Who will have an A licence and why?

[Dave T]

9 hours ago, Magic Superbeetle said:

This can very easily turn into a nature vs nurture debate. Ultimately plenty of highly rated youngsters still don’t make it and if it was purely top kids go in, top players come out then the top clubs waste a lot of time and effort in helping them develop. Welsby wouldn’t be half the player he currently is if Saints hadn’t put their trust in him and allowing Coote to leave for example…

Instead - I think it’s more pertinent to suppose your assertion is correct, the big three “get first draft” and ask why. In theory a Leigh mad kid whose grown up supporting the club should want to join the Leigh academy. Why don’t they? I guess it’s one of three answers;

- the big 3 put more effort into convincing them to join. Schemes like Saints Australia tour (prior to Covid) doesn’t necessarily help towards anything, but sounds a really cool thing to be part of and may just be enough to swing a maybe to a yes.

- the big 3 offer better coaching and facilities, with a demonstrable path to becoming a professional player.

- the big 3 pay more in academy contracts than other academies.

Surely it is up to other clubs to put attractive offers to the junior players that breaks the “first draft” rather than just complaining it exists? 

I agree there is something in those 3 points, but it does rather ignore some important points. 

On the 2nd point I think facilities and coaching is overstated. There will be very good coaching setups at other clubs, but even if Wakefield went and spent money on the very best coaches plus the best Academy facilities, they would still generally lose out in a battle for a player to Leeds. Players want to go to the best teams - why wouldn't they? 

If you break into the Wigan, Leeds or Saints team you are more likely to win trophies and get international honours than if you go to another club. 

Sure, reasons may be complex and some will go for other reasons, but I think the above is a huge factor and is hard to ignore on a lost of reasons why the big three hoover up the best players. 

We also have the fact that it may be possible to get 1 to 3 good young players coming through per year, to get to the stage where these top clubs are, it will take probably a decade to match them, and that is being hampered by having 4th, 5th, 6th choice, and not having the amateur setups in their town that these 3 have. 

I think it is naive to just suggest that these clubs do it better so reap the rewards. They are working with a model taht can't just be copied, my club has tried to invest a lot of money in youth, coaching and facilities, but still nowhere near these other clubs in terms of outputs. 

People often point to the fact that Wire don't bring them through into the first team - but it's not as if they go onto other clubs and have stellar careers. I can't think of any ex-Wire players we have released who has gone on to make us regret our choices - and that isn't a slur to those who have gone on and done well for themselves, like Dwyer, O'brien etc. 

But, at the end of this rambling post, I'm not sure what the answer should be. I struggle with the idea of drafts, and I think that's because I don't fully understand them. 

But anyone who thinks it's a case of just spending money and focusing on it and yiu can be just like Saints is kidding themselves. 

 

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

When did Warrington start seriously investing in their academy? Likewise Hull and Huddersfield?

The big 3 have nearly a decade on these clubs, and these clubs are already starting from a weaker position. Its never going to be an overnight process, and is almost going to require generational change.

To overcome inherent and long term positions, they will need to spend more, work harder and recruit smarter. Even then it might not begin to pay off for another 10 years; that's the cost of being years behind your competitors.

It's a challenging one. I agree, it's a long game, but Warrington for example will probably never have the junior game that say Saints and Wigan have, strong clubs that have been around for decades. There is a cultural piece at play here as well as simple investment. 

As I say in my above post, I struggle with the concept of things like drafts, but for a sport that has tried to create a more leevl playing field, to do nothing at youth level, which is acknowledged as crucial for success, seems an oversight. 

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I agree there is something in those 3 points, but it does rather ignore some important points. 

On the 2nd point I think facilities and coaching is overstated. There will be very good coaching setups at other clubs, but even if Wakefield went and spent money on the very best coaches plus the best Academy facilities, they would still generally lose out in a battle for a player to Leeds. Players want to go to the best teams - why wouldn't they? 

If you break into the Wigan, Leeds or Saints team you are more likely to win trophies and get international honours than if you go to another club. 

Sure, reasons may be complex and some will go for other reasons, but I think the above is a huge factor and is hard to ignore on a lost of reasons why the big three hoover up the best players. 

We also have the fact that it may be possible to get 1 to 3 good young players coming through per year, to get to the stage where these top clubs are, it will take probably a decade to match them, and that is being hampered by having 4th, 5th, 6th choice, and not having the amateur setups in their town that these 3 have. 

I think it is naive to just suggest that these clubs do it better so reap the rewards. They are working with a model taht can't just be copied, my club has tried to invest a lot of money in youth, coaching and facilities, but still nowhere near these other clubs in terms of outputs. 

