Is this what Eamonn McManus meant when he said we need to put our faith in St. Helens' outstanding academy crop?

I've come to the conclusion that McManus just says what he thinks fans want to hear but then does the opposite. The line about young players was just to cover doing things on the cheap.

As with Wheeler, Dixon was in excellent form at the start of the season but got dropped with the change in coaching setup. It would be a shame to lose him as I think he was developing into a good second rower.

Not good enough. Does have the size or aggression to compete as a modern day forward. Dixon was left out on occassions by Simmons if memory serves me right. Likes of Forster now ahead of him even before the likes of Manu, TP, Wilkin, Flanagan etc
Needs to be playing regular first team rugby & will go. Certainly not the Nathan Brown style of forward.

Good signing for Salford - not good enough for us. We always produce plenty of similar workhorse 2nd rowers whenever we need one in the squad so I doubt we'll miss him.

Good squad player will fill plenty roles just don't expect block busting runs.
But we want Broughton as an exchange or your not having him

He is a second row in the Lee Gilmour mould. Pretty quick for a second rower, deceptively strong with the best footwork of all our second rowers. Better than Matty Ashurt anyway

He played regularly at the start of the season.

Yep...and as above, was also left out on occassions by that clown Simmons. Is it me or playing regularly & left out occassionally a similar thing? Or are you on a personnel crusade to reply & takeover every single thread.
Irrelevant, gets thrown round like a rag doll against the bigger packs & isnt good enough, hence why he aint getting picked.

If my memory serves me right, super Royce didn't pick him in the starting line up against London but played due to flannery taking ill in which Dixon played well which backed up his impressive friendly game against Widnes but then was dropped the following week by super Royce on his crazy rotation system.

You seem to be on a lot of threads too.

Dixon was played whenever he was not injured or on rotation, same as everyone else in the team at that time. You were making out he was dropped, which he wasn't. Unlike now, when he has been.

You're gonna love Nathan Brown if you thought Royce's rotation was crazy. You should read the frustrations of Hudds fans over Brown's crazy rotation system.

You wern't around in the Millward years , I suspect most other posters here were so I doubt anything brown does will shock us

Without rotation, Tomkins would not be the devastating FB he is, Morley would not have become one of countrys best front rowers, Wello wouldn't have made it etc.

The Hudds criticism, unsurprisingly, has arisen since Brown declared he was joining Saints. Before this, they've been pleading for him to stay each time his contract approached expiry.

Don't be fooled by Hudds sour grapes.

Dropped, rotated which ever way you dress it up, he wasnt picked & isnt currently being picked by Mike Rush. Like i said before, lacks aggression & size to play for a top side with aspirations of winning things. Ill guarantee the likes of Wigan, Warrington, Cats etc wont be sniffing around him for next year.

But we did rely on our Academy crop then (albeit to "do things on the cheap", aka delivering a brand new stadium and securing the future of our club)?

I'll also be sorry to lose him, reminded me of Stankevitch who I also had a lot of ime for. But would he be happy playing a bit part as he is behind Sia, Wilkin, Flanagan, TP, Manu (if signed)?

I'll put this to you again, Brown at hudds is totally and utterly different to brown at saints, different club, different players etc

I'll also put this to you before you jump on me when saints lose next year and you blame brown - Im not against rotation if the is meaning to it but super Royce was rotating for rotating sake with no reasoning behind it.

Why rotate wingers and centres every week like super Royce was doing?

I was responding directly to Pete, who clearly does not like the idea of rotation. I have no problems with rotation myself.

Anderson was very successful at rotating our props in 2006 when we had five first line props. I would have liked to see that happen this year, plus some back row rotation when we have the likes of Dixon who is very capable of filling in. Rotating centres and wingers is a cookie idea, although in royces defence I think he was doing it to work out our best team composition as much as resting players. Let's face it, there is still a lot of questions to be answered about our back line, and they aren't bring answered by sticking to the same team every week.

Utter rubbish, ive nothing against rotation if the is a reason for it. I don't see the point in super Royce swapping and changing makinson, Ade, foster on the wings every week and I don't see the point on rotating centre like necessary doing with Meli and wheeler.

Centre and wing partnerships are built on experince of playing with each other, look at the Lyon and Albert duo, it es like Albert could read Lyons mind, that's no fluke, it comes from playing together and under Royce it was effecting the centres and wingers.

Halfback pairing is another postion that should rarely but touched unless needed as they also need to build a understanding. (obviously if not playing well it needs to be changed)


Rotation for me is keeping players fresh, especially forwards and must not be mistaken for tactical changes.

Spot on. Dont mind a player missing a game to freshen up before the playoffs or run of big games but not on a week to week basis. The pivots need to generate an understanding but defensively you need to trust & know whose on youre shoulder.
Probably why we have looked vulnerable at times out wide with left centre/wing Meli/Wheeler/Jones bring chopped & changed for admittedly whole host of different reasons.

I'll be disappointed if Dixon goes because he does appear to have potential. If he can't get a game here though perhaps it's the best move for him and I wish him success if he does go.

I too like Dixon and he has shown a lot of promise. I'm at a loss to explain some of the signings and contract extensions that have been made over the last 12-18 months. Of course I'm not aware of what goes on in training etc but from what I've seen of Wilkin and Dixon over the last 12 months on the pitch and with an eye on the future I know who my four-year contract would have gone to.

I would like to see him go out on loan for a year to see how he develops. If at the end of it he isn't good enough, then fair enough let him go, but he hs enough potential to be given a chance.

That would be ideal. And it hasn't done Matty Smith's career prospects any harm, has it?

Perhaps a reason for Fosters drop in confidence and increased mistakes?