What system would be best for recruiting and developing young players

[LionelHurst]

I think this fits in here chaps as it provides another thread to the argument re player development -

http://allgoldsrugby.com/danny-fallon-signs-2017/

[The Parksider]

I agree that drop off rates are the big problem.

This is why my thoughts were about keeping players in the community game for longer as they will stay with their friends and not have the stress of moving to a high performance environment. These are young kids remember and they are not always ready for that type of environment and I am sure we lose some talented players by putting too much stress on them too soon. At that age it should be about fun as well as performance. Keeping them all together will allow the late developers to shine as well.

p.s. I said critiqued not criticised. I consider the former to be far more positive.

 

Much appreciated. I just wouldn't know if lads would stick in the community game as when i was helping with the soccer team many lads left WITH their friends to go do other things.

 

The problem always was that if we had a squad of 20 lads at 13 we could always put a team out, that could drop to 13 or 14 lads by 15 Years old age group and all you needed was an injury or two and kids on holiday and you would be postponing games or playing short.

 

This is the heartbreaking thing for a coach of lads at say 15,16 when you have nine players keen to play including some very good players and you can't play.

 

Then the ambitious kids have to leave their mates and go play at a stronger club.

 

I seriously just feel you have to get the top talent into the pro system before the amateur system falls apart. And it does!

[LordCharles]

I seriously just feel you have to get the top talent into the pro system before the amateur system falls apart. And it does!

 

 

And that perception Parky is exactly the problem, when in actual fact the Community game is falling apart from U15's through to Open Age for that very reason, i.e the Pro clubs are trying to get kids into a not fit for purpose system that they operate as soon as they can without considering the damage they are doing elsewhere (Community game).

 

Talent ID is one of the most complexed fields in sport and attempting to do it at a young age in a sport that actually benefits late developing players is in itself madness!

 

They can't see it and won't see it even when it is spelled out to them, they are very poor at what they do and if you got the return they get from their investment you would soon stop investing but they won't!!!

 

Why I hear you ask?

 

Fear...........fear of somebody else signing a player they thought they should have signed and him becoming the next Farrell, Sinfield, Long, Cunningham, Peacock etc.

 

In all seriousness our sport is damaging itself and those responsible, RFL & SL Clubs, don't want to hear it, but it is the truth and if they had to put an argument together to defend it based on statistical data and facts it would be pretty thin, in fact they might just not bother turning up to the hearing it would be that poor.

[terrywebbisgod]

The YJL recently ran a quick Twitter survey on what teams clubs would be running next season, 11 clubs responded. At u7 12 teams would be running. This dropped to 8 at u15&16 and only 4 at u17&18.

I played in the era when kids played for town teams onto county level and the national level and not able to sign to pro clubs until the age of 17. Whilst there wasn't the same number of amateur clubs as there is today, very few teams folded at the older age groups. I can't see why that system has changed to a system that clearly doesn't work.

[LordCharles]

The YJL recently ran a quick Twitter survey on what teams clubs would be running next season, 11 clubs responded. At u7 12 teams would be running. This dropped to 8 at u15&16 and only 4 at u17&18.

I played in the era when kids played for town teams onto county level and the national level and not able to sign to pro clubs until the age of 17. Whilst there wasn't the same number of amateur clubs as there is today, very few teams folded at the older age groups. I can't see why that system has changed to a system that clearly doesn't work.

 

 

Correct TWIG, prior to Academies/Scholarships I don't remember teams folding or struggling for numbers, I also remember that at the same time we were in direct competition with sports such as Football and RU due to the Sept-May season and this had no impact either. 

 

Unfortunately that is no longer the case and whilst scholarships were never designed to have a competitive playing format, we now have that as well.

 

As each season passes the erosion gets slightly more and I can honestly say after 36 years in the sport (22 years and counting as a coach) we are reaching a critical era from U15's through to Open Age, if we do not do something within the next 2-3 years I can see the sport passing a point of no return in some aspects and that would not be good long term.

 

Stabilise the Community game and we stabilise the sport in my view, fail to do that soon and we are going to have real problems moving forward.

