Joined: Mar 14 2003 Posts: 25969 Location: Back in Hull.
carl_spackler wrote: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.
I think we all would, but the fans are crying out for first team success and if this doesn't improve soon and fans continue to stop attending games, there could be great consequences than this merger.
I don't think this merger will impact on the amount of players coming through to the first team, I am not convinced that it will improve the caliber of players, but I guess we will have to see who coaches the players etc, before that can be seen.
Joined: Feb 20 2007 Posts: 10540 Location: Hunting Gopher
Dave K. wrote:I think we all would, but the fans are crying out for first team success and if this doesn't improve soon and fans continue to stop attending games, there could be great consequences than this merger.
I don't want this thread to veer from the topic in hand, but as far as first team success I don't think recruitment of one top player should be/is the best answer. I think other changes could have more impact.
Dave K. wrote:I don't think this merger will impact on the amount of players coming through to the first team, I am not convinced that it will improve the caliber of players, but I guess we will have to see who coaches the players etc, before that can be seen.
We'll have to wait and see. I just think that the main issues we have with producing young players are not actually addressed by this proposed solution.
I've no idea what it costs to run an academy, but £20 on the cost of a season pass would probably bring in another £100k, money well spent, I would have thought.
Is Hodgson the new Griffin, or is it all about pace?
Joined: Mar 14 2003 Posts: 25969 Location: Back in Hull.
ccs wrote:I've no idea what it costs to run an academy, but £20 on the cost of a season pass would probably bring in another £100k, money well spent, I would have thought.
I'd bet the majority of those who have signed the petition either aren't passholders or would refuse to pay the extra.
Dave K. wrote: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.
Transport, kit etc are still costs, but ones that most amateur clubs are able to pay. A properly marketed academy team, with players sponsored, a donation system and a small price to attend the game for species would cover it.
False hope? I don't believe it does. An academy player isn't full time and has plenty of time to carry on their studies, plenty do it. No player should be under any illusions that a SL career is a given. I don't see that as the clubs fault.
Leeds manage to offer much higher level of engagement with schools and amateur clubs than either of our clubs, and they manage to do it in a city three times as big, by themselves. Is the financial gap between us that big that they can afford to spend 3 times as much at Foundation level than both our clubs combined? Or are we cutting corners?
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.
Doom&Gloom Merchant wrote: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.
I fully agree . We have players [Feka] going in to schools, but we should have a player as a rep at all schools in the area. Even the under 19's could do this help coach the under 13/14's one player to each school. This way not only help get more players in to the game at grass route level but helps with future supporters . If I was a teacher and i have some one not picked for the new academy who I thought good enough think would put doubt in my mind and happened again I would just give up so then you would loose a team, through a blinkered attitude. Thats what is wrong with the joint academy system. Might save short time cash but long term do more damage than any thing done before.
Joined: Apr 29 2010 Posts: 585 Location: In two minds
Doom&Gloom Merchant wrote: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.
I should think there will be involvement at foundation level, and the failure to engage outside of Hull is precisely what should be addressed.As was mentioned earlier, it's a RFL initiative on a country (or should that be European) wide basis, so it's likely to receive funding from them I should think.
As I said, if it's resourced properly, and succeeds in bringing through more Super League standard players then I'm all for it. If after a suitable period, it is deemed not to be working then it'll be time for another rethink.
Also as Dave K has said, What makes everyone so sure the dobbins academy is so poor. Of all he players mentioned, by far the best in the Super League era, Wilkin, has come through theirs. IMO.
Joined: Jan 02 2003 Posts: 43413 Location: rlfans flying wing man
Speaking from my own experience of viewing both clubs, I don't think the KR academy is poor, but they have struggled to attract certain players (even KR fans) because of multiple reasons.
They have good coaches and my lads have been in to both set ups and the feeling among them and a lot of others is that KR sessions were more enjoyable and you were made to feel more a part of the whole club.
Seen a lot of people mention schools but for me this isn't the way to go, some very poor standards, teachers who don't know the game coaching or aren't event sports people. Kids made to play for 2 year groups if they are good and that leaves them shattered when they come training with their amateur teams. They don't have to do half the stuff that community clubs have to.
Hutchie wrote:Speaking from my own experience of viewing both clubs, I don't think the KR academy is poor, but they have struggled to attract certain players (even KR fans) because of multiple reasons.
They have good coaches and my lads have been in to both set ups and the feeling among them and a lot of others is that KR sessions were more enjoyable and you were made to feel more a part of the whole club.
Seen a lot of people mention schools but for me this isn't the way to go, some very poor standards, teachers who don't know the game coaching or aren't event sports people. Kids made to play for 2 year groups if they are good and that leaves them shattered when they come training with their amateur teams. They don't have to do half the stuff that community clubs have to.
Agree about your points on schools.
Leeds (sorry to bang on about Leeds, but I know a lot about their setup) use schools as a precursor to amateur clubs, rather than as well as. The Foundation organise after school sessions in partnership with the amateur club in the area, they get a player or two down, Ronnie the Rhino & all that lot. They run this in 2 or 3 schools, the coaches from the local club are there, speaking to parents etc, and bobs your uncle there's a new team.
That's their tried and tested way of increasing participation, not with school teams playing as such, but by using the school as a vehicle to help and even create amateur clubs, and engaging with the wider community.
The other part of the jigsaw is the terrific coaching resources the Foundation has.
Whilst the Hull clubs are in schools and what not, they're obviously not doing enough. Looking at the RFL Club Locator, outside of Hull there's one junior side in Scarborough, a couple South of the River, one in Beverley and one in Keyingham, that's it!
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.
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
