Joined: Jan 29 2007 Posts: 5695 Location: Wigan, unfortunately.
ritz wrote:Producing young players who look good doesnt mean they gonna turn out to be any good, karl pryce looked brill in academy and scored loads, but he aint turned out that good.
Why is it always leeds and saints who get mentioned about their junior developement, bulls have developed more than saints, more bulls academy reared players played for england in aus than saints.
Sykes, pryce, peacock, langley compared to roby, graham and wellens..unless you insist on counting gardner(barrow) and wilkin(hull kr) as most posters do. Plus burgess would have played if not injured, poss deacs as backup if not injured, fielden if form hadnt dropped.
Joined: Feb 14 2006 Posts: 319 Location: deep in enemy territory
ritz wrote: Why is it always leeds and saints who get mentioned about their junior developement,
if you look at leeds 1st team squad at the moment i think it is a pretty impressive advert for their youth development. i noticed when i watched their opening game againts celtic that their 17 had a fair amount of home grown talent.
ritz wrote:Producing young players who look good doesnt mean they gonna turn out to be any good, karl pryce looked brill in academy and scored loads, but he aint turned out that good.
Why is it always leeds and saints who get mentioned about their junior developement, bulls have developed more than saints, more bulls academy reared players played for england in aus than saints.
Sykes, pryce, peacock, langley compared to roby, graham and wellens..unless you insist on counting gardner(barrow) and wilkin(hull kr) as most posters do. Plus burgess would have played if not injured, poss deacs as backup if not injured, fielden if form hadnt dropped.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 77 guests
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