People often point to the fact that Wire don't bring them through into the first team - but it's not as if they go onto other clubs and have stellar careers. I can't think of any ex-Wire players we have released who has gone on to make us regret our choices - and that isn't a slur to those who have gone on and done well for themselves, like Dwyer, O'brien etc. 

But, at the end of this rambling post, I'm not sure what the answer should be. I struggle with the idea of drafts, and I think that's because I don't fully understand them. 

But anyone who thinks it's a case of just spending money and focusing on it and yiu can be just like Saints is kidding themselves. 

 

Its a process that will take decades, Dave. And will cost lots of money, and deliver not many guarantees for quite a while. Clubs like Warrington, Hull, Huddersfield etc are in the middle of that right now, and some fruits are emerging and have emerged.

Outside Systems may help. Guaranteed Super League places will make some clubs more attractive than they have been.

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Its a process that will take decades, Dave. And will cost lots of money, and deliver not many guarantees for quite a while. Clubs like Warrington, Hull, Huddersfield etc are in the middle of that right now, and some fruits are emerging and have emerged.

Outside Systems may help. Guaranteed Super League places will make some clubs more attractive than they have been.

I agree, the best clubs are not standing still, it's why I agree we are talking proper generations, and not 10 years. 

We are talking cultural shifts as well as just investing a few hundred k on some facilities. 

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It's a challenging one. I agree, it's a long game, but Warrington for example will probably never have the junior game that say Saints and Wigan have, strong clubs that have been around for decades. There is a cultural piece at play here as well as simple investment. 

As I say in my above post, I struggle with the concept of things like drafts, but for a sport that has tried to create a more leevl playing field, to do nothing at youth level, which is acknowledged as crucial for success, seems an oversight. 

Its no easy thing to overcome I suppose.

I think a lot of "solutions" proffered are unworkable, impractical and in some cases not legally enforceable. As I said in another post perhaps a return to licensing might help some clubs by enabling to focus on youth promotion more without the concern short term avoiding relegation.

The RFL did try to limit the number of academies in line with the limited player pool, perhaps IMG's leadership might follow a similar line.

[David Dockhouse Host]

13 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I agree, the best clubs are not standing still, it's why I agree we are talking proper generations, and not 10 years. 

We are talking cultural shifts as well as just investing a few hundred k on some facilities. 

I think removing promotion and relegation will help 

If I'm an owner near the bottom of super League do I invest an extra 100k into my academy when I'm already paying and even then not sure I'll get a return as I'm getting a low draft.

That's 1 million in ten years and I may not be in super League then.

Makes far more sense to buy a couple more first teamers and remain in SL with the far superior funding. Running an academy isn't then that attractive, you can see why some have dropped them, it's not lack of ambition or a will to replicate the top 3 it's simply to use your money more wisely.

So as been said on this thread, you can get better coaches, facilities, try harder to convince best youth to join and still be no better off. If a kid chooses the best teams in SL your business plan is actually better getting a great first team squad and then consider youth, chicken before egg if you like.

[The Art of Hand and Foot]

Just supposing, although possible but not probable, but just supposing we end up with more teams that are grade A than places available, what then? Yes I know it's unlikely , but what if?

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, The Art of Hand and Foot said:

Just supposing, although possible but not probable, but just supposing we end up with more teams that are grade A than places available, what then? Yes I know it's unlikely , but what if?

Expand the league, they've said that.

[yipyee]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Nobody has said it's purely initial quality ,but that is a massive starting point , and as I said it starts at junior level with community ' super clubs ' 

 

Community super clubs haha what are you drinking

[David Dockhouse Host]

6 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Community super clubs haha what are you drinking

Referring to youth teams which end up with all the best players, it happens, seen it at many age groups. It's not healthy for the community game. I'm not sure pro clubs want this, I believe they prefer the talent is spread, but parents and community coaches hoping to win things use it as a way to get kids to join their team. I've been contacted by coaches of other teams saying they will get my lad a contract. I didn't fall for it but you can see how this becomes everyone's belief.

This is my experience BTW, others may have different veiws and experiences

[Guest]

Not a little bit interested in

Who will have an A licence and why?

more interested in

Who won't have an A licence and why?

[The Art of Hand and Foot]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Expand the league, they've said that.

Hmmm! Really!? The so called top teams won't like that. More games and spreading the same income a little thinner. No, they'll change the rules again.

