Think the issue with Patton and O’Brien etc was back in the day as a club we never shown faith unlike Wigan, Saints etc. But now with our club going in the right direction and using and looking after our youngsters better think they would have had a better chance here.

Mmm, under the current regime, only 1 year ago, we let Riley Dean go. He got 10 games in 4 years. I don't think he got much of a chance.

Not sure I agree, Ben Currie being the case in point, he was a regular first teamer at 18, he was clearly always going to be good enough and the club backed him. To a lesser extent, Philbin got plenty of game time as a younger player as well, he was always going to be a decent SL player.

Fact is for a long time the players coming through weren't good enough to be given the opportunity to step up.

On O'Brien and Patton specifically, they played 60 odd and 100 odd games for us, so they were given plenty of opportunity I think. O'Brien was the better of the two, but he wasn't good enough IMO to be considered a starter for a 'top 4 club'.

We have a long established track record of the following sequence with young players.

1. Promising youth player. Lots of hyperbole and exaggerated claims. 1st team contract.
2. Debut
3. Loan
4. Lots of argument about why they are not getting selected.
4. Another loan, maybe a few more games.
5. Exit to lower league.

As a teaser name the players in the last 25 years who have followed this sequence.

1. Promising youth player. 1st team contract.
2. Debut
3. Wins starting jersey / 1st pick.
4. International representation.

I can think of Phibin, Mike Cooper, Currie doesn't count as he wasn't home grown. Which others?

This my point I just don’t think we managed them well enough. I have often seen chatter about players we have signed maybe improving under our coaching, so the youngsters already discussed I think would have been coached better with the direction we are going now. As for Dean we had Hayes at same time and of course Drinkwater and club decided to go with Hayes. I think it was only fair to let Dean go because he was obviously going to be further down the pecking order barring injuries.

We have focused in the past on signing established players at the expense of developing our own players which was folly in a game that has a Salary Cap.

Some signings could be be classed in the vanity category but that was the prerogative of the guy who owned the club and we clearly missed having a Director of Rugby on our Board until Chambers was appointed.

Currie played for our Academy so I don`t understand why he doesn`t count in your post as a Wire developed player, as does Toby King who you haven`t included.

Rhys Evans?

Yes 3 games for Wales.

Chris Riley (England Knights 2012) ?

Josh Thelwis made the England squad in 2023 if that counts....?

I guess it depends where you think the issue is, for me it hasn't been about 'not giving them the opportunity' when a player has been good enough, he's been given that opportunity. We have underperformed for decades with our youth development, I think that issue is more related to Scouting / recruitment and development, rather than lack of opportunity. No point playing them if they aren't good enough can harm their development and could be dangerous for them.

I'm afraid reality is that there are always lots of promising youngsters who people bull up to be the next star. Wigan discard loads of youngsters and many are playing at various clubs. Perhaps the hyped up youngsters weren't world beaters to start with & we speccies are a bit gullible. When virtually all clubs fill their quota (of half their team) with foreign imports it tells you a lot.

Never give out any squad numbers again.
Hate the concept. Leave it to NFL.

I called it in 2022.
I said Dean is behind Hayes, because Dean was out on loan an Hayes wasn’t.
Hayes got his chance vs Salford away in the final game if the season.
I saw more raw intent in that one game from him, than I ever saw at any time from Dean.

Bloody hell RD I hope you haven’t hexed Hayes (ala D Patton).