson, you'd better PM Padge on that. Brett Hodgson was a sensation at Huddersfield then Warrington just took him. Why don't the big four clubs sign Cudjoe, Crabtree and Brough? Maybe they have players just as good.

5. Are you kidding me here??? Widnes were producing fantastic juniors right through the 70's and 80's. do you want me to name a GB team of Widnes born players? Do you want me to name a near all Featherstone born X111 who won the cup, then do you want to consider that these fantastic production lines have faltered and in some cases died?

6. Now you are being funny. The Hull first XV11 has only a sprinkling of Hull lads

Mr. Davey has been around for some time now and as far as I know he's no problem funding his club. When do you think they will eventually break through if ever??

The point is simple. There's a talent shortage and yes clubs need money to obtain quality players first, after that they need to find them.

I cannot be bothered responding to all that. However, the key to the whole thing is your last sentence.

The point I am making is that if all this new and impressive looking investment comes into other teams, i.e. Salford, Hull KR, Hull added to the already susbtantial contributions of O'Connor and Davey ( By the way Huddersfield have definitely moved into top tier staus despite their spectacular collpase last year and if the players they have developed are not up to standard, why are they playing for England), and Glover, why can they not challenge Leeds and Wigan for the top juniors and the top overseas players. The salary cap prevents Wigan or others signing up everybody and now these other teams have or will have money, they can compete. They can sign top juniors and Australians and develop their own junior player development systems over time.

Money will equalise the spread of talent. You quote Myler.Also what about Ratchford If they wwere at at Salford when the new money regime is in place, do you think they would have been signed up so easily by Warrington.? My opinion is they would have stayed at the new and ambitious Salford.

Money is the key and , in the past, only the teams you quote had it. This seems to be changing and it will result in a bigger spread of the available talent between more clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Money" seems to be a common theme as a problem in your posts.

Pretty obvious, I thought.

Money is the key to the success or not of RL. Many posters on here reference money or the lack of it in their various arguments. I don't think any of them and certainly not me have suggested the game should become amateur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Money is the key to the success or not of RL. Many posters on here reference money or the lack of it in their various arguments. I don't think any of them and certainly not me have suggested the game should become amateur.

I'm suggesting it to you as a discussion point.

Or you can justify why on the field performances should take priority over anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm suggesting it to you as a discussion point.

Or you can justify why on the field performances should take priority over anything else.

I do not suggest that.I am in favour of on field performance getting a club to the top but actual elevation being supported by standards based citeria, one of which is financial stability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not suggest that.I am in favour of on field performance getting a club to the top but actual elevation being supported by standards based citeria, one of which is financial stability.

Then I don't understand why you sneer at Parky for mentioning money. :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I cannot be bothered responding to all that.

2. The point I am making is that if all this new and impressive looking investment comes into other teams, i.e. Salford, Hull KR, Hull added to the already susbtantial contributions of O'Connor and Davey and Glover, why can they not challenge Leeds and Wigan for the top juniors and the top overseas players.

3. Money will equalise the spread of talent.

1. You can't be bothered because you can't answer it.

2. It isn't happening, many top players have remained "loyal" to the top four clubs and openly wanted medals (even a statue) for that stating they had received better offers elsewhere, but wanted to stay. I have heard players more honestly saying they signed because they wanted to win things, that happens in soccer they move from top ten clubs to top four clubs. Top players don't want to end up the big fish in a small pond club with the burden of trying to take the club up the table on their own back. Lautiti had equal offers from Hull and Leeds who did he choose. Leeds.

You still don't get it with Huddersfield or "England". We've been so short of talent even Karl Pratt and Stuart Reardon got games for Great Britain with respect to them. Huddersfield have won nothing, and Hodgson left a club who could pay him what he wanted for Warrington. All you need for the top four to dominate any challenger is for one of them to lure the challengers best player away. It does more damage off the pitch than on it.

3. We'll see how it goes, but there is NO argument or proof now that even money will equal even teams. The top 28 players will not spread out at two per club which is your wishful thinking theory. Nobody wants to go to London who can pay full cap. Why do Leeds win so much? It's because they don't even have to buy top players, they come through the juniors and play for significantly less money.

And this is the the reality, you need to fund full cap to get above the skint clubs, then once there you need to produce the quality juniors. These only come through at a rate of one a year at the top clubs, so down at your Wakefields and Widnes's they only produce a star once every couple of years or so.

