As far as I'm concerned the minute you see the word 'Whippet' being used you know it's a Steph Curry style troll. It seems to be their generic stand by response to anything they don't agree with.

Do you not see a value in the reserves competition? I go back far enough to have been to many "A" team games? Is a reserves side a more settled environment for a fringe player....or is championship Rugby the better game to be playing??

[/u

Correct...............But [url=https:///viewtopic.php?f=22&t=631678[uPlease read[/u[/url

I 100% do but the problem is that there probably aren't enough players to make it competitive nor it appears is there the will.

So a Championship team working both as a competitive club in that league and as a feeder club for a SL team is probably more cost-effective and competitive. However the chances of that ever happening are low.

When I say feeder club I'm only suggesting a small number of players who are signed to the parent club, say 6, or otherwise, that would rob the Championship club of its identity and be self-defeating. It would effectively make them a reserve team and that's not what I want, I want somewhere that players who are not yet SL can spend a few years developing in a good environment. Essentially they stay SL contracted players bit say 50% of their wages paid by the Championship club, beneficial to both clubs and stopping potential being lost.

At the end of the day, it's just my thoughts, the real problem is that there simply aren't enough youngsters playing RL or indeed RU anymore. Like any other resource, when that happens re-cycling has to become an option.

I appreciate your thoughts entirely, and it's a well thought out strategy which deals with the issues of championship clubs becoming "A" teams

This is my understanding of how the academies are funded - I'm happy to be corrected if someone knows more.
The RFL is in charge of academies - funding them, assessing them, licensing them. But, the funding the RFL doles out comes from SL TV contract money which is transferred over from SL, rebadged and handed over to the clubs which have academies. Mainly SL, but now down to 3 non-SL clubs.

A couple of questions. Only licensed academies can receive central funding. Is there anything to stop a club setting up an academy if they can afford it without central funding?
Academies are another point where responsibilities/funding are shared between SL and RFL. Could the RFL fund academies without SL financial support? Important question if the next TV deal is 25% less than the last one.
Could SL assess and license academies if they took them over? Would SL have any interest in non-SL academies in this case?

Well thanks for the interesting post. The listing of the monies provided by the SKY contract showed £17.8M paid by SKY for the SL clubs [i"coaching and charitable foundations"[/i so it seems that the money to run academies is paid for by the clubs from their own funds? Thus clubs can choose not to run an academy like Salford choose not to if they don't have the money. AFAIK Superleague has an element of control of the academies in that they appear to be able to veto an academy if they do not see it having any strategic worth.

Strategically SL see academies in London and Newcastle important as they underpin clubs important to widening the footprint of the game, conversely they have knocked on the head the ideas of academies 10 miles down the road to an existing academy, again IIRC.........Not sure they can stop a club opening an academy but if it isn't allowed in the academy league then there is no point as there is nobody to play.

Notwithstanding Hull having two acadenies, then combining and i think splitting again

Thought Northern clubs didn’t need academies these days as they just nick young players from London?

From the Widnes announcement:

“Current Academy licenses across the sport are due to expire at the end of 2021, and it has been indicated that Super League membership and the ability to draw players from non-heartland areas will be integral to successful reapplication.”

This reads as though SL will not allow non-SL academies from 2022 onwards. I assume by license they mean permission to run one not just the funding that goes with it although not sure from the wording if non-heartland Ch and L1 clubs will be allowed to continue.

I don't know if people agree with me but for my club Bradford, the idea of telling us we can't have an Academy would be beyond belief. The single shining light in our years of disaster has been our ability to attract and develop local lads, plenty of which have then become established players, some at SL teams. Do we really want to shut down a proven entry point for young lads to enter the professional and semi-professional game? I really hope its not quite as black and white as that Widnes statement suggests.

It would be utterly bizarre for the game not to allow academies, wherever they are situated.
I dont see a problem in them needing to be licensed, in fact this is a very good idea - hopefully to ensure minimum standards etc.
The game is short of players and this situation is likely to get worse in the short term, with contact sports being heavily affected due to covid.
"We" should be encouraging RL anywhere and everywhere, not closing doors for those willing to invest.