We don't know if the current system will produce internationals, as the lads in the current system are still in the 19's/just starting to break into the first team. Pearson has only been investing for the past 3/4years, before that the setup was a joke which I'd hardly class as a current system.
Cup Winners: 1914, 1982, 2005, 2016, 2017. Cup Runners-Up: 1908, 1909, 1910, 1922, 1923, 1959, 1960, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2008, 2013. League Champions: 1920, 1921, 1936, 1956, 1958, 1983. League Runners-Up: 1957, 1982, 1984, 2006.
Joined: Apr 29 2010 Posts: 585 Location: In two minds
Mr. Zucchini Head wrote:But there have been some. You asked if he would admit he was wrong if the new system produced England internationals. Well the old system has produced them too. How many (let's say in 10 years) would you be happy with?
And for the record:
Horne King Yeaman Briscoe J. Hodgson
Also a few guys have played for the Knights, and Jon Wlkin came through Rovers.
The thing is, if the correct resources are allocated to the new academy,(and that's the big unknown at the moment) and it utilizes the potentially massive catchment area of East and North Yorkshire, Lincolnshire et al. Then it ought to produce more who make it to Super League standard, and thus increase the chances of more international representatives.
Large Paws wrote:The thing is, if the correct resources are allocated to the new academy,(and that's the big unknown at the moment) and it utilizes the potentially massive catchment area of East and North Yorkshire, Lincolnshire et al. Then it ought to produce more who make it to Super League standard, and thus increase the chances of more international representatives.
The bit you mention on catchment area is exactly why the merger should happen at Foundation level, rather than an academy. Which club is going to go out and engage with the amateur clubs in these towns in North/East Yorks and Lincolnshire? That would require additional £ being pumped into the Foundation, and I guarantee it'd be FC doing the brunt of the work if it were to happen.
The reason they're doing this (according to them) is that the player pool is too shallow to sustain two academies, so I don't think they have any desire to engage at grassroots level outside of Hull. They'll sit back and let the top amateur clubs do the work for them.
On another note, has there been any mention of where these top class coaches are going to come from. Obviously they'll have to be pretty good as to deliver a higher standard of coaching than the academy is currently getting.
Cup Winners: 1914, 1982, 2005, 2016, 2017. Cup Runners-Up: 1908, 1909, 1910, 1922, 1923, 1959, 1960, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2008, 2013. League Champions: 1920, 1921, 1936, 1956, 1958, 1983. League Runners-Up: 1957, 1982, 1984, 2006.
Joined: Feb 20 2007 Posts: 10540 Location: Hunting Gopher
Mr. Zucchini Head wrote:I'm very much against the idea, but the majority of those comments are pathetic. I couldn't care less if Rovers benefit from it as long as we do too. My problem is that I can't see any benefits for either team.
It will be the same coaches we already have working with a smaller pool of players. Kids will slip through the net, and the ones we do catch won't be any better. The draft won't work (if indeed that's how it happens, but I can't see an alternative). Fans will be alienated, as we have already seen. And all the while we won't have done anything to improve the real issue, which is the integration of these players to first team, which is where we have fallen down for as long as I can remember.
What annoys me the most is that Pearson came in and spent years telling us how brilliant he was and how much money he had spent on getting the academy up to scratch, and now that it is baring fruit and we have some youth teams to be proud of he's going to rip it up and start again just to save a few £.
The reason Leeds, Wigan, Saints juniors do so well isn't because they are much more talented that ours, or even that they get better coaching. It's that a) they get introduced slowly into winning teams that have coaches who know to go about doing it. And b) the culture and the standards set by the first team are carried on through every aspect of the club, so that when kids make their debuts they already know what's it's about because that's the way they've always done it anyway. How are we supposed to set a culture and replicate it right through the club when effectively 3 different clubs are involved?