With no prospect of any cups with their clubs these lads are prone to moving to a top club. Ricjie Myler's a great Widnes born star. Why's he not at Widnes now O'Connor can afford him?

Is there a solution to a negative post? Not now there isn't if it's grow your own stars if they aren't there to buy. The game is too short of quality kids at too many so called "super" clubs to develop into stars, and even the lads who do shine at local junior clubs will look straight to the top four academies.

Progress is possible but only on a radical basis. One club in Hull, one club in "Calder" with everyone behind it just may capture the huge resources in playing talent and fans and challenge the top four monopoly.

However if it came to Pass Hull or Featherstone grew their clubs into big outfits with academies capturing all the talent in their areas, and interesting all the fans then I fear that St. Helens who are slightly dropping off the pace and still reliant on overseas would suffer and we'd still have a "big four". Bradford lost their big four place to Warrington.

Whose next to lose their big four place to who is the real question in the real world......

Not how many club will join the big four to make it the big 5,6,7,8.

The dearth of talent could even lead to a big three for some time to come, then the big two and finally we may end up having tried try to follow the NRL but ended up like the SPL. Especially if Moran ever leaves the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. You can't be bothered because you can't answer it.

2. It isn't happening, many top players have remained "loyal" to the top four clubs and openly wanted medals (even a statue) for that stating they had received better offers elsewhere, but wanted to stay. I have heard players more honestly saying they signed because they wanted to win things, that happens in soccer they move from top ten clubs to top four clubs. Top players don't want to end up the big fish in a small pond club with the burden of trying to take the club up the table on their own back. Lautiti had equal offers from Hull and Leeds who did he choose. Leeds.

You still don't get it with Huddersfield or "England". We've been so short of talent even Karl Pratt and Stuart Reardon got games for Great Britain with respect to them. Huddersfield have won nothing, and Hodgson left a club who could pay him what he wanted for Warrington. All you need for the top four to dominate any challenger is for one of them to lure the challengers best player away. It does more damage off the pitch than on it.

3. We'll see how it goes, but there is NO argument or proof now that even money will equal even teams. The top 28 players will not spread out at two per club which is your wishful thinking theory. Nobody wants to go to London who can pay full cap. Why do Leeds win so much? It's because they don't even have to buy top players, they come through the juniors and play for significantly less money.

And this is the the reality, you need to fund full cap to get above the skint clubs, then once there you need to produce the quality juniors. These only come through at a rate of one a year at the top clubs, so down at your Wakefields and Widnes's they only produce a star once every couple of years or so.

With no prospect of any cups with their clubs these lads are prone to moving to a top club. Ricjie Myler's a great Widnes born star. Why's he not at Widnes now O'Connor can afford him?

Is there a solution to a negative post? Not now there isn't if it's grow your own stars if they aren't there to buy. The game is too short of quality kids at too many so called "super" clubs to develop into stars, and even the lads who do shine at local junior clubs will look straight to the top four academies.

Progress is possible but only on a radical basis. One club in Hull, one club in "Calder" with everyone behind it just may capture the huge resources in playing talent and fans and challenge the top four monopoly.

However if it came to Pass Hull or Featherstone grew their clubs into big outfits with academies capturing all the talent in their areas, and interesting all the fans then I fear that St. Helens who are slightly dropping off the pace and still reliant on overseas would suffer and we'd still have a "big four". Bradford lost their big four place to Warrington.

Whose next to lose their big four place to who is the real question in the real world......

Not how many club will join the big four to make it the big 5,6,7,8.

The dearth of talent could even lead to a big three for some time to come, then the big two and finally we may end up having tried try to follow the NRL but ended up like the SPL. Especially if Moran ever leaves the game.

1. I could and I think you know I could but I don't always have endless time or energy to refute all your guff. This was one such time.

2. It isn't happening because all the new investment money is not in place yet and the recipient clubs of this new found largesse are not yet in the market for juniors and top overses stars. The money will expand the small ponds to the size of the bigger lakes atg the top, don't you get it?

I am not arguing with you about the lack of all round talent in the game and the cuts in funding to junior teams will only make it worse. However, poor as they may be, the players produced by Davy's millions, have been deemed to be the best of the bunch, hence their selection for England. What was Hodgson's motivation for moving from Huddersfield to Warrington or from Australia to the UK. It could be MONeY or it could be the desire to win things. I would bet on the money thing myself.

