Meh.....Each game is only played on a piece of grass at the end of the day Rogues or do your lot get "coach travel lag" when you cross the pennines?

You really do despise it when the Rhinos juniors do a number on your mighty Wigan don't you

Cam is quite a talent who is the best junior I've seen in the past 20 years,he's a great kid too not big headed at all given his talent.

I'd be amazed if he doesn't play first team in the next couple of years choose where he goes,fingers crossed it will be his hometown club but either way I've had the privilege of watching him develope since he was a young boy and I'll follow his career closley

Then the highlights don't truly reflect their "size" live at the ground mate their prop n08 Kibula looked like a bloke playing against u10's and they more than matched size and many bigger across the park especially the pack.
Only our 9 (Whiteley) 10 (Oledski) and 13 (Smith) matched their physical build and even then all were small up against the previously mentioned Kibula who btw was very tough giving it to the smaller lads but not as interested when Oledski and Smith were smashing him.

If this kid is a talented as many say I hope we retain him. However, throwing silly money at a 16 year old may not be best for the club or, for that matter, the kid. I recall certain posters lambasting the club when Baldwinson was lured to the NRL. Since that time Baldwinson career hasn't quite progressed as was precicted and he's back at Leeds.

Cameron Smith could be the next Ellery Hanley and he could be the next Richard Gunn. That's a degree of uncertainty.

What is far more certain is Leeds handling of juniors and their career progression has usually been spot on.

Cameron Smith, or any other Junior at this time as no relevance to Ellery Hanley or Richard Gunn. What they could be is the next Kevin Sinfield, Jamie Peacock, Sam Tomkins, Paul Sculthorpe, Kieron Cunningham, Gareth Ellis, James Graham, Sam Burgess, or James Roby.

You see we have a game in a completely different era to what we had in Richard Gunns days. There are far far far more kids playing the game these days, which means if you are top of a much bigger pool, the likelihood is you are better than those who were top of a much smaller pool. More importantly these lads are training with clubs from the age of 13 these days, not still in the amateur game until after 16 years of age before invited to clubs. They are training with the clubs facilities, getting integrated long before decisions are to be made.

Now Andy Gilder, if you can give examples of lads who are rated at the highest in the Junior game over the last 10 years who have failed to do anything, that would have relevance.

The skill is to spot the genuine talent - if he is a generational talent then he needs a different path to his peer group. When we talk about throwing money at somebody what are we talking about? this isn't PL soccer. It would be a shame to lose a future Kevin Sinfield because of the rigidity of the salary structure. The club will know in three years if he maintains his status in his peer group so if they pay 10k a year more than they would other youngsters what have they lost - a lot less than they have wasted on the likes of Brad Clyde, Brett Mullins, the second year of Tony Carroll etc.

I seem to remember the likes of Ashley Gibson being touted as the best thing since sliced bread about a decade ago, and it never really worked out with him. I'm sure there are many others

Do you know it as actual fact that the club doesn't already do this?

It's a kind of self-fulfilling prophesy: kids who don't make it weren't really top level youngsters (despite opinions held at the time) whereas those that do were. Particularly if they achieved elsewhere.

But I agree with Sal, our pay structure should not be totally inflexible. Then again, I'm not convinced it is. After all, that's hardly the kind of information the club would want to be widely known.

Ask Morgan Smith? that is a tangible example of what can happen with very talented kids. If Cameron really is that good then I would suspect there will be some competition for his signature.

If Wigan came along and offered on the basis of getting youngsters into the first team in key positions early it would be a very compelling argument, something Leeds would not be able to demonstrate so easily.

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.