Edited October 2, 2022 by The Art of Hand and Foot

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, The Art of Hand and Foot said:

Hmmm! Really!? The so called top teams won't like that. More games and spreading the same income a little thinner. No, they'll change the rules again.

They have said they have agreed grading not numbers of clubs to direct them.

They expect, logically, to have less than 12 Grade A clubs to fill the Super League spaces. The rest of the spaces will be filled by the highest ranking Grade Bs.

If we have 14 Grade A clubs like Leeds, Saints etc, then excellent! The TV rights will surely be worth much more.

[ELBOWSEYE]

4 hours ago, Dave T said:

I agree there is something in those 3 points, but it does rather ignore some important points. 

On the 2nd point I think facilities and coaching is overstated. There will be very good coaching setups at other clubs, but even if Wakefield went and spent money on the very best coaches plus the best Academy facilities, they would still generally lose out in a battle for a player to Leeds. Players want to go to the best teams - why wouldn't they? 

If you break into the Wigan, Leeds or Saints team you are more likely to win trophies and get international honours than if you go to another club. 

Sure, reasons may be complex and some will go for other reasons, but I think the above is a huge factor and is hard to ignore on a lost of reasons why the big three hoover up the best players. 

We also have the fact that it may be possible to get 1 to 3 good young players coming through per year, to get to the stage where these top clubs are, it will take probably a decade to match them, and that is being hampered by having 4th, 5th, 6th choice, and not having the amateur setups in their town that these 3 have. 

I think it is naive to just suggest that these clubs do it better so reap the rewards. They are working with a model taht can't just be copied, my club has tried to invest a lot of money in youth, coaching and facilities, but still nowhere near these other clubs in terms of outputs. 

People often point to the fact that Wire don't bring them through into the first team - but it's not as if they go onto other clubs and have stellar careers. I can't think of any ex-Wire players we have released who has gone on to make us regret our choices - and that isn't a slur to those who have gone on and done well for themselves, like Dwyer, O'brien etc. 

But, at the end of this rambling post, I'm not sure what the answer should be. I struggle with the idea of drafts, and I think that's because I don't fully understand them. 

But anyone who thinks it's a case of just spending money and focusing on it and yiu can be just like Saints is kidding themselves. 

 

I think you are spot on, I coached a lot in Warrington in the late 80's and all the 90s and as well as the local clubs tried there were fewer kids playing at school compared to wigan and st helens, (especially wigan) Warrington have worked hard to rectify this but it something that will take years to bear fruit (there are loads more coming through now). Warrington in the past matched other clubs for the top juniors (Sculthorpe and Harris were 2) but failed to keep hold of them. 

[Smudger06]

A - Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Hull, Warrington, Catalans = 6

B - HKR, Castleford, Huddersfield, Toulouse, Wakefield, Salford, Leigh, Featherstone, Halifax, York, Widnes = 11

C - Barrow, Batley, Sheffield, Bradford, Whitehaven, London, Newcastle, Dewsbury, Workington, Keighley = 10

Ungraded - Swinton, North Wales, Doncaster, Rochdale, Oldham, Hunslet, Midlands, London Skolars, Cornwall, West Wales = 10

 

[Pete Grady]

On 01/10/2022 at 11:00, bobbruce said:

The site itself was called Cunningham grange. I think there is a Coslett Drive,Wellens Walk and Sculthorpe close. 

We've got an outside McManus, does that count?

[yipyee]

9 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

Referring to youth teams which end up with all the best players, it happens, seen it at many age groups. It's not healthy for the community game. I'm not sure pro clubs want this, I believe they prefer the talent is spread, but parents and community coaches hoping to win things use it as a way to get kids to join their team. I've been contacted by coaches of other teams saying they will get my lad a contract. I didn't fall for it but you can see how this becomes everyone's belief.

This is my experience BTW, others may have different veiws and experiences

Teams like this tend to fold and are fortunately few and far between.

Usually good community coaches develop kids further to their potentials and this may lead to a switch in clubs when some talented kids are being left behind. Also when kids go to high school and mix with other kids, typically from further afield this can also cause kids to move clubs. 

Ultimately teams can only transfer 3 players in a season.

Sky and BBC (the broadcasters) can actually help though by stop banging on about 'good community clubs' that develop players. 

Edited October 2, 2022 by yipyee

[GUBRATS]

2 hours ago, yipyee said:

Teams like this tend to fold and are fortunately few and far between.

Usually good community coaches develop kids further to their potentials and this may lead to a switch in clubs when some talented kids are being left behind. Also when kids go to high school and mix with other kids, typically from further afield this can also cause kids to move clubs. 