Anyway you defeat your own argument when you bring Warrington into it. For the first few years of SL they were in a decaying stadium with no fans and no money. They were the Salford of the era. Then along came Moran, new stadium, new players, new fans and now they are attracting the top talent. It's all about the MONEY.

Now Hull KR and Salford are seemingly about to move into the same financial league as the others they can also join the club. It may well dilute the available talent between more cashed up clubs than there are at present but so what. Leeds and Wigan and Warrington et al will either have to raise their game or lose their top four spot. The game will be better for it. The number of teams able to compete for the top spot in the NRL is always bigged up as a plus for their competition. It will now become a factor in SL.

3. If the money is available at other clubs, Leeds will not be able to sign all the top juniors they do now. Money talks. If Wakefield or anyone else with the cash can point to top Australasians being signed, good facilities, good coaching and offer lotsa money to juniors they will not automatically sign for Leeds, especially the ones from the immediate area of a cashed up club.

Richie Myler was at a cash starved Widnes. He went to Salford for SL money. He then went to Warrington for even more SL money. If he were a junior on Widnes books today, I mwould wager that he would be staying, convinced of the vision within the club to move into the big time and persuaded to stay there by the cash on offer.

The result of money at many clubs will dilute the talent but will indeed end up with the big four becoming the big 6, 7 or 8. The standards on the field may regress but the number of power player clubs will increase.

The reason the SPL is as it is is because they only ever had two teams with money and now they only have one. The reason Bradford fell out of the top echelon of clubs is because they ran out of money.

SL, if all this new money comes to pass, will be more like the NRL than the SPL because there will be numerous clubs with money and not just the top three or four.

The dearth of talent is real but the availability of money at more clubs will result in a more equitable split of the limited talent between more clubs because they can. The current big boys will have serious competition for the first time in years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. The dearth of talent is real but the availability of money at more clubs will result in a more equitable split of the limited talent between more clubs because they can. The current big boys will have serious competition for the first time in years.

2. I don't always have endless time or energy to refute all your guff

1. You miss the obvious, the dearth of talent has been around for 17 years, for the whole of SL. Fev and Widnes had stopped spawning whole teams before SL came along and the Aussie invasion was already on. The best players have been at the top few clubs for years now. The aussies helped even things, and they are going now.

What you also miss also is if 14 clubs have £1.6M each that's £22M in wages available.

There has to be £22M worth of talent about, Or you get clubs spending full cap on teams that lose their matches as we have seen

2. That's fine I won't reply to you again, and you don't need to reply to me either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. You miss the obvious, the dearth of talent has been around for 17 years, for the whole of SL. Fev and Widnes had stopped spawning whole teams before SL came along and the Aussie invasion was already on. The best players have been at the top few clubs for years now. The aussies helped even things, and they are going now.

What you also miss also is if 14 clubs have £1.6M each that's £22M in wages available.

There has to be £22M worth of talent about, Or you get clubs spending full cap on teams that lose their matches as we have seen

2. That's fine I won't reply to you again, and you don't need to reply to me either.

1.The best players have been at the top clubs because the top clubs had all the money. This is apparently about to change. That's the point you miss. The law of supply and demand will kick in. The poorer quality players will make more money because there is no other supply of players and, because there is more money available, there will be more demand for them. The players will however be more evenly distributed between more clubs. The winner then will come from the best coached, best recruited quality squad and that could be any of them like the NRL. This is a good thing.

2.You have a unique knack of pushing my buttons and I reacted hastily. Whilst I disagree with most all of what you post, it's well researched, if biased content. I apologise for calling it guff. Reply or not as suits you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.The best players have been at the top clubs because the top clubs had all the money.

2.You have a unique knack of pushing my buttons and I reacted hastily. Whilst I disagree with most all of what you post, it's well researched, if biased content. I apologise for calling it guff. Reply or not as suits you.

1. Well we beg to differ and we will see, but money is not the only drive behind a successful team. Sucessful clubs have quality player production lines and that means Leeds, Wigan and Saints.

Warrington have the amazing coach Tony smith and a chairman that will still spend all he can. They have attracted some great young talent to come through as well.

Can't see that top four being broken for a long long time and you would do well to research Ken Davey's years of banging on that door. They looked good for the top when Smith was coaching them but he's gone to Wire - not only do they take the best players they take the best coach.

2. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.