I'm still waiting for the day when a player we let go genuinely (post missing Robinson) goes on to bigger and better things elsewhere. It just hasn't happened over recent years. You can make an argument that players such as Carvell, Scruton, Burgess have done OK for themselves but I genuinely can't recall a player we've let go whose career has progressed to the point we'd be desperate to have them back.

This is how I'd be selling the club to our young players. You can also dangle the carrot to any young ball players that spots are going to be available in the first team in the fairly short term for them to make their own for the next decade.

Until I see otherwise, I'll trust the club on these matters. Baldwinson is a prime example of how A) the grass isn't always greener and B) some people or here don't know as much as they'd like to think.

Of course there will be many others. But not the ones touted as the best of their age group, that is the key difference.

There are plenty of youngsters who excel, but then many other variables come into effect, ability, attitude, focus, build. If they are the top of their age group, and of the right quality in these areas, then these are the ones you don't see many not making it.

These are fair points - how many youngsters have Leeds had in the past 5 years that are genuinely really top class - Watkins?

Watkins almost goes back beyond 5 years now I would argue.

Ward was meant to be, which I guess shows the very best at their age group doesn't necessarily translate. He has 'made it' but I would argue due to a number of reasons is nowhere near fulfilling expectations.

Sutcliffe looks the part at times but has plenty of development to do.

I'm sure there are many others who have been touted as the next big thing (Aston Wilson anyone?) who haven't made an impact. The club will have lambasted for not giving them a chance yet few have gone on to even be very good SL players.

I guess my point is that until we start getting it massively wrong I'll trust the judgement of the people who've been doing this successfully for years.

But thats largely to do with the fact we've had this 'golden generation' around......which simply won't be around in 3 years time or less in some cases.

Given also that we don't look like a club that will go out and spend big to replace them all, then actually if you're around 16/17/18 now then now is the perfect time to be on the cusp on the first team. When Peacock and Leuluai go ahead and retire then Mulhern and Baldwinson chances look better here than if they were behind the likes of Amor, Walmsley, Masoe at Saints.

Who are the U18s players over the last 10 years who have been touted as "best in class". I can think of Sam Burgess, Kyle Eastmond, Watkins, Bateman. Are there any who've done a Richard Gunn and *not* made it?

I seem to recall Rogue's Gallery, a poster who has never shied away from decrying Leeds youth development, once describing Stevie Ward as the best player of his age group. He's now a steady Super League player but would I break the pay structure to keep him? Doubt it.

The pay structure work. It's proven. It is not a bar to retaining the right players with the right attitude (Hall, Watkins etc). Juniors can commit long term within it (Golding etc). At the end of they day if young Smith is the type of player whose sole motivation at age 16 is to play for whatever club offers the biggest contract then talented or otherwise does he fit the ethos of the club.

Of the 29 players named in the 2010 England Academy squad (so arguably the best 29 players of their age group in the country) there are around half a dozen holding down regular first team places in SL/NRL at the moment - Tommy Makinson, Brad Singleton, George Burgess, Adam Milner, Ben Crooks and Matty Russell.

That squad included the likes of George Elliott, Liam Hood and Jared Stewart from Leeds all of whom have dropped off the SL radar. So even under systems where juniors come to clubs much earlier in their pro development there's still a sizeable drop-out rate in terms of making progress to even playing at first team level, let alone going on to become a superstar.

And none of those still in Super League would be worth breaking the bank for.

Again some good points - is the current structure fit for purpose? the circumstances are very different from when it was first introduced. The team is now in decline as its key players age - how do you arrest that decline either spend large money on average NRL players or invest a little more in the very best youngsters.

If Smith is that good he will thrive in any top 4/5 clubs, they all have a good record with youth. Why should he take less money to stay at Leeds - what can Leeds offer him that Saints/Wigan/Saints/Warrington cannot?

George Burgess - whilst not in SL might have been quite useful now - maybe he wouldn't have had the opportunities at Leeds he has had at South Sydney.