Jump to content

Academy Licensing (2022 - 27) - (Merged threads)


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:


The solution does not address that problem in the other 9 clubs - so what’s your point?


You either run a centralised combine system with draft, a farm system integrated on top of the community game, or a free-market academy system. Each has their advantages and disadvantages, the first two addressing your community game concerns. What you can’t rationally do in a competitive talent market is allow 9 of the 12 elite sides to run an advantaged talent pathway in the free-market model, whilst barring the other 3 from doing so.

 

It’s not rocket science, or drone science for that matter 

 

 

I would have left it alone. It was doing ok and we got nearer to the Aussies than now.

After that centralized.

Think about it.

A licence system is just that. An approved form of player production not  a talent hoarding exercise for individual clubs as it has now become.. The product should be available to all with scouting systems open at each session and ultimately the player gets the best offer.

Never going to happen of course

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


6 minutes ago, del capo said:

I would have left it alone. It was doing ok and we got nearer to the Aussies than now.

After that centralized.

Think about it.

A licence system is just that. An approved form of player production not  a talent hoarding exercise for individual clubs as it has now become.. The product should be available to all with scouting systems open at each session and ultimately the player gets the best offer.

Never going to happen of course

And not many people know but there is an actual money transfer market at Scholarship / Academy level

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

Leigh don't have an academy this year, or last or before that. Why is that? Why did Widnes drop theirs, they had an excellent academy, grade 1 with very good people running it.

They don't get the pick of the best youth, they have to take players further down the pecking order at the cost of the community clubs.

I don't know enough to comment on what's right and wrong for academies over all, but there are only a handful of clubs in SL and Championship that don't have a Widnes academy product in their current first team squad. Widnes cut the academy to focus on spending limited money on the first team. The idea that St. Helens, Wigan & Warrington Academies hoover up all the best young players in the northwest and there's no space for say Leigh or Salford to operate is plainly not true. Similar consideration for Bradford - their academy products are all over SL and the Championship.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing to stop HKR and Cas been active in the player market, whatever the players age may be. With or without an Academy. If however an Academy was that important to the club, and indeed geography was a factor, they could have relocated their own Academy literally anywhere, preferably somewhere agreeable to the sports overarching plan and vision. If I was majority owner of HKR I'd stick my Academy in Cumbria. I'd still ship in loads of lads from East Hull to live in student accommodation during season who would rather sign papers with HKR than Hull FC. But would also have the rich grounds of the barrow junior clubs and the Cumberland junior clubs. Win win. Would even think about going halves on the project with Cas......the real problem is they can't afford it, not in hull and not in Cumbria, the RFL have simply called time on poor projects that are grossly under funded. 

The main reason we need academies is to keep players from going a) to union = disaster and b) to nsw or queensland = not good. Otherwise there are great clubs and fantastic coaches in the community game and we could sign after they complete U18s but because of union and because there is downunder, we unfortunately can't do that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, JonM said:

I don't know enough to comment on what's right and wrong for academies over all, but there are only a handful of clubs in SL and Championship that don't have a Widnes academy product in their current first team squad. Widnes cut the academy to focus on spending limited money on the first team. The idea that St. Helens, Wigan & Warrington Academies hoover up all the best young players in the northwest and there's no space for say Leigh or Salford to operate is plainly not true. Similar consideration for Bradford - their academy products are all over SL and the Championship.

I take your point but don't agree entirely. I do believe the top 3 or 4 clubs take most the top talent from community clubs. The 4th choice players usually make up the rest, unfortunately this is a fact with numerous examples in Wigan, Saints and Leeds academies. Wigan have won 6 and played in all of the last 7 Grand Finals, I think Saints have been in 4. 

I do agree that some late developers come through those other clubs, who would otherwise had played community rugby. This can still be the case with fewer academies as more competitive community rugby will exist, in theory anyway. This has been one of the drivers of this change.

There is maybe a lesson for all that selection at 13 from the community game doesn't always lead to success, begs the question should scholarship be a different model rather than academy's? Which to be fair I was under the impression was to be considered, I wonder if that's out the window with the latest announcement.