[JM2010]

I started this thread as I am interested in all the different ideas on what is an important aspect of RL both for the community game and the professional game.

After reading through all the ideas, I've been changing and tweaking my own.

I think academies should still run but on a more regional basis. I do, however, think the young players should be signed to a professional club but not play until the end if the u16s season.

This could either be done by the RFL offering a certain amount of spaces in each regional academy to the clubs in that catchment area (who would then contribute to a percentage of the running cost depending on the amount of spaces they have) or by clubs that are close together agreeing to run one academy like in Hull and Leigh/Salford.

This would take less players out of the community game as less players would be signed on due to less academies and no scholarships at u16. I'm not saying this would solve the issue of the drop off rate but it would help.

At u18 level would changing from a Sunday morning help with the drop off with them maybe playing before the open age on a Saturday?

I also think that college teams could have an important role to play in keeping this age group playing RL.

Just some ideas which may or may not work

[The Parksider]

And that perception Parky is exactly the problem, when in actual fact the Community game is falling apart from U15's through to Open Age for that very reason, i.e the Pro clubs are trying to get kids into a not fit for purpose system that they operate as soon as they can without considering the damage they are doing elsewhere (Community game).

 

Talent ID is one of the most complexed fields in sport and attempting to do it at a young age in a sport that actually benefits late developing players is in itself madness!

 

They can't see it and won't see it even when it is spelled out to them, they are very poor at what they do and if you got the return they get from their investment you would soon stop investing but they won't!!!

 

Why I hear you ask?

 

Fear...........fear of somebody else signing a player they thought they should have signed and him becoming the next Farrell, Sinfield, Long, Cunningham, Peacock etc.

 

In all seriousness our sport is damaging itself and those responsible, RFL & SL Clubs, don't want to hear it, but it is the truth and if they had to put an argument together to defend it based on statistical data and facts it would be pretty thin, in fact they might just not bother turning up to the hearing it would be that poor.

 

Fair enough, I guess those who drop off the sport may in general have never been great prospects anyway. There appears between posts some great ideas to move forward...... 

[LordCharles]

Fair enough, I guess those who drop off the sport may in general have never been great prospects anyway. There appears between posts some great ideas to move forward...... 

 

 

Another misconception as those who drop off are invariably Q3 or Q4 late developers that ultimately have the potential (but not the physical attributes at that point) to become very good players, hence why we are missing another trick as a sport and much of it is down to the perception of what Talent is, rather than what it actually is.

 

Just to support this............

 

I did a study on a top SL academy over 12 months ago.

 

82% of their academy players were Q1 & Q2, yet 42% of their first grade squad were Q4?

 

I will leave you to draw your own conclusions but that same scenario is reflected across pretty much every other SL Academy/Club

[northernmouse]

There seems to be a recurring theme that the drop off rate is way to high. Is it a case of not only picking up and recognising young talent but also having a route back into the sport at a later age. Some 30 years ago none of the colleges or Unis, I applied to, played RL so no chance of playing (without travelling). My question would be - is it possible to take a 20-21yrs old who has talent and turn them into a SL player or are they 'past it' at this age?

[Dunbar]

Another misconception as those who drop off are invariably Q3 or Q4 late developers that ultimately have the potential (but not the physical attributes at that point) to become very good players, hence why we are missing another trick as a sport and much of it is down to the perception of what Talent is, rather than what it actually is.

Just to support this............

I did a study on a top SL academy over 12 months ago.

82% of their academy players were Q1 & Q2, yet 42% of their first grade squad were Q4?

I will leave you to draw your own conclusions but that same scenario is reflected across pretty much every other SL Academy/Club

Forgive my ignorance but what is Q1, Q2 and Q4?

[LordCharles]

Forgive my ignorance but what is Q1, Q2 and Q4?

 

 

Quartile 1    (Birthdate: Sept - Nov)

Quartile 2    (Birthdate: Dec - Feb)

Quartile 3    (Birthdate: Mar - May)

Quartile 4    (Birthdate: Jun- Aug)

 

Reference to the relative age effect (RAE), which evidences the maturational differences often seen within an age group cohort as players born on the 1st September can be 364 days older than those born on 31st August yet still play in the same age group.

