Imagine an ideal world where players from catchment areas got assigned to their local pro clubs with funding from the RFL to improve them and also to pay the amateur club that produced them. Then they stay at that club for a minimum of say a couple of years and if a SL team or anyone wants to take them they have to pay a fee again with a % of that fee going to the amateur club. We can only dream of a system like that which could improve the whole game but the top clubs would never go for it.

Nice idea in theory. Certainly think there's scope for improving the system, at the moment it must be disheartening for coaching staff to work hard to get a kid through to the first team to then seem him depart elsewhere. Community clubs get naff all out of it.

We have to suck it up I'm afraid. It's that or nothing until some madman with pots of money to waste (sorry invest) comes along.

That's fine in principle GFB but, like you earlier post, it misses the point somewhat.

Players don't become good professonals because of the particular blades of grass they train on, but by the quality of the training given. The facilities and coaches are not all equal. The Bulls' academy is rated amongst the best in RL, better than many SL clubs, in fact. It is also very expensive to run and is without doubt, with the possible exception of players wages, probably our biggest expenditure. The RFL were adamant that it should continue when the new guys took over, so they can also see the benefit of it. I'm not knocking what is available at other clubs, they do what they can, but it doesn't mean they offer the same coaching, or chances, as others.

Gregory, John Bastion has openly stated that the club cannot compete with SL clubs for the cream of the countries talent. They have had to cast their net elsewhere and sign players that have previously been overlooked by the top clubs. Cameron Scott all of a sudden became the most sought after player once he'd been in the system 12 months. He was playing 3 division as a Junior.

Corrected for accuracy

Despite all our off-field dramas we certainly do still attract some of the very best young talent in the country thanks to the setup and culture John Bastian has installed at the club. Remember the names Joe Brown, Jake Trueman, Daniel Waite-Pullman, Luke Hooley, Cameron Scott. All those players will be household names in a few years. All began and chose the Bulls academy because of the culture John Bastian created. All flourished under the coaching of Matt Diskin and John. We still attract, produce and develop some of the best in the game. We still managed to keep a few despite the latest off-field farce. Theres a lot of problems with the club but our academy is still draw IMHO

Regarding the catchment area Greg, not sure if this was your point, so apologies if I've got the wrong end of the stick, but i don't get that if a player plays/lives in one particular area, then he should have to play for that club E.G. if he plays for Siddal he should play for Fax academy. Matty Storton who is part of our academy played for Keighley Cubs. Should he have to play for Keighley cougars?

I hope the rule where a player under the age of 21 who has come through a clubs academy, is offered a contract by the same club, but decides to go to another club, the the club that developed him through their academy gets compensation. I believe it used to be around £15k.

I think RFL tried to address the issue Of rewarding clubs for developing young talent, but in true RFL style loved it up by bringing in compensation rules for 16 year olds which is too young.

Ive no idea how it would work to be honest but at the moment it comes down to who has the biggest cheque book and SL sides signing players on the off chance they might make it. Bradford will find this out to a much greater extent when your academy becomes of less importance than the money it costs to run it which will happen eventually. Maybe Im a little bit bitter because we have the best junior set up in the country at Siddal but do not have a hope in hell of getting any of their players. There has to be a fairer way of doing it for the good of the competition.

Bradford haven't had a large cheque book for a while now so why are they still producing good players??

Whilst I agree with 90% of what has been said on this thread the biggest crime is Pro clubs signing kids in droves, telling them there the next big thing and then discarding them as worthless at an age where they are then lost to the game all together. It is F@@@ing criminal and I'm afraid Bradford have been one of the worst for it over the last 15 years.

The players that Bradford are now seeing are players that were signed when they were still living beyond their means. You will see a distinct drop in quality over the coming years as you go part time and the academy has to take a back seat.

Totally agree, some of these kids would be better signing at part time clubs and been developed slowly but SL clubs can not take that chance just in case they miss one.

Eventually the penny will drop that the sport needs building from the ground up. Some SL supporters are already suggesting that there aren't enough players playing the game to support a 13 or 14 team super league.
They should never have voted to scrap the reserves structure. It should never have even been put to a vote in the first place. Clubs should have been made to run a reserves setup even if it meant doing so at the detriment of their first team squad.
Instead we have this farce where countless players reach the age of 19 and immediately find themselves in limbo or being passed from pillar to post, Rawsthorne being a perfect example.

Funny i was talking to someone from the club on Saturday and they are of the opinion they have some very talent individuals they are picking up.

Agreed. Look at James Bentley. Had offers from other clubs as ajunior. Chose us, been developed, still eligible for the academy this year, but has played every minute of every game he's been fit for and has scored 12 tries this year. He now has a choice of eight SL clubs all wanting to sign him.

Browsing around various clubs boards regarding junior development, there does seem to be a theme that some of the starlets at U16s, get offered ridiculous money (Warrington seem to be guilty of this) and then the said player never kicks on. The Leeds board gives a few examples of when they had players with huge potential on their books. Warrington came and offered stupid money (I've heard offering 30k for players graduating from scholarship level to join their U19s) and then the player never develops and is another a wasted talent. Who have Warrington developed in the last couple of years that has established themselves? Not having a go at Warrington as they at least fund a reserves, but my point is some junior players get offered silly money for a "bigger" club, then either fall in love with themselves or never kick on. Staying at a smaller club and being developed is sometimes the better option. A lot of the bigger clubs struggle to develop and nurture talent. Warrington, Hull, and even Saints don't seem to be producing first team players like before. I still think we're one of the best at developing talent and long may it continue whatever division we're in.

Agreed Bullmania. I know that John Bastian leads a team that have a superb track record of recruiting talented youngsters , many of whom have had the chance to go to Super League academies. It is not the cheque book that has persuaded these young 'uns ( and their families!!) , rather the programme of development and the links to educational institutions. There are many examples of young players who have not secured full time contracts but have nevertheless learnt skills which will stand them in good stead for the future .
Whatever the faults of the RFL ( and there are many), I for one am glad they included continuation of the Academy as one of the criteria for new ownership. And I'm pleased Chalmers has made a firm commitment to continuing the Academy next year regardless of survival in the championship or relegation.