Some of the clubs are challenging the decision, so there may be changes yet and some decisions overturned ?

Edited by David Dockhouse Host
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, del capo said:

I think it was a case of geography money and organisation. You Marras have always produced talent through your local clubs - isn't RL the national sport ( according to the Tourist Board ) up there ?

It was Organisation and erm.....people involved. Wrong people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What good is it going to do Rovers and Cas having their academies playing in the colleges competition while the other clubs academies are playing in the academy league? How are they supposed to prepare their young players for first team SL rugby in comparison to everyone else when they are playing in an inferior competition? IMO every Super League club should have a team in the Academy League.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

Called compensation, based on amount of weeks in someone else's system 

Justify that to the Community game for a non contract player  who has spent up to 10 years being taught how to play

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, del capo said:

Justify that to the Community game for a non contract player  who has spent up to 10 years being taught how to play

Oh I was justifying it, just pointing out that's what happens.

Community clubs are given a small amount of money for each player signed into an academy on professional forms.

Players leaving one academy to join another, even after their contract is up, will have to pay compensation based on the amount of weeks played for the original professional club. (Should initial club offer a contract extension I should add)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Liverpool Rover said:

What good is it going to do Rovers and Cas having their academies playing in the colleges competition while the other clubs academies are playing in the academy league? How are they supposed to prepare their young players for first team SL rugby in comparison to everyone else when they are playing in an inferior competition? IMO every Super League club should have a team in the Academy League.

Some clubs blaitantly can't afford it. If they had decent money on the table they'd have their Academy and geographic location be damned. If the right money was involved you could have 5 academies in Hull. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Liverpool Rover said:

What good is it going to do Rovers and Cas having their academies playing in the colleges competition while the other clubs academies are playing in the academy league? How are they supposed to prepare their young players for first team SL rugby in comparison to everyone else when they are playing in an inferior competition? IMO every Super League club should have a team in the Academy League.

I think that's everyone's preference, the issues are the player pool, finance, community game, what happens to the 90% dropped by pro club, etc. If we can manage all those expectations and resources I'd be 100% behind you.

Love to hear from those who manage, coach, play or parents of the u14s-17s and if this will help their amateur teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

Some clubs blaitantly can't afford it. If they had decent money on the table they'd have their Academy and geographic location be damned. If the right money was involved you could have 5 academies in Hull. 

Hull KR have the budget; I agree we could have 2 academies in Hull... the fact we don’t is down to political shenanigans 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having an Academy gets you most of the best players but the average 20 year old is miles off Super League.

The game via the RFL recognised that when it promoted Reserves but the  SL Cubs effectively rejected that in favour of loan arrangements etc on cost grounds.

That's one of the many fixes the game needs to provide a proper individual and club pathway.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

I think that's everyone's preference, the issues are the player pool, finance, community game, what happens to the 90% dropped by pro club, etc. If we can manage all those expectations and resources I'd be 100% behind you.

Love to hear from those who manage, coach, play or parents of the u14s-17s and if this will help their amateur teams. 

My Brother is currently in u17s and his league has been decimated in the past few seasons. The strongest teams now no longer play at all as a sizeable chunk of their teams were drawn into academies - so that's not just the 90% of players who don't make it being lost to the community game but often the rump that is left of the best teams too. 

From my own (23yo) and my brother's(17yo) experiences, I would say the whole scholarship/academy process created a toxic environment in teams. Being friends with the coach or (not)playing a certain position became far more important than skills and having fun. Winning, and being in the top junior division, became hugely important for young lads and often their parents even more so. Both my Brother and I moved clubs because of that toxicity which focused so heavily on winning so certain individuals would get scouted. We both moved to lower division sides and had immensely more fun as a result.

I can hand on heart say too that the "game of the people" was far far more about who you knew rather than just playing talent regarding this topic; and I'd know my 400 year old school has an old boys network! Perhaps that is reflective of RL in general.

This is even worse given how at Leeds' academy for example, all but 2 of the current u17s signed up aren't being paid a penny. So these lads are taken out of the community game and not even paid to stay - yet still having to make relatively large sacrifices in theirs and their parents lives. The other conclusion from that is if Leeds aren't even paying you and you're still staying, how bad must the other nearby academies be.

