This is the crucial difference between us Leeds, Saints, Wigan and is the reason why, as Lefty has pointed out in another thread that our success is only ever sporadic and is not sustained.

So what drives that? Top down culture, or simply better youth development and overall recruitment performance?

I don't understand the belief that Saints are on a par with Leeds and Wigan, they haven't been for a decade or so as highlighted in SC's post. In fact it could be argued that their fall from grace is more stark than ours.

Since 2006 Saint Helens have made the GF 7 times, winning twice.
Since 2006 Leeds have made the GF 7 times, winning 7 times.
Since 2006 Wigan have made the GF 6 times, winning 2 times.

Since 2006 Saint Helens have made the CCF 3 times, winning 3 times.
Since 2006 Leeds have made the CCF 5 times, winning 2 times.
Since 2006 Wigan have made the CCF 3 times, winning 2 times.

Leeds are clearly the standout, but St Helens fall from grace has been limited with 10 finals, 2 GF and 3 CC trophies. In fact if Wire had achieved this we would no doubt be arguing it was a successful period

Only 2010/11/12 have we had a squad with the quality to match those clubs, and we have never had young players to match.

One of those GF wins and all 3 of the CC wins were in 2006-2008 while Daniel Anderson was coach, you can't count the Anderson era in Saints 'fall from grace', but they have not been the same since Anderson left. They have struggled to replace big name players who have retired or gone to the NRL, while Leeds and Wigan seem to have managed the departure of their stars and maintained success.

No I agree SC. I was just replying on the "decade or so" post. Post Anderson is probably more apt for Saints "decline" however I don't write off a their GF win as lucky. Still takes a lot to win one, and I am not sure Wire would have beaten a man down Wigan. They also contested a lot of GF post Anderson to finisher Runners Up, which is no mean achievement.

I think the issue is that Wigan, Saints, Leeds are undoubtably seen as the big clubs, and this can only be because of the success they have had over an extended period. We are not in that camp yet, far from it. This does not help recruitment from the NRL when we want to get the sought after players.

You obviously need to embolden your cross reference to Sally's post, otherwise you never know, another poster might choose to ignore it end extend Saints' successful period to just over a decade from just under a decade to weaken your point

I don't think profile in Australia is the problem. We were able to get players like Morley, King, Hicks and Monaghan even before we'd won any Challenge Cups. We even got Andrew Johns for a few weeks. But now with the exchange rate and the higher salary cap in the NRL none of the English clubs really get major NRL players any more, unless there are some issues like Barba or Sandow.

The separating factors these days are the academy production line and making the astute signings of players that are a bit underrated but have much higher potential in the right environment. With the academy players it's not just bringing through individual superstars but bringing through a set of players that work well together and will stick together as the nucleus of a side for years. Wigan and Leeds do that far better than us. Also its signing players like Matty Smith, Blake Green, Dan Sarginson, we all scoffed at those saying they aren't exactly 'Wigan' signings, but they delivered. Luke Gale at Cas is another example, bit of a journeyman floating around lower clubs but turned out to be a star.

"I'm just a poor boy whose intentions are good, oh Lord please don't let me be misunderstood". Think I'm a lost cause!
Edits in bold!

Winning 3 times!

You need a core of top players that have come through the academy and then good decisions need to be made consistently on players and coaches around them. That has been a constant in leeds success, there's always been a core of academy players. Leeds is a good example to study because they went from being big underachievers to one of "the modern games most efficient winning machines". There's a nice article here : www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugb ... 6.html?amp You can put together a team with signings but without any core success will be fleeting. I don't know what it is but you need a "winning culture". Getting that first one is so important, the CC just isn't the same, you need a grand final win, 2004 was massive for leeds, it changed everything. If you can put together a good core from the academy and get that all important first gf, you'll be set.

You need a core of top players that have come through the academy and then good decisions need to be made consistently on players and coaches around them. That has been a constant in leeds success, there's always been a core of academy players. Leeds is a good example to study because they went from being big underachievers to one of "the modern games most efficient winning machines". There's a nice article here : www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugb ... 6.html?amp You can put together a team with signings but without any core success will be fleeting. I don't know what it is but you need a "winning culture". Getting that first one is so important, the CC just isn't the same, you need a grand final win, 2004 was massive for leeds, it changed everything. If you can put together a good core from the academy and get that all important first gf, you'll be set.

Played in it 5 times since 2006 and won 3.