I have read some crap in my time, but what has previous jobs roles ect at Wakefield got to do with Kelly leaving ? He has made a massive, enormous difference to the steaming pile left by Ryan badge kisser Hudson.
He has brought in players who wouldnt have sniffed at Wakefield 2 years ago, brought a fantastic Apps system for the players, and worked 60 plus hours every week. I have a lad here, and without his support he would have packed in by now, and thats a fact. I have no idea why he has left, but I do know that as a development and talent id person, he is the best at the Club, hands down. In the last 3 years we have had a massive turnover of coaches at Academy and scholar level, and it needs to stop.
Wigan the biggest and by far the best club in the Uk with regard to Talent ID and development of young players have not got there by chance. The Wigan way is simple, get the best coaches, ther most dedicated, and try to make sure they themselves are Wigan through and through, and we now loose someone who if you cut him in half he would be red white and blue.
I can only speak for myself and my son, but thanks Richard for everything you have done for us, and many others in your way too short stay at the club.

a family member told me wasn't happy with the way Morgan was looked after Leeds at the time Wire was the next best club on the scene

That may well be the case but even so the amount Warrington throw at some kids is ridiculous but I guess a club in there position can take the risk but a club like ours cant risk giving that sort of money to a kid who may or may not make it.

I guess it depends on how you view development - is it about winning every week, or is it about genuinely developing players to be the best they can be?

Surely the two go somewhat hand in hand. The more you develop a player, the more chance there is of winning. Equally, you wont win regularly if your players are not good enough or developing.

The only caveat I will say is, that in a team where 11 players playing that will never be good enough to make it, alongside one or two potential superstars who truly have the ability and desire to succeed as a professional. In this scenario these two specific players could be developed and be good at their own role/ duties, but the overall team may not be able to win in a game against a team who are better across the board.

In general though I do stand by my first statement, as I feel it is rare to successfully develop a player to their potential in a losing team

I prefer your second paragraph - it's unrealistic to think that every player in a junior team will make the grade, and sometimes development is about what the individual players get out of the process; that's much more subtle than winning a game and takes some bottle from a coaching perspective.

In my view, the win at all costs mentality is rife in junior rugby - to the detriment of many aspiring players.