Finally, this is all on top of the other pressures and distractions for 15/16/17 year old boys that draw them away from rugby.

I'm very much of the opinion now that clubs should be very hands off till players are at least in year 13.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

My Brother is currently in u17s and his league has been decimated in the past few seasons. The strongest teams now no longer play at all as a sizeable chunk of their teams were drawn into academies - so that's not just the 90% of players who don't make it being lost to the community game but often the rump that is left of the best teams too. 

From my own (23yo) and my brother's(17yo) experiences, I would say the whole scholarship/academy process created a toxic environment in teams. Being friends with the coach or (not)playing a certain position became far more important than skills and having fun. Winning, and being in the top junior division, became hugely important for young lads and often their parents even more so. Both my Brother and I moved clubs because of that toxicity which focused so heavily on winning so certain individuals would get scouted. We both moved to lower division sides and had immensely more fun as a result.

I can hand on heart say too that the "game of the people" was far far more about who you knew rather than just playing talent regarding this topic; and I'd know my 400 year old school has an old boys network! Perhaps that is reflective of RL in general.

This is even worse given how at Leeds' academy for example, all but 2 of the current u17s signed up aren't being paid a penny. So these lads are taken out of the community game and not even paid to stay - yet still having to make relatively large sacrifices in theirs and their parents lives. The other conclusion from that is if Leeds aren't even paying you and you're still staying, how bad must the other nearby academies be.

Finally, this is all on top of the other pressures and distractions for 15/16/17 year old boys that draw them away from rugby.

I'm very much of the opinion now that clubs should be very hands off till players are at least in year 13.

Seen a lot of what you’ve said around. Community clubs should handle development until the players are adults. Make academies u19s to make the distinction 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

My Brother is currently in u17s and his league has been decimated in the past few seasons. The strongest teams now no longer play at all as a sizeable chunk of their teams were drawn into academies - so that's not just the 90% of players who don't make it being lost to the community game but often the rump that is left of the best teams too. 

From my own (23yo) and my brother's(17yo) experiences, I would say the whole scholarship/academy process created a toxic environment in teams. Being friends with the coach or (not)playing a certain position became far more important than skills and having fun. Winning, and being in the top junior division, became hugely important for young lads and often their parents even more so. Both my Brother and I moved clubs because of that toxicity which focused so heavily on winning so certain individuals would get scouted. We both moved to lower division sides and had immensely more fun as a result.

I can hand on heart say too that the "game of the people" was far far more about who you knew rather than just playing talent regarding this topic; and I'd know my 400 year old school has an old boys network! Perhaps that is reflective of RL in general.

This is even worse given how at Leeds' academy for example, all but 2 of the current u17s signed up aren't being paid a penny. So these lads are taken out of the community game and not even paid to stay - yet still having to make relatively large sacrifices in theirs and their parents lives. The other conclusion from that is if Leeds aren't even paying you and you're still staying, how bad must the other nearby academies be.

Finally, this is all on top of the other pressures and distractions for 15/16/17 year old boys that draw them away from rugby.

I'm very much of the opinion now that clubs should be very hands off till players are at least in year 13.

 

2 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Seen a lot of what you’ve said around. Community clubs should handle development until the players are adults. Make academies u19s to make the distinction 

Thanks for sharing your experiences, very insightful and very close to what I have witnessed.

Talk of 'Super clubs' at under 13s/14s as players (encouraged by parents at times) move to strong community clubs hoping to be scouted leaving their well run teams for these 'super teams' massively affects the club they leave.

I like the mention of 'toxic' as I've seen similar. Pro clubs don't want this to happen, it's an unwanted by-product of the current system. I've spoke to Pro clubs who encourage players to stay with their initial clubs, many young players get picked up from 2nd, 3rd league tier, but parents don't think this is the case, hoping to give their children the best opportunity.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

 

Thanks for sharing your experiences, very insightful and very close to what I have witnessed.

Talk of 'Super clubs' at under 13s/14s as players (encouraged by parents at times) move to strong community clubs hoping to be scouted leaving their well run teams for these 'super teams' massively affects the club they leave.