I have supported this club for not far short of 20 years, and obviously a lot of you have followed them for many more. I have already been becoming disillusioned with it. Not because of the bad results, or Radford, or the refereeing, but because I'm struggling to indentify with it anymore. You go to places like Cas and it feels like a proper part of the community. You go to the KC these days and it's just sterile and soulless. This whole move just feels like another small part of the clubs soul has been ripped out.
Joined: Mar 14 2003 Posts: 25977 Location: Back in Hull.
At the end of the day, the same amount of players will be produced at half the cost, both clubs have chairman's who have put millions into their clubs for no return, so you can't blame then for cost cutting when it won't effect the outcome, the option could be to spend less on the salary cap and we all know the downside to that and I'm sure people would be up in arms in we didn't sign players like Sneyd and Pritchard.
It's fine doing petitions and moaning about it, but unless we have someone to who has a few spare millions to buy the club and prepared to lose most of it, then Pearson is still here and making the tough decisions, costs have to be cut somewhere and this makes the most senses as it run correctly it should have no impact on the future of the club.
Dave K. wrote:At the end of the day, the same amount of players will be produced at half the cost, both clubs have chairman's who have put millions into their clubs for no return, so you can't blame then for cost cutting when it won't effect the outcome, the option could be to spend less on the salary cap and we all know the downside to that and I'm sure people would be up in arms in we didn't sign players like Sneyd and Pritchard.
It's fine doing petitions and moaning about it, but unless we have someone to who has a few spare millions to buy the club and prepared to lose most of it, then Pearson is still here and making the tough decisions, costs have to be cut somewhere and this makes the most senses as it run correctly it should have no impact on the future of the club.
I don't think anyone blames either club for trying to cut costs, it's that they disagree this is the way to do it. As has been mentioned plenty of times, they could merge the foundation, share training facilities & backroom teams.
What they've done is seem a problem, which is a shallowing player pool, and instead of trying to fix that issue, they're taking a short cut. There is no guarantee this will produce a higher calibre of player (for Hull FC) than the current system is. Where will the better coaching come from?
Pearson has been hoodwinked by the bloke who's club barely has it's own academy.
Cup Winners: 1914, 1982, 2005, 2016, 2017. Cup Runners-Up: 1908, 1909, 1910, 1922, 1923, 1959, 1960, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2008, 2013. League Champions: 1920, 1921, 1936, 1956, 1958, 1983. League Runners-Up: 1957, 1982, 1984, 2006.
Joined: Mar 14 2003 Posts: 25977 Location: Back in Hull.
Doom&Gloom Merchant wrote:I don't think anyone blames either club for trying to cut costs, it's that they disagree this is the way to do it. As has been mentioned plenty of times, they could merge the foundation, share training facilities & backroom teams.
What they've done is seem a problem, which is a shallowing player pool, and instead of trying to fix that issue, they're taking a short cut. There is no guarantee this will produce a higher calibre of player (for Hull FC) than the current system is. Where will the better coaching come from?
Pearson has been hoodwinked by the bloke who's club barely has it's own academy.
This is another thing, why do people think Rovers academy is so bad?
Rovers academy is good have good coaches and have some good players coming through, maybe not quite at our level but isn't far off.
Iv'e spoke to a lot of people the last two weeks in who are involved in youth rugby and some feel that their isn't the numbers playing rugby league to support two competitive academy teams long term, I was talking to a parent whose son plays under 9's, there are currently 9 teams, in comparison under 9's football their are over 50 teams.
As i've said I am on the fence, but feel the outcry is really over the top and I will see how it goes over the next year or so before signing a petition or attending a meeting.
Dave K. wrote:This is another thing, why do people think Rovers academy is so bad?
Rovers academy is good have good coaches and have some good players coming through, maybe not quite at our level but isn't far off.
Iv'e spoke to a lot of people the last two weeks in who are involved in youth rugby and some feel that their isn't the numbers playing rugby league to support two competitive academy teams long term, I was talking to a parent whose son plays under 9's, there are currently 9 teams, in comparison under 9's football their are over 50 teams.
