I disagree, I think we have done very very well in targetting players and good succession planning, We have players who have made that step up or are making that step up all over the field. As Senior’s star has fallen, Watkins has risen. As Donald has aged and left we have seen BJB move up as Diskin and Buderus have aged McShane and Hood are stepping up. as JJB hits 30 Clarkson comes through. We are still seeing it now, as Sinfield comes into his early 30’s we have the best young Loose Forward since him in Stevie Ward in the academy. As Peacock hits his mid-30’s we have an England captaining Prop coming through in Singleton, Ali and Kirke decline and we have Steward waiting in the wings. That’s not even mentioning Pitts or the likes of Normington, Bravo, Smith, Who all have decent potential., or the fact we have actually gone out and brought in Ambler and Hardaker which isnt a failing.

I think we are doing particularlly well at our succession planning, and I’m confident that we have enough, and of a good enough quality for us to challenge for honours and that is no mean feat, in fact it is very very difficult and not something anybody but saints have managed and I think we can do better than they have with the crop we have coming through

I think the problem with forwards is the take longer for their bodies to sufficiently mature, firstly for SL, then to be a regular, then to be a front line player. Very few achieve that before 22/23 and it is very difficult to see who, physically can make that step up. We have all seen props killing it at 16/18 get dominated in the big leagues at 20, and players like Scruton and Carvell who just arent physically up to it at a young age resulting in a large part of their twenties being taken up with injuries.

It came down to £££ Gotcha pure and Simple and IF the lads prove good enough they'll play as soon as we hire a decent Coach.

No they wont. Not if we continue with the same plan and structure we have for the last 3 years, and whilst Barry McDermott is still Head of youth.

The £££ by the way for each and ever club is the same when it comes to youth. The difference only happens when the player is handed a full time contract. If your saying the players got the full time contract now then good luck to him. Personally, and it was the way Leeds used to work prior to 2007, if a player is identified as good enough then he should be given a fulltime deal. Trouble is Leeds went for this silly plan thing where the player works through the systems before handed the full time contract. That has led to many potential stars taking opportunities elsewhere.

It came down to the "little treats and extras" that were on offer and that came from within the system.
We don't exactly have a p!$$ poor record with promoting juniors or looking after them so again IF they prove good enough they'll play but from my own pov i don't trust the current coaching set up and that doesn't include Barrie.

If it doesn't include Barrie then your head is firmly in the sand Mark. Look solely at the last 3 years. Look at it from a point of view that what happened previous had not happened.

We have a pish poor record with youth in that time. Mainly down to the fact that we changed the way we operate. It's not about whether we have introduced another couple to first team, it's about the ones we lost and why, it's about why the players that of the couple that have come in other than Watkins, why did it take so long to introduce them.

Let's look at Clarkson, because I remember having this argument with you clearly long before he made his debut. Clarkson should have been introduced to first team in early 2009, he was good enough for it then and would have been way ahead of where he is right now had that happened. The lad himself so nearly went to the Bulls in the close season of 2009/2010, because he was frustrated how he was overlooked and had to follow the system of playing here so many years. Let's not kid yourself here, Clarkson got his shot because of injuries, and not for any other reason. Had those injuries not happend he would have still been languishing in the under 20's, and more than likely called it a day with Leeds at the end of last season.

Clarkson is not unique, and infact we have probably lost even better players. The system we operate is pants, and should revert to what we were doing previously, and running it a person who is capable of doing it rather than whoring the media. Then we can get back to what we do best.

This little "treats and extras" you mention for Learmouth. I'm sorry but I don't believe it. I work with juniors, I know of a lot of them in the game, and I speak with a fair few scouts and coaches. Warrington are offering nothing more for "juniors" than each and every other club. There is not cheating in that regards. Where they are differing, as Leeds did prior to our changes, is offering identified potential stars full time contracts with good opportunities, rather than the pittance part time contracts until a number of years with the club.

Just so we are clear on this, Leeds have some absolute fantastic kids in this club at the moment, some of which that had they been at Saints, or even Wigan god forbid would have been playing first team rugby allready. I just hope we get to see those lads in a Leeds shirt before it is too late.

Hang on a minute i've no reason to doubt what i was told re-Youngsters who we've lost to Warrington whther you believe or not is up to you but cut the "head in the sand" BS.
If Barrie Mc is this destroyer of our acadamy system why hasn't he been sacked?
Who are these juniors that walked away that are now playing SL elswhere?
Watkins ,Bjb ,Burgess,Mchane and Clarkson etc have all had opportunities to play 1st team and done well who should be in there now?
You know full well i'm all for the young lads getting chances when they are good enough i also like the policy of the loan system or dual registration so who have we lost and who at this present time should we picking for the 1st team?

Just so we are clear D ,the more quality youngsters we play in the 1st team then the better imo but they have to be better than who they replace wouldn't you agree?
Also one other thing why was Barrie Mc "allowed" to apparently change the system that led to the 1st team surely that's a "Head coachs" call?

Why would the first team coach have the call over director of youth development?

If the club is run properly, the First Team Head Coach should have the authority and responsibility over the entire coaching structure and strategy. If he doesn't then you end up with a system whereby players arrive at the first team door with little to no knowledge of what to expect on the other side.

I repeat, the point of the Academy is to prepare the players for First Team duty, and the best way to do this it for them to do the same things week in, week out.

That's incorrect.