 

Thus, where we see observational bias align itself to selection of the bigger, faster, stronger players within an age group due to their relative age in comparison with other players, usually late Q3 and Q4 players.

 

Hence the illusion of talent where non actually resides and the perceived talent is little more than a physical/athletic advantage due, very often at point in time, to RAE.

[Dunbar]

Quartile 1 (Birthdate: Sept - Nov)

Quartile 2 (Birthdate: Dec - Feb)

Quartile 3 (Birthdate: Mar - May)

Quartile 4 (Birthdate: Jun- Aug)

Reference to the relative age effect (RAE), which evidences the maturational differences often seen within an age group cohort as players born on the 1st September can be 364 days older than those born on 31st August yet still play in the same age group.

Thus, where we see observational bias align itself to selection of the bigger, faster, stronger players within an age group due to their relative age in comparison with other players, usually late Q3 and Q4 players.

Hence the illusion of talent where non actually resides and the perceived talent is little more than a physical/athletic advantage due, very often at point in time, to RAE.

Thanks. I had guessed it was this but wasn't sure.

The obvious answer at junior levels is to arrange leagues by weight/size rather than age as this means kids of the same size are playing each other and so ability will come to the fore rather than just physical dominance.

I hadn't realised the issue was so pronounced when looking at the Academy level as well. There is no obvious answer here as mixing ages gets more complicated over time. I guess having u16, u17, u18 and u19 Academy league structures would begin to even out the imbalance but this would require considerable resources.

Looking back to the structure you propose, how would you tackle this problem if the intakes into the regional academies are age based? Or is just holding the kids in the system long enough for their ability to mature the answer?

[LordCharles]

Thanks. I had guessed it was this but wasn't sure.

The obvious answer at junior levels is to arrange leagues by weight/size rather than age as this means kids of the same size are playing each other and so ability will come to the fore rather than just physical dominance.

I hadn't realised the issue was so pronounced when looking at the Academy level as well. There is no obvious answer here as mixing ages gets more complicated over time. I guess having u16, u17, u18 and u19 Academy league structures would begin to even out the imbalance but this would require considerable resources.

Looking back to the structure you propose, how would you tackle this problem if the intakes into the regional academies are age based? Or is just holding the kids in the system long enough for their ability to mature the answer?

 

 

Bio-Banding already exists in some sports where players are grouped based on their size and weight, but it is not the answer.

 

If we removed or found a solution to RAE then we may actually produce less Talent. You may find that a strange statement but in reality RAE produces traits in players that without it they would not develop.

 

Problem solving, skill development (Technical & Mental), Resilience, Grit etc etc, all of which are produce as a result of the adversity faced by players who do not yet have the physical attributes of (in general) older players within their cohort.

 

Consequently, when they do mature physically/athletically they out perform many of their earlier more prominent peers as they can now match them physically/athletically but have also built a skill set/set of traits that those earlier maturing players have not had the need to develop as they simply relied on nature in the first instance to give them an advantage.

 

Hence why many players exit the system at 16,17,18..........nature is no longer serving them in the way that it once did and they were deemed talented based on their physical/athletic performance in an unequal environment.

 

Obviously that does not mean Q1 and Q2 players don't make it because they do, but far more don't in comparison to the conversion rates of Q3 and Q4 players, hence the stacking up of Q1 and Q2 players in SL academies.

[Dunbar]

Bio-Banding already exists in some sports where players are grouped based on their size and weight, but it is not the answer.

If we removed or found a solution to RAE then we may actually produce less Talent. You may find that a strange statement but in reality RAE produces traits in players that without it they would not develop.

Problem solving, skill development (Technical & Mental), Resilience, Grit etc etc, all of which are produce as a result of the adversity faced by players who do not yet have the physical attributes of (in general) older players within their cohort.

Consequently, when they do mature physically/athletically they out perform many of their earlier more prominent peers as they can now match them physically/athletically but have also built a skill set/set of traits that those earlier maturing players have not had the need to develop as they simply relied on nature in the first instance to give them an advantage.