As i've said I am on the fence, but feel the outcry is really over the top and I will see how it goes over the next year or so before signing a petition or attending a meeting.
There isn't the numbers, nobody is doubting that Dave. They doubt that an academy merger is the solution to this player pool drying up. I think the solution should be a combined effort at Foundation level to attempt to increase participation numbers, expand the sports footprint outside of Hull. Exactly what Leeds are doing. Another problem is that costs need to be cut, well the solution would be to combine facilities and overheads in other areas wouldn't it.
This solution is half-baked, short-termism and does nothing to address the wider problem of grassroots participation.
Cup Winners: 1914, 1982, 2005, 2016, 2017. Cup Runners-Up: 1908, 1909, 1910, 1922, 1923, 1959, 1960, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2008, 2013. League Champions: 1920, 1921, 1936, 1956, 1958, 1983. League Runners-Up: 1957, 1982, 1984, 2006.
Joined: Feb 20 2007 Posts: 10540 Location: Hunting Gopher
Dave K. wrote:At the end of the day, the same amount of players will be produced at half the cost, both clubs have chairman's who have put millions into their clubs for no return, so you can't blame then for cost cutting when it won't effect the outcome, the option could be to spend less on the salary cap and we all know the downside to that and I'm sure people would be up in arms in we didn't sign players like Sneyd and Pritchard.
It's fine doing petitions and moaning about it, but unless we have someone to who has a few spare millions to buy the club and prepared to lose most of it, then Pearson is still here and making the tough decisions, costs have to be cut somewhere and this makes the most senses as it run correctly it should have no impact on the future of the club.
That seems to be the idea that this merger is based around, but I don't personally understand what evidence there is to be so confident in it happening like that. It would work like that if the talent pool evenly spread across the different rugby league positions. For some reason, both the Hull and Rovers academies tend to produce certain positions well and not others. Hookers & props are strong areas, back row and centre regular but not top class, halfbacks, fullbacks and wingers are rarities but occasional.
If this pattern continues there's every chance that we might see slightly less players coming through than we do now, because we're halving our options in the positions we do well and not necessarily doing anything markedly different that would appear to address the areas in which we lack. I also think that the tendency to lack in certain positions will probably be a sore point for the proposed draft system. If both clubs need a half and one good prospect is coming through, I'd expect them to fight tooth and nail for them and test the partnership's breaking point.
Of course the other issue is that the merged academy will have to be twice as productive as any other in the country just to keep pace. It may work, I'm just not seeing reasons to be confident that it will other than blind faith.
And for the record, I'd choose a fully-functioning and independent academy over 1 player like Pritchard every time.
Joined: Mar 14 2003 Posts: 25977 Location: Back in Hull.
Doom&Gloom Merchant wrote:There isn't the numbers, nobody is doubting that Dave. They doubt that an academy merger is the solution to this player pool drying up. I think the solution should be a combined effort at Foundation level to attempt to increase participation numbers, expand the sports footprint outside of Hull. Exactly what Leeds are doing. Another problem is that costs need to be cut, well the solution would be to combine facilities and overheads in other areas wouldn't it.
This solution is half-baked, short-termism and does nothing to address the wider problem of grassroots participation.
Depends how much it would save? You still have things like transport, kits, match-day staff etc, plus you have to pay 10-15 players for each club that are never going to make it. The currently academy also gives some false hope to certain players, for example I know of a kid at Rovers (He is never going to make it IMO) he is a bright lad and offered a very good apprenticeship, but has chosen to sign for Rovers next year and now may waste the next 3 years with them whilst he could have been building a career elsewhere.
Leeds have more money than us, greater catchment and already have a successful first team, so it's hard to compare ourselves with them, when they have so many advantages.
I'm not saying the merging is a perfect idea, but just looking at it from the clubs perspective and I can see were they are coming from.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
