Instead of bringing in an extra quota rule how about something like players coming through your academy all have a 50% cap deduction, this would give clubs more incentives to invest in their youth and would massively benefit the game as a whole.

That or something along those lines would benefit the game greatly and put much more emphasis on developing your own players.

I know there is some cap exemption now but it doesn't go far enough.

Only helps the richer clubs and the richest already have good academies and hoover up the best talent. Plus the cap rules are already trying to solve numerous problems simultaneously. If you want to solve a problem you have to acknowledge what it really is. This isn’t something that can be nudged away.

So, how about a good-of-the-game approach, with investment directed to the grassroots, coaches going out more to community clubs rather than bringing players in so much at a young age? Then fewer, better, independent regional academies feeding into the semi-pro game and then, in turn, SL. Maybe with a requirement that Championship teams have a minimum number of under 23s in their match day squads, in return for better central funding.

Every club in SL could have good academies if they had invested in it the last few years. Look at Bradford and the amount of players they still produce.

Pretty sure there is something on the cap or you get extra spend for fielding more developed youngsters that have come through the academy. Sure it's something like 20k extra per fielded player?

Is the Lan deal completely dead? There's been nothing from Leigh, only Lam Snr?

Does Hastings count on quota as he has played for GB/England?

Think the deal is dead, but no word of the extension, maybe do one more year and try and get a NRL deal.

Hastings is a non fed player, only way off is if they played youth rugby here.

And the amount of good it does them.

Are you appealing to clubs’ better natures, or sense of duty… suggesting that they should do the ‘right thing’? That’s nice and everything, but not a sound basis for developing a policy or system that might work.

The issue is that most clubs would be investing at the expense of other key parts of their business, and are not guaranteed any direct benefit. Even if they produce good players, they’ll be picked off.

The return on investment on player development is really bad. So, unless you can subsidise it with money you can’t spend elsewhere (i.e., you’re a relatively rich club constrained to some degree by the the salary cap), or you have system that is able to accept a poor direct return (same principle as a key public service), it won’t work very well.

It doesn't only benefit the rich clubs, we're forever told how much money Rovers have but your youth development is embarrassing, Warrington have finally realised this after years of trying to buy success. Hull haven't exactly been flush with money since covid and we've always steadily brought through players.

I agree more money and development is needed in grass roots, a more competitive reserve league is needed aswell, the teams with the better academics need to blood their best prospects against seasoned pros whilst allowing them to still play in the clubs systems, instead of loaning players out left, right and centre.

Clubs should always be rewarded for bringing players through and giving them a shot at SL and it will help increase the player pool and keep more players in the game.

Again I disagree, the return is really good if you get it right, no coincidence the most successful teams have strong academies.

Definitely don't have to be rich, we certainly haven't been and have invested and finally seeing the benefits.

But yes, also think clubs should be doing for the greater good of the game and these new quota rules won't help the game at all.

With regards to Lam, all I can assume has happened is that the clause was only for NRL clubs in the end, and his agent mis-understood the contract. The wording from Lam Snr that Lachlan would be there next year - it wasn't a new deal, new contract, or he had turned us down, it was just that he would be at Leigh next year

Saddest part of all of this is just realising exactly how far we have fallen - we are a VERY tough sell to any player with real aspirations.

Getting a top class half is obviously a priority, but our forwards will still lack go forward ( Herman excluded ) & our backs lack pace.

JC needs to bring a majic wand with him.

Forgotten about the top class hooker we were talking about too, Danny Houghton critics should be realising just what a loss he will be next year.

Pack isn't too bad,

Ese Ese
Cust
Aydin
Cartwright
Holmes
Asiata

If we have Walker/Moy, Barron and Martin we have some pace, but definitely need another centre and 6.

Still think we will add two more forwards, although not sure whsr the quality of those will be as must be non quota.

Not based on his performances the last two years he won't, should have retired last season.

He is better than Smith for sure, but that's not saying much.

Would have to agree with Dave.K, in his prime yes Danny was a real asset to the 17 every week but sadly through poor recruitment, poor coaching and over playing him he has not been anywhere near for quite some time. The over sentimentality is another reason why we are where we are, look at the the teams who've regularly been at the top in any sport, they are ruthless in retention/recruitment and more often than not get rid just before a players ability starts to drop off. We on the other hand have always left it far too late an renewed deals over too long a term etc. For me a quota player should be with a club no more than 4-5 years max as squads need to be kept fresh and on its toes, instead we've bred failure and no accountability.