Hence why many players exit the system at 16,17,18..........nature is no longer serving them in the way that it once did and they were deemed talented based on their physical/athletic performance in an unequal environment.

Obviously that does not mean Q1 and Q2 players don't make it because they do, but far more don't in comparison to the conversion rates of Q3 and Q4 players, hence the stacking up of Q1 and Q2 players in SL academies.

But what about putting similar character building challenges in front of the players have have physically matured earlier? Surely the system is doing then an equal disservice by allowing them to rely on their physical dominance and forsaking technical and mental development.

It seems that what we have at the moment is a system that disadvantages the less mature and leaves the early developers with a limited skill set as they are not being challenged enough to develop a more rounded game.

Rugby League is a tough sport. I would suggest that the resilience and grit you mention would come to the fore even if the players were more closely matched physically.

[LordCharles]

But what about putting similar character building challenges in front of the players have have physically matured earlier? Surely the system is doing then an equal disservice by allowing them to rely on their physical dominance and forsaking technical and mental development.

It seems that what we have at the moment is a system that disadvantages the less mature and leaves the early developers with a limited skill set as they are not being challenged enough to develop a more rounded game.

Rugby League is a tough sport. I would suggest that the resilience and grit you mention would come to the fore even if the players were more closely matched physically.

 

 

Welcome to my world!!!!!!!!

 

Unfortunately the current TID systems and personnel are not up to speed with what they have created and are continuing to create, managing it if they did is a whole other level, which again requires a certain level of knowledge/expertise. So "he's a good lad" or "he will make it pro" type of nonsense that many scouts still to this day spout and consequently underpins the signing of said "Good'un" at 13/14 is just poor, but believe me we are still at it and in a big way, its just awful TBH.

 

Putting bumps in the road so to speak (managed failure) is something some sports are looking at within Elite Talent Development, but you really need to know what your doing for it to achieve the desired outcome.

 

PCDE's (Psychological Characteristics of Developing Excellence) are not something you can just attain. Therefore, building them over a period of time in the correct environment is something that takes a good deal of knowledge to be available within any talent development environment.

[Faxflopper]

Yes we need to stop the leaking of talent and many on here have mentioned numerous ways of doing this but I also feel that 1 area has been missed out and that's the quality of coaches/coaching within the game.

 

Now I'm not comparing SL or the Championship to NRL but coaching within the NRL is seen as a career path and they have numerous coaches at each level to help nurture the talent at every level. Yet in ESL, we tend to either discard players due to them not reaching the required number of ticked boxes by the age of 18/19 and don't give them a stop gap to help them improve..... it has been said in the media on numerous occasions that had Peacock been born 10 years later he would have fallen by the wayside due to him being a late developer and also Alex Walmsley who was touted to SL Clubs at 19/20 and without even looking at him most clubs rejected him purely down to his age.

 

SL clubs need to continue to look at players of all ages (NRL this year has had at least 3 players on debut who were over the age of 26) but we need the coaches to be there at each and every step but not only coaches but the right coaches who are fully qualified and know how to bring on talent (we should have something like football do with the badge system). We could have the best talent in the world but we will lose it if we don't know how to use it. Would Widdop be a good a player as he is now had he stayed in the UK?

 

In short, we need quality coaches through the ranks to help players reach the top rather than what we do now....'he was a good player so we'll have him as a coach'...... this system does not work (yes, there's always an exception)...... and to prove that bring coaches through the ranks works just look at Premiership Managers and see how many of those were international standard players (only a handful) or even the NRL...again only a few were international standard.

 

There needs to be career paths for both talented players & talented coaches and this will improve the quality of our game, raise the standard and in-turn improve the national squad which then make the game for appealing and then more people start watching and they will then want to play the game and thus increase the pool of players we have to pick from!

[Dunbar]

Welcome to my world!!!!!!!!

