Quote: Dunbar "
The London club you mention “had the financial muscle to attract star players”, whereas the Quins club of today lie near the bottom of the table. But is that the big picture? The club today is based on predominately English players, many of which have come through the vibrant London amateur scene which wasn’t there 20 years ago. If a sport has a strategy to build from the bottom up (which I believe that RL has in London) then this will take decades, not years. My belief is that the London club will thrive in the years to come and the whole sport will benefit from it. We may not win the hearts and minds of the whole London population but keeping a single identity and building on home grown players is a solid foundation. Would I rather have the 1995 situation or today? Looking at the big picture, today'"
The big picture now, in my opinion, is that the club is broke and is losing its best players (Orr, Sharp, LMS). It no longer has the resources to compete for the signatures of today's equivalents of Edwards, Offiah, Hammond, Carroll, Young, Barnett, Hetherington, Dymock etc etc (even if they weren't all (Carroll!) a success). Even after Branson, they were a draw for big players.
The club is in a hugely perilous state, and it may have no future at all if rumours of David Hughes pulling out are true. Ian Lenagan still has shares in the club that he doesn't want which is a real mess.
People point to the number of homegrown players they have, but the truth is they can't afford to play anyone else.
