Well if we are ignoring actually bringing through young players to be successful in SL, what criteria are you using?

Considering we're talking about youth development [Leeds Fans brought up the Winning of Trophies] then where is the argument here? If you're happy for Wigan to have the most successful youth setup, why are we arguing? Seems pointless. I'm not denying that Leeds have a very successful youth setup, nor i'm I trying to take away the quite simple fact that the reason Leeds have been so succesful is because of a crop of outstanding players who came through about 10 years ago. [Sinfield, McGuire, Burrow, JJB, Bailey, Diskin et al].

What I am saying, is that at this moment in time, Wigan have the best youth setup in Superleague. We have the best young players, the best facilities, and the best coaches. These are simple facts. I'm sorry if this flies in the face of all things Leeds, but it's true. Leeds have nowhere near the amount of Talent in their u19s that Wigan do. As evident by the England academy side including no less than 8 Wiganers in the victory against France the other week.

Whether these players go on to win SL titles remains to be seen, but if they don't, I wouldn't consider them failures.

Winning youth trophies isn’t having the most successful youth set up. Its just winning youth trophies, If your youth set up is geared towards winning youth trophies you’re an idiot. The whole point of having a youth set up is to bring through players to your first team, the whole point of having a first team is to win trophies. If you are winning trophies with players you have developed then your youth development is successful. Leeds have done this 19 times. Wigan 7.

You may state that Leeds don’t have anywhere near the talent at U19 level Wigan do, but I wouldn’t swap any of Wigan’s U19’s for Stevie Ward (Grand Final winner last year, still only 19) and you would have to wonder how, if Leeds have no-where near the talent Wigan do in their U19’s that the score was 40-26 to Leeds when the academies played each other.

Youth development is very important, but who would complain if their team didn't develop anyone and then just bought all the best 20 somethings to play in their team.
Developing youth is all about the sustainability of your club, but money does the same thing.
It's the success at top level that ultimately counts. It's nicer when they are local boys but not vital.

I only brought up winning youth trophies, because you brought up winning Senior Trophies. Isn't it the same thing? If you have a successful youth team, that 'Should' translate into first team success [See Wigan since 2010 3 trophies in 3 years]. Also, are we not taking into account the challenge cup here? Just the SL? As over the last 3 years Wigan have won as many major trophies as Leeds. How apt that a Leeds advocate would dismiss the CC.

Individual results, during the season [If you listen to any Leeds fan] do not matter, and it's overall success that matters. If you wish to take into account individual results, be my guess to do so. On that day, Leeds were the better team. Does this make them the best team overall? I think not [See Wigan 2012] Best team during the regular season, beaten by Leeds when it mattered.

Also, you may say you would not swap Ward for anyone, I would not swap Ryan Hampshire for anyone in SL or Academy now, he is the highest rated player [Arguably] at academy level.

There are more players in SL from the WN postecode than any other.
If in doubt ask the RFL and they will confirm it.

And they still can't win owt!

No, quite obviously not. Not necessarily no. If your objective is to win youth trophies and you set yourself up to do so, the bringing through youngsters in to the first team becomes a secondary consideration. Players development can be harmed by this. Similarly you may lose every game at youth level but every year pick a Cam Smith and Greg Inglis out of that team and progress them in to the first team. That would be pretty successful youth development with 0 success at youth level.

i havent dismissed anything.

Even if we did value all trophies the same, perhaps you could explain why 3 trophies in 3 years for wigan is better than 3 trophies in 3 years for Leeds?

Meh, That might be nice for Ryan Hampshire that you value him so highly. Im sure Stevie Ward likes looking at the videos of his first team games and his Grand Final winning ring more.


PS: You have still to explain how Wigan’s 19’s can be head and shoulders above everyone else, but second in the league to Leeds and having already lost to Leeds?

Where does all this "Leeds are about winning trophies" come from?
Yes, they've won the GF 6 times since the start of SL in 1996.
They have topped the League only twice in that time
Also only won the C Cup twice since SL started, yet haven't won it since 1999.
Leeds have lost their last six visits to Wembley and the last three on the run.
Leeds have been trophy winners on 10 occasions since the start of SL.
Wigan have won 9 when it is well known it has been a long barren spell for Wigan since the start of SL. Saints have won 18 trophies in that time, topping the League 6 times, the Prem/GF 5 times and the C Cup 7 times.
Leeds have recently been good at winning one trophy but quite hopeless at winning the others.

You forgot the 3 WCC wins.

Off the top of my head and I'm sure I've missed a few

WAKEFIELD
Chris Annakin
Lucas Walshaw
Danny Cowling
Matt Wildie
Kyle Trout
Kyle Wood
Ben Westwood
Jay Pitts
Wayne McDonald
Paul March
David March
Francis Stephenson
George Griffin
Darryl Griffin
Ben Gledhill
Adam Gledhill
Gareth Ellis
Keith Mason
Chris Feather
Steve Snitch
Danny Brough
Dale Morton
Nigel Wright

If we are pretending all trophies are the same, don’t forget to include our Lazenby cup and Heat-shot festive challenge victories.

For arguments sake, Wigan have produced one of the most decorated players of the superleague era -
4 SL winners medals, 5 CC winners medals, 2 WCC winners medals, 1 MOS award and 3 Lance Todd trophies.

And im sure you are very grateful