I don't think it is a success for most academies to have had players that go on to have good super league careers, but did not debut in SO for that club. Seems to me that is failing to develop talent that was later proven. Exceptions being Leeds and Wigan who produce so many

I would say they had to have spent the majority of their career in SL. Players who played a couple years at the end of their careers in a lower league can still be discussed, like Micky Higham.

It’s very difficult to define an academy product. Some players go all the way from under 13’s development squads to first team at one club. Others go through various clubs at different stages.

Ryan Hampshire for instance was on Wakefield’s books as a young kid, then got picked up by Hull before finishing at Wigan. I’d have to call him a Wigan product but two other clubs played a part and that’s not unusual. If you go a long way back Leeds have a claim on Tom Johnstone but seriously I don’t think anyone would call him a product of the Leeds club.

Oats and Dagger are two Wakefield products who moved to other Academies shortly before making the first team. Both in truth are Wakey products but will go down as produced by there new clubs and in truth that’s fair enough if a little vexing.

As I say it’s complex.

If we were to rank teams on the number of current Super League players to come through their academy I would go for

Leeds
Wigan
Castleford
Catalans
Huddersfield
Warrington
Saints
Wakefield
Widnes
Hull combined
Salford

Well, when your finger has dried from licking it and sticking it in the air, how about justifying your opinion with some figures?

For example, I'm not sure there are that many Catalans products in the league (don't confuse being French with being a Catalans product).

Saints must be doing something right they top the tables for Superleague/Academy/Womens. The academy team attract players because of the structure and the tour against the australian teams. Also there are only two teams in Wigan and Saints that could field a competitive sidein super league from academy level past and present.

How do the Hull clubs manage with a shared academy? Do they pick a player each (like an NFL draft) or how do they decide who gets which player?

Wakefield have 6 (Jowitt, Johnstone, Wood, Batchelor, Crowther, Anakin), with 4 (Hooley, Wray, Kershaw and Ackroyd), in the first team squad, but yet to break through.

Elsewhere in SL, they "produced" Ferguson, Murphy, Griffin, Dagger, Oakes, Brough, Westwood.

Not as good as some, but not bad. It's just under 10% of the SL pool (based on 12x17; not point doing it by squad, as they are all different sizes/qualities).

With a big % of the pool being overseas players, it's actually over 10%.

I don’t have any statistics, but as you are saying I am wrong can you justify that with some figures?

So you've proffered a guess and want me to disprove it



If you have nothing meaningful to add to the thread, why waste time and effort posting?

Am I missing something here? You say "no point doing it by squad" then list at least 4 Wakefield squad players. That leaves 13, which as a percentage of 204 (12 x 17) is just over 6%

That means with 12 clubs in the SL Wakefield are producing less than the baseline average of just over 8% per club and nowhere near the 10% you claim.

Not having a go but that's clearly a different picture than the one you're putting forward.