Quote: G1 "Whilst your post makes a lot of sense the bit in italics I strongly disagree with.
It's a fallacy.
Leeds have been investing in youth since the start of Super league. Remember when Caddick and Hetherington took over we were insolvent. We still had the likes of Sinfield and JJB at the club.
Of course, having resources helps but we didn't always have them and it didn't prevent us pursuing a youth policy nor should it prevent clubs like Wakey. The fact is Wakey and others have in the past paid appallingly scant regard to youth development. To excuse that away with "well, we're not as rich as you" is lazy and wrong.
Saints aren't as rich as us and they#re the other great club and promoting youth. It's no coincidence that the strength of Sl lies with us and them.'"
I can accept what you say, but I still add into that the fact that we were skint - completely in 2000 - and all of our available funds were taken up just staying in SL, which if we hadn't done so, would have meant we weren't even at the races now. So, the use of the word 'rich' is only relevant to the each club involved and some clubs clearly have a bigger income / turnover than others, that's not lazy and it's not wrong, it's a statement of fact and I wish it weren't so.
We are well aware of the challenges we face in this area and steps are being taken to improve our junior development even now, which should help us as a club and, if all clubs continue down this line, will help the game and the national teams in general!