Unfortunately the current TID systems and personnel are not up to speed with what they have created and are continuing to create, managing it if they did is a whole other level, which again requires a certain level of knowledge/expertise. So "he's a good lad" or "he will make it pro" type of nonsense that many scouts still to this day spout and consequently underpins the signing of said "Good'un" at 13/14 is just poor, but believe me we are still at it and in a big way, its just awful TBH.

Putting bumps in the road so to speak (managed failure) is something some sports are looking at within Elite Talent Development, but you really need to know what your doing for it to achieve the desired outcome.

PCDE's (Psychological Characteristics of Developing Excellence) are not something you can just attain. Therefore, building them over a period of time in the correct environment is something that takes a good deal of knowledge to be available within any talent development environment.

I certainly hope you are not alone in your thinking and you get a chance to put your ideas into practice.

I have not been actively involved in Rugby League as anything other than a spectator since I left university but a lot of what you talk about resonates with me.

In many ways I consider my role to be about talent management as I need to build teams with both continuity and contingency... finding and developing talent where attitudes far outweigh abilities when it comes to long term contribution. This is not in the field of sport and not age based but some of the strategies are similar.

I hope that you succeed.

[The Parksider]

Another misconception as those who drop off are invariably Q3 or Q4 late developers that ultimately have the potential (but not the physical attributes at that point) to become very good players, hence why we are missing another trick as a sport and much of it is down to the perception of what Talent is, rather than what it actually is.

 

Just to support this............

 

I did a study on a top SL academy over 12 months ago.

 

82% of their academy players were Q1 & Q2, yet 42% of their first grade squad were Q4?

 

I will leave you to draw your own conclusions but that same scenario is reflected across pretty much every other SL Academy/Club

 

I'm fine with your analysis and conclusions thank you for all your efforts.

[Oxford]

Another misconception as those who drop off are invariably Q3 or Q4 late developers that ultimately have the potential (but not the physical attributes at that point) to become very good players, hence why we are missing another trick as a sport and much of it is down to the perception of what Talent is, rather than what it actually is.

 

Just to support this............

 

I did a study on a top SL academy over 12 months ago.

 

82% of their academy players were Q1 & Q2, yet 42% of their first grade squad were Q4?

 

I will leave you to draw your own conclusions but that same scenario is reflected across pretty much every other SL Academy/Club

Can I ask what Q1 etc means?

 

And is there an equal drop off rate in NRL circles?

[terrywebbisgod]

Can I ask what Q1 etc means?

 

And is there an equal drop off rate in NRL circles?

 

 

Quartile 1    (Birthdate: Sept - Nov)

Quartile 2    (Birthdate: Dec - Feb)

Quartile 3    (Birthdate: Mar - May)

Quartile 4    (Birthdate: Jun- Aug)

 

Reference to the relative age effect (RAE), which evidences the maturational differences often seen within an age group cohort as players born on the 1st September can be 364 days older than those born on 31st August yet still play in the same age group.

 

Thus, where we see observational bias align itself to selection of the bigger, faster, stronger players within an age group due to their relative age in comparison with other players, usually late Q3 and Q4 players.

 

Hence the illusion of talent where non actually resides and the perceived talent is little more than a physical/athletic advantage due, very often at point in time, to RAE.

[Adeybull]

Quartile 1    (Birthdate: Sept - Nov)

Quartile 2    (Birthdate: Dec - Feb)

Quartile 3    (Birthdate: Mar - May)

Quartile 4    (Birthdate: Jun- Aug)

 

Reference to the relative age effect (RAE), which evidences the maturational differences often seen within an age group cohort as players born on the 1st September can be 364 days older than those born on 31st August yet still play in the same age group.

 

Thus, where we see observational bias align itself to selection of the bigger, faster, stronger players within an age group due to their relative age in comparison with other players, usually late Q3 and Q4 players.

 

Hence the illusion of talent where non actually resides and the perceived talent is little more than a physical/athletic advantage due, very often at point in time, to RAE.

This is very interesting.

