Because Leeds give more first team opportunities to young English players than almost any other club in the league?

Add to your list Ali & Buderus

It doesn't, they are all the same. So we are competing against others, is that a problem? If Leeds want a player then it is up to them to sell the club to them if they end up competing with the other clubs. But what if the others are not in for them? Leeds is still a big attraction for ANY player, whether it is the be all and end all is irrelevant, it's still a big attraction.

Which is matched by Saints and I'm sure some other clubs.

What G1 said plus despite all his critics GH has shown a commitment to most of the youngsters that have come through and kept the core of the squad together plus despite their current well earned rise in the SL Leeds are still a much bigger club than Wire and Huddersfield and are equally if not bigger than Saints and the Pies.

Surely you would not be signing an established young player from another club not to play him - it is more about chances to win things and further your career through playing in a top team.

Do Leeds fit that description? - to me Leeds are now reaping what the sewed to win the 3 GFs - now you have an ageing side that is owed a living due to financial sacrifices made years ago. The core of which will not change for 4 years.

If I were a top young player would I want to play in a side that will contain the likes of Sinfield, Burrow, McGuire, Hall, Smith, JJB, Ablett, Bailey, Kirke in 3/4 years time - not a chance.

Leeds cannot compete because they have so much of the cap tied up in the core e.g. Sinfield/Burrow/McGuire/JJB etc. all on long term contracts

Forgot Ali but re-Buderus i think he's here next year aswell.

Well, to be fair, the reason our young halves are going so well is thanks mainly to James Roby (who has taken on the role of leading the team around the park) and Paul Wellens (who has been given the task of third halfback by Simmons) as well as a supportive team environment. If they'd been thrown in without that support, things may have been much worse. They also played together in the youth leagues, so that's a bonus. If you remember our situation last season when we had Moore and Wilkin in the halves, you can probably appreciate our deep joy at having our present arrangement in place even though it is probably proving to be a lot of extra work for some of our senior players!


That will no doubt have come into it, but he will be a starting halfback when he arrives next season, that has been made clear in press statements. Whether at stand off or scrum half will probably depend on whether Leon Pryce (a) can ever get his groin to stick back together, and (b) re-signs with the club.


Whereas ours is in the halves. If he can settle in then I think he will be an asset, and our young guys will have had a large chunk of this season to gain extremely valuable experience that will hopefully turn them into our first choice halfback pairing in the future.

Really?

If they were all fit, Leeds would be lining up with Webb, Delaney, Cross, Buderus, Leuluai, Hauraki and Lauitiiti in their matchday 17 every week leaving just 10 places to be filled by home-grown players.

Castleford have five overseas players in their first team squad (Youngquest, McGoldrick, Chase, Isa and Widders). Huddersfield have just four (O'Donnell, Fa'alogo, Faiumu and Simpson). Which of those three clubs is offering the best opportunity to young British players, other than by reason of its overseas contingent being frequently crocked?

And Wigan have exactly the same thing, along with Saints. Why would they then be able to compete more?

No, I don't agree with all that. If you are a top player Leeds, along with Wigan and Saints are the clubs you would be aspiring to reach for in your career. If you were an Aussie, and expressed a desire to play in Super League, those very same clubs are the ones you would hope would come calling.

Now if you are talking a specific different argument where if you were a 16 year old scrum half who was ready for first team, then I can see your point. But this discussion started with someone like Arundel, who is a quality centre who has made it now, and the fact that Leeds require a quality centre to replace the aged Senior.

What about the long term deals Morely ,Westwood ,Harrison,J.Monahagn at Wire ,Brown ,Robinson ,O'Donnell ,Brough at Giants ,Tompkins bros ,Leuleui,Lima at the Pies and at Saints Lomax ,LMS ,Shenton ,Perry ,Roby etc etc it's the same at most clubs in the league they tie down the core of their squads.
As for not wanting to play in a team that contains Sinfield ,Mcguire ,Bailey etc etc that's ridiculous what did Hardaker say when he signed? or the statements made by Hall ,Bjb and Watkins when signing new long tem deals.
We can compete with ANY club in this league admitedly we have a strict wage structure which has cost us Atkins but lets be honest should we break the bank for him when much better others have signed on tose arrangements?

What about the players they've signed??
Gilmour ,Brough ,Brown ,Ferguson for Giants ,Mathers ,Jones ,Fozzard ,Ferres etc etc for Cas are all signed from outside the club Leeds have shown that if your good enough you'll get picked and retained and plus with teh new recruitment many of the players listed won't even be here.

Both Wigan and Saints are about 3/4 years behind in core age of their squad - Wigan have 3/4 Saints similar Leeds have 8/9 big difference what Saints and Wigan have are higher paid overseas on short term contracts. That can easily be moved along - can't see Carmont playing as long as Senior, can't see Roberts being around as long as Hall etc

Sal surely a young player who had his choice of clubs would consider playing with the likes of Sinfield and Mcguire as a "bonus" rather than a hinderance and as for the 3/4yrs down the line the squad would naturally evolve and whilst there are players in this squad that have had 1 or 2 yrs too long on their deals it shows that he club are willing to support success does it not?