viewtopic.php?f=19&t=536759&tsmp=1347468396 Before you panic it's on the Bradford board but I think it very sad if this is the way forward. Thoughts?

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=536759&tsmp=1347468396 Before you panic it's on the Bradford board but I think it very sad if this is the way forward. Thoughts?

Im torn with this...

The under 20s is a massive step up to super league level, whereas the championship could be be used as a stepping stone, much like 'feeder teams' I guess.

The championship and championship 1 are still great competions that the players will probably get more out of than playing against the same age group.

However, how many of them will actually get to play for these other teams is what worries me, and how many will just be left to go stale. Tough one.

Wont be able to use the u20s games for players match fitness who are returning fm injury anymore either, i no many dont but a few do

Fielden, Lauaki, Gelling, Matty Russell all played for Wigan U20's in last couple of weeks.

Not sure if this will help the game / youngsters, although I suppose it's enevitable that Rovers will become our feeder team

Seems their U16s have gone as well , not good for bulls

Wherever possible I'd rather see our players loaned out to Championship 1/2 clubs then play Under 20's RL.
Isn't the lower leagues expanding next year more teams?

The rule letting 3 over age players play u20's never made sense to me.

Hopefully each SL club will strike up a partnership with each championship club so all our over 19 players not playing first grade will go there.

The two clubs should be on the same lines coaching and tactic wise as well.

SO you want each super league side to send out it's entire under 20's to a championship club, and then have the championship club train your players the way you demand?
Do you think fans of these championship clubs to watch a lower standard of rugby played by a bunch of players they have no affiliation with? Once again if it's not super league, who cares eh?

No, players who are to old for the u19's and not playing in the first team that weekend.

At the end of 19's you will be able to tell who the players are that have the potential/ability to play first grade. Hopefully we strike up a deal with York/Doncaster where we send a few younger players out to them to get them more prepared for the physicality of SL.

But what makes you think your under 19's are good enough to get into a championship team? I know some clubs have already jumped into bed with super league clubs, but i really don't think it's the answer.
Would the superleague team then pick the side who plays in the championship?
It devalues the championship, which has proved over the last 5 years to be highly competitive, more so i'd say than the super league. One week a team could be made up entirely of under 19's , but then what happens the next week when the 'parent' club calls half the team back?

Under 19's shouldn't play for the Championship side.

Sorry just seen HF post.

I'm not sure if this post was aimed at Sheldon or myself.

Think you suggesting that half a team will be called back is really dramatic. I was suggesting that everyone who is eligible to play 19's stays at FC however the 2/3 that we think are worthy of a full-time deal once they become too old should get sent out to a NL side who we have a link up with.

To be fair Sheldon, i had misread your post.
I just think that a club should be nurturing it's own, clubs like Fev are trying to build pathways for youngsters to come through and we've done really well against some of the bigger teams, i just feel this undermines that hardwork and then we will undoubtedly end up with a closed shop.
Season long loans for fringe players i could swallow, really not a fan of the DR system
Btw, i don't want to sound like i'm having a go, just slightly disgruntled.