I like the mention of 'toxic' as I've seen similar. Pro clubs don't want this to happen, it's an unwanted by-product of the current system. I've spoke to Pro clubs who encourage players to stay with their initial clubs, many young players get picked up from 2nd, 3rd league tier, but parents don't think this is the case, hoping to give their children the best opportunity.

 

Pro clubs say that but they don’t do anything when super teams are formed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hull KR I understand are going to have to sack a stack of young players because of this strange decision to remove their elite academy.

The recruitment 2 years ago of the highly rated John Bastian as head of youth was seen as a real coup and a statement of intent. Unfortunately his position is also at risk now.

Which other sport would actually remove academy status from clubs desperate to promote young players, are putting time,  effort and money into the process and are now beginning to see the results with brilliant players like Mikey Lewis.

I suppose Hull FC will take the pick of the Rovers kids and the rest will be on the scrapheap.

What a sorry day for Rugby League.

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, DimmestStar said:

Hull KR I understand are going to have to sack a stack of young players because of this strange decision to remove their elite academy.

The recruitment 2 years ago of the highly rated John Bastian as head of youth was seen as a real coup and a statement of intent. Unfortunately his position is also at risk now.

Which other sport would actually remove academy status from clubs desperate to promote young players, are putting time,  effort and money into the process and are now beginning to see the results with brilliant players like Mikey Lewis.

I suppose Hull FC will take the pick of the Rovers kids and the rest will be on the scrapheap.

What a sorry day for Rugby League.

John Bastian is an excellent coach and a very nice bloke. I really feel for those players and staff caught up in this. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

My Brother is currently in u17s and his league has been decimated in the past few seasons. The strongest teams now no longer play at all as a sizeable chunk of their teams were drawn into academies - so that's not just the 90% of players who don't make it being lost to the community game but often the rump that is left of the best teams too. 

From my own (23yo) and my brother's(17yo) experiences, I would say the whole scholarship/academy process created a toxic environment in teams. Being friends with the coach or (not)playing a certain position became far more important than skills and having fun. Winning, and being in the top junior division, became hugely important for young lads and often their parents even more so. Both my Brother and I moved clubs because of that toxicity which focused so heavily on winning so certain individuals would get scouted. We both moved to lower division sides and had immensely more fun as a result.

I can hand on heart say too that the "game of the people" was far far more about who you knew rather than just playing talent regarding this topic; and I'd know my 400 year old school has an old boys network! Perhaps that is reflective of RL in general.

This is even worse given how at Leeds' academy for example, all but 2 of the current u17s signed up aren't being paid a penny. So these lads are taken out of the community game and not even paid to stay - yet still having to make relatively large sacrifices in theirs and their parents lives. The other conclusion from that is if Leeds aren't even paying you and you're still staying, how bad must the other nearby academies be.

Finally, this is all on top of the other pressures and distractions for 15/16/17 year old boys that draw them away from rugby.

I'm very much of the opinion now that clubs should be very hands off till players are at least in year 13.

I can 100% see that perspective. I really do think there’s an argument for a tied/farm system where the community game partners are the scholarship platform for clubs 16-18, and act as the periphery partner for clubs’ academy players outside of the top 20 (or less). My issue with the new plan is that it doesn’t deliver that... your example is Leeds, who will continue as is. The RFL model just limits an ineffective pathway to 9 out of 12 clubs, making it “worse” for the 3 versus their peers whilsg not addressing any community game issues for 75% of their peers.

 

We should either do one thing, or the other. As ever the weak and strategically limited leadership of our sport have chosen the worst of both worlds, instead of delivering meaningful change (or keeping the current model but mitigating its downsides)

 

Depressing as... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Spidey said:

Seen a lot of what you’ve said around. Community clubs should handle development until the players are adults. Make academies u19s to make the distinction 

I could really get on board with this - but it has to be across the board, not just 3 clubs out of 12 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Glensider changed the title to RL decision on Academies
  • John Drake changed the title to Academy Licensing (2022 - 27) - (Merged threads)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...