 

I think back to my own very early teens.  Sometime back in the 19th century... I was pretty ###### at sports. Tall lad for my age, but no 3D vision and not very good, really.  Seriously not good. Then certain little nuggets started working, and I shot up and out in all drections (I heard you sniggering back there...be good!) in a matter of months. And I suddenly went from being the saddo who got picked last for wendyball games, to packing down in the front row (admittedly, in the wrong code - it WAS the East Midlands... ) and knocking seven bells out of the arrisholes who had bullied me before, within a single school year. And suddenly being able to keep up with the school star athlete over 100m and chuck a discus out of the park. All because I hit puberty before virtually everyone else in my year.  And I could not understand how I could get the ball, and just stand and chuck it out over everyone else's heads. It was good, though!

 

Did not last long, of course.  And the rest of them ultimately caught me up as THEIR naughty bits finally started working too. But, for that year, until they did, I suddenly went from muppet to representing the school at swimming and athletics and rugby. Had any scout seen me then, they might have thougt I had some talent.  When, in reality, it was only because my bits got their act together first - and well ahead of even Q1 and Q2 contemporaries (I was born in March).

 

I'll not bore you with the other consequences of the early wake-up call from down below...

[Oxford]

 

Thanks for that terry I was hoping it would be something like this as it works or seems to in Hockey circles (biff with a stick on ice) but I think the research suggests that it is learning characteristics that are more useful in analysis of developing talent than simple birth date significance. The relationship between attitude to both opportunity and setback that are of greater importance.

[Ash Hope]

FYI all there's going to be a six-page article on how academies are run and the future in next month's magazine. Reading through this has certainly offered me some different avenues.

[LordCharles]

Thanks for that terry I was hoping it would be something like this as it works or seems to in Hockey circles (biff with a stick on ice) but I think the research suggests that it is learning characteristics that are more useful in analysis of developing talent than simple birth date significance. The relationship between attitude to both opportunity and setback that are of greater importance.

 

 

Indeed, which is exactly why the "Scouts" get it wrong far more than they get it right!

 

Players are identified off performance now, rather than the prospect of their development potential in relation to future performance. Many factors enter that equation so thorough assessment and understanding of that assessment is required if you want to bring the correct players into a High Performance TDE and progress them in a manner that allows them to fulfil their potential.

[Sco77]

This is very interesting.

I think back to my own very early teens. Sometime back in the 19th century... I was pretty ###### at sports. Tall lad for my age, but no 3D vision and not very good, really. Seriously not good. Then certain little nuggets started working, and I shot up and out in all drections (I heard you sniggering back there...be good!) in a matter of months. And I suddenly went from being the saddo who got picked last for wendyball games, to packing down in the front row (admittedly, in the wrong code - it WAS the East Midlands... ) and knocking seven bells out of the arrisholes who had bullied me before, within a single school year. And suddenly being able to keep up with the school star athlete over 100m and chuck a discus out of the park. All because I hit puberty before virtually everyone else in my year. And I could not understand how I could get the ball, and just stand and chuck it out over everyone else's heads. It was good, though!

Did not last long, of course. And the rest of them ultimately caught me up as THEIR naughty bits finally started working too. But, for that year, until they did, I suddenly went from muppet to representing the school at swimming and athletics and rugby. Had any scout seen me then, they might have thougt I had some talent. When, in reality, it was only because my bits got their act together first - and well ahead of even Q1 and Q2 contemporaries (I was born in March).

I'll not bore you with the other consequences of the early wake-up call from down below...

This IS a huge problem still!! I see some of the lads my local pro team are enrolling into their scholarships and it's all the big and physically matured lads.

It staggers me that they don't see that those big lumps, with limited skill and vision, will be overtaken within a year or two.

They are not interested in the lads with all the core skills, vision and foresight. Which is why they then slip away into the abyss.

Remember, what they all said about Thurston time and time again!!

Surely it's easier to take on board the lads that just need to physically develop and get a bit of self belief, rather than trying to get the bigger lads to learn how to read the game properly, pass and tackle properly etc!

It's scary, as I have watched a lot of these lads over the years, as our team play against them on a weekly basis, and I honestly am astonished how they get the plaudits over some of the smaller lads!

Things really do need to change.... And fast. But like Jason mentioned earlier, how can it change when the powers that be keep burying their heads in the sand and don't want to listen.