knockersbumpMKII wrote:IF and it's a big if we do get more money in the game some way down the line, aren't we in desperate need as a sport for it to be invested in improving the development of younger players, keeping players in the sport as a whole and developing the game more nationally as opposed to just blowing it all on a couple of players a team?
I get that there might be some player drain but there is plenty of choice for NRL teams already.
Currently there are maybe 4 British/English players in the NRL I'd consider for our team, I don't think the likes of Bowden would get a gig as good as he is, Watts and Taylor maybe.
But in any case if players want to earn £70k/year sitting on the sidelines most of the season let them, if we (RL as a whole via individual clubs) develop more players and to a higher standard here then this should not be a huge problem.
I get what you're saying with regards to Bowden and the NRL having a much greater choice but if the minimum wage for an NRL player is coming in then NRL clubs may well look at taking the players such as the Bowdens, McMeekens etc as they are getting proven players that would cut it in the NRL as opposed to an inexperienced player.
Granted they may not get regular games but RL is a short career and if they can double their earnings whilst having a year or two in Australia I'm sure they'd look at it as a serious option, hell I would.
I agree the focus must be on developing home grown players but the farce of the U23's was proof that the RFL aren't that way inclined, its all well and good getting players through the development to around 16 but then not having the structure in place to get them up the next level by playing regularly at as a high a level is possible then the production line stops. This is something that should be one of the main requirements of any team not just in SL but wanting to get in to SL, that they must have a development program and a proper academy set up with age groups up to U23's.
Its a big issue for SL and British RL in general.