No young lad in Wigan is growing up dreaming of turning out for Hull KR or Wakefield.. fair enough, if you aren't quite top level and end up there by default, but if you are an elite youngster and forced to pack up and spend your fledging career and life in Hull, then I'd suggest that player will quickly be quitting for rosier places like RU.

Like I say, it's a scheme designed to bail out clubs who can't sort themselves out and, in reality, should be kicked out of the league. Having a working academy should be a minimum requirement for a SL franchise.

I largely agree that a draft isn’t really workable.

However, I think in the absence of meaningful transfer fees, there’s not much of a carrot for the less well off clubs to invest heavily in their youth systems. You can make them spend more through franchise criteria, but if it is done grudgingly it likely won’t be done well. And if it is done at the expense of first-team spending, it’ll lead to a more unbalanced competition.

After years of under delivery and a few more merged with Hull, Rovers have been focusing really heavily on their academy lately. This has been widely welcomed by fans, as far as I can tell. And I think having an important structural element of the club basically fail has been more than problematic. However, I’m sceptical about the likely scale of the pay-off without pretty dramatic parallel improvements in the performance of the first-team.

I’d lean towards regional academies, funded centrally by reduced Sky distributions. Then you’re not asking or demanding some clubs to spend ‘their’ money on something which doesn’t much benefit them.

The problem with kicking out the poorer teams is that you’d be left with a pretty tiny league. And those that are left whose business model is to some extent based around winning rugby, would be winning rather less. We kind of subsidise the league by winning so rarely - you’re welcome.


It was quite a big blow when the league was cut from 14 back down to 12, for us imo - we got a bit more Sky money but lost 4 winnable fixtures.

This is why I'm against relegation/promotion in its traditional guise.

If a club like Hull KR is making genuine efforts to build it's academy for the good of the future of its senior side, then it naturally needs time to come to fruition - A relegation/promotion system works against that and so sides have to cut corners and bring in short term signings, who drain the wage budgets, in order to simply survive.

Giving 5 or ideally 10 year licences to clubs who are making the effort to develop young players, has got to be better than having those clubs constantly living on the edge?

Against the draft system. It completely removes the local character of the team's playing staff.

Take Michael Jordan (for example), born in New York, college in Carolina, drafted by and became a Chicago hero. I only pick out him as an example everyone will know. The American squads have almost no natural attachment to their team.

There would never have been the Fowler, McManaman, Owen, Gerrard, Carragher core at Liverpool, nor the United equivalent of the Nevilles, Scholes et al if English sport had adopted this model. Teams should retain some local flavour.

Stupid idea and will never happen

The only way forward is a pool of players in local amateur leagues & schools to progress up to professional standards to provide players for all the league clubs ,superleague & below.
Alas ,amateur & works clubs aren't as abundant as they used to be & i don't know what is played in schools these days in order to provide the players of the future.

Perhaps there is an algorithm to forecast how the game will pan out in years to come.

Stupid idea and will never work. No surprise it’s mentioned by a club who can’t produce their own players or make their club attractive to local players

And the thread nearly dies with a typical nasty and empty reply from whoever you are.........

I think the way it goes now is the RL game is played in Schools across the M62, and that introduces kids to the game. In our local M62 school they only play Union though so that's a problem for us. Local SL clubs through the "foundations" encourage kids to play at school and at local amateur clubs some run kids teams through all the age ranges. Your right there is a massive drop off of kids playing either code of Rugby or Soccer when they start to get some independence in their teenage years and drift off into other things.

For me the one thing is that is essential is freedom of choice, so once you start "drafting" and telling people what to do and where to go and play then I'd be sure they would take great exception to that, and it would be very damaging. I think the issue here is where clubs are close together and parents of talented kids can choose which academy to take their kids to. e.g. If the best kids in the Salford area are off to Wigan Academy what's the point. This I think was Koukash's argument for closing it.

Diversing slightly Superleague were keen for any club wanting a place in the 2022 Superleague to run reserves, with the aim of keeping more academy kids in the game to a later age. Salford AFAIK signed up to that........

So speaking the truth is nasty? What do saints and Wigan gain from having the infrastructure at grass roots level when the kids they natured could be stolen by Salford who have zero infrastructure?

But if you have nothing to add and would just rather call me nasty, crack ok if it makes you feel better.

I'm not at all interested in what you have got to say, your terrible record of trolling speaks for itself.

But your post is a nice way to point out to fair minded people (only please) that Kallum Watkins played his junior RL in Salford, and joined the Salford academy only to be poached by Leeds.

Leeds got 256 games out of the lad and now he's pretty much on the downhill path, Salford can now have him back. Not much point lower clubs trying to run player development systems when big clubs who should concentrate on their own locality decide to jump in and take their best lads away........

I get your point and it has some worthy validity. However, in the age of professional sport, it's upto those who take part to, first and foremost, think about their own welfare financially - Does an apprentice in any working capacity have the moral obligation to pay back his trainer by dedicating his lifetime's work to them, despite the ability to earn more money elsewhere? (I suppose that's a question for another discussion?).

I think it comes back to the argument of finding enough individual club owners who can compete on the same financial playing field. Admittedly, a difficult job in these times and with a sport that struggles permamantly for a positive profile.