Ultimately teams can only transfer 3 players in a season.

Sky and BBC (the broadcasters) can actually help though by stop banging on about 'good community clubs' that develop players. 

Tend to fold ? 

Like who ? St Pat's and Blackbrooke ? 

[yipyee]

10 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Tend to fold ? 

Like who ? St Pat's and Blackbrooke ? 

Yeah, 

So onceiys gets competitive some clubs turn away players, many of whom parents played at the club and would be future first team players, instead these clubs chase 'better players' the teams then loose players or once lads get scholarships stop playing and the teams fold.

I saw a post about blackbrook that 4 junior teams are in finals, if that's the case why doesn't this transfer to their poor first team and why have their other age groups struggled to fulfill fixtures?

It is of course different from age group to age group as its a parent who has little accountability in charge.

Another club I am aware of cut players and effectively kicked kids out of a club, this was based on how good 11 year olds are at playing the game. Absolute madness!!

 

[Damien]

18 minutes ago, yipyee said:

I saw a post about blackbrook that 4 junior teams are in finals, if that's the case why doesn't this transfer to their poor first team and why have their other age groups struggled to fulfill fixtures?

I dont know about Blackbrook but i know at St Pats the open age team often doesnt reflect their true strength because the majority of players have traditionally signed professional well before open age. The ones who go on to open age are often the ones that didn't sign pro and who didn't quit the game at 18.

[yipyee]

7 minutes ago, Damien said:

I dont know about Blackbrook but i know at St Pats the open age team often doesnt reflect their true strength because the majority of players have traditionally signed professional well before open age. The ones who go on to open age are often the ones that didn't sign pro and who didn't quit the game at 18.

Yeah so a lot of kids who quit at 18 are the ones who played at that club to try and get a scholarship..  not to play for that club.

A lot of the time the ones who wanted to play for the club are kicked out at an early age as decisions are made on little kids as to their ability which could develop later.

Usually around under 15s , kids who play at a club to try to pick up a scholarship and don't will leave to go and play with their mates for fun. Clubs who kicked out all the ones who tried to do this from the offset then struggle for numbers and the teams fold.

Edited October 3, 2022 by yipyee

[whatmichaelsays]

On 02/10/2022 at 09:16, Dave T said:

On the 2nd point I think facilities and coaching is overstated. There will be very good coaching setups at other clubs, but even if Wakefield went and spent money on the very best coaches plus the best Academy facilities, they would still generally lose out in a battle for a player to Leeds. Players want to go to the best teams - why wouldn't they? 

Whilst there is probably some truth in this, I do think it would be a factor for many parents. 

You see it in other sports (US collegiate sports in particular) where a big thing is made of impressing parents with facilities, coaching, education opportunities, pastoral care, etc, and parental influence is definitely a big factor when you're recruiting scholarship players. If your folks are impressed by the tour of Leeds' training facilities, the educational programmes with Leeds College / Beckett and "randomly" bumping into players like Jamie Peacock and Jamie Jones-Buchanan milling about the hallway, are they going to encourage you to go there, or to those clubs that don't offer something comparable? 

I think it is definately going to be "a" thing, if not necessarily "the" thing that helps to tip the balance. 

 

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Whilst there is probably some truth in this, I do think it would be a factor for many parents. 

You see it in other sports (US collegiate sports in particular) where a big thing is made of impressing parents with facilities, coaching, education opportunities, pastoral care, etc, and parental influence is definitely a big factor when you're recruiting scholarship players. If your folks are impressed by the tour of Leeds' training facilities, the educational programmes with Leeds College / Beckett and "randomly" bumping into players like Jamie Peacock and Jamie Jones-Buchanan milling about the hallway, are they going to encourage you to go there, or to those clubs that don't offer something comparable? 

I think it is definately going to be "a" thing, if not necessarily "the" thing that helps to tip the balance. 

 

So flip that. If Wakefield built better facilities than Leeds, would young lads suddenly start going there, or would they still go to Leeds? 

That is my point. 

[Tommygilf]

35 minutes ago, Dave T said:

So flip that. If Wakefield built better facilities than Leeds, would young lads suddenly start going there, or would they still go to Leeds? 

That is my point. 

It does begin the slow process of balancing out that decision.

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

It does begin the slow process of balancing out that decision.

Very slow imo. 

In reality, I think a young player would still choose Leeds over them 9. 9 times out of 10.

Thats not to say there is no impact, or that they shouldn't be investing, I am challenging the narrative that clubs can just invest in facilities and coaching and do what Leeds, Saints and Wigan do.