I wouldn't be at all surprised if some kids went elsewhere at junior level. Until very recently if I was a young halfback Leeds would be the last club I'd look at. Now at 16 it could be one of the best in terms of timing of oportunities.

In any event, given the fact that the whole of SL produces virtually no world class backs, its hard to say that Leeds have done any worse than other clubs.

Where Leeds do seem to have underachieved in junior development is in the forwards. When McClennan came in he basically got rid of the entire crop of young forwards around - IIRC he wasn't impressed at all. Since then we've really only had Clarkson, Steve Ward and Singleton come through. The only one of those likely to be much better than average is Ward. That's not a great return in 7/8 years, when there has clearly been scope for juniors to come in and grab places (as Clarkson and Ward did) - even with the likes of Bailey and Kirke around.

Rogues Gallery will tell you Wigan Academy is the finest academy in the land, with the finest facilities, the finest coaching, the finest players all contributing to the finest record in rugby league history. Some of that is right. Maybe. But as I never tire of reminding him - Wigan are nowhere near the finest team in twenty years of SL.

Great kids will more than likely fail than succeed in the sport. It isn't easy.

On the flipside - "ordinary" kids can become great. Two obvious examples at Saints would be Paul Wellens and James Roby, both of whom were close to drifting out of the team age 19-20 before they fleshed out and made it on guts and determination.

When Sean Long and Sculthorpe were getting on at Saints the fans were told "don't worry". The "super kids" are on their way (Wheeler, Eastmond, Lomax). Of those only Lomax really made it.

Fast forward to last year and virtually no-one expected big things from the academy. And certainly not in the prop and second row position. The former of which is a role St. Helens have been nothing short of terrible at manufacturing (aside from Graham) for the best part of twenty or thirty years.

Until a kid physically matures somewhere between age 21 and 23 you really can't say whether he is going to make it at the top level. Million dollar academy or not.

Wigan picking their strongest 17 would include the following:
Burgess
Charnley
Williams
Gelling
McIlorum
Tomkins
Farrell
O'Loughlin
Crosby
Powell
Sutton

All have come through there system that's 11 out of 17 - add to that fringe players like Tomkins Mossop and Hampshire and Wigan could be close to fielding a full side of home-reared SL standard players. Against Huddersfield 13 of the 17 came through their academy. Even you would have to admit Leeds are nowhere near being able to achieve that. Wigan's junior development that spots and develops talent - something Leeds used to be very good at?

I wouldn't say we are nowhere near. Not quite a full 17, but this homegrown team would go pretty well, i think. And this time last year, you could have added Bailey, and BJB to this.

1. Golding
2. Handley
3. Watkins
4. Ablett
5. Hall
6. Mcguire
7. Sinfield
8. Singleton
9. Burrow
10. JJB
11. Walters
12. Ward, S
13. Sutcliffe

14. Ward, R
15. Mulhearn
16. Minchella
17. ??

I'm never quite sure whether the number of people coming through is indicative of talent at a club, development or opportunity. IN reality its a combination of all 3.

Over the last 12-13 years Leeds have had by far the greatest youth output of any club in SL. The trouble is that the juniors need the opportunity to come through. As has been said as a halfback you'd have to be one hell of a prospect to get into the Leeds team ahead of the golden triangle. In fact, once Leeds were a top, multi-title winning team, its hard to for new players to force their way in, especially whilst players are continually winning trophies. Sport is about winning stuff at the elite level, and this team has won more than any other in the last 10 years. Now the golden generation is on its last legs I would expect a new approach, maybe similar to what we had in 2001-2003 where more focus is on bring on new blood through the academy.

Over the last 5 years Wigan have brought a lot through from their academy, partly because of the state of the club 6-7 years ago, and partly because big names have moved on.

Saints have never hit a bad patch, and have always been there or thereabouts, but again have a lot of young players in their team, as they had space in their matchday 17 through retirements of their own golden generation.

In those teams, I don't see many youngsters who oust a top incumbent, its more through being groomed for an upcoming gap, and taking it when it becomes available

Fair point. There's a few decent players in amongst that lot too. OTOH they seem to lose a better class of player than we do. Bad luck, or is there an underlying reason?

A first choice Leeds 17 would probably have:

Watkins
Hall
Sinfield
McGuire
JJB
Ablett
Ward
Burrow
Singleton

So 9 compared to Wigan's 11 and with Sutcliffe, Golding, Handley, Mulhern, Ward being next in line we don't seem far behind them. Plus if you're including Gelling I reckon we can make a case for Hardaker.

For years people moaned about our lack of overseas signing - at once we had less than anyone else. We now have 5 and people moan about the academy.

It's all about balance-I still think as a club we get it about right. Admittedly, we need to replace some people over the next 5 years and we shouldn't expect miracles

Gelling is a Kiwi whom came through at the Roosters

Wigan have *had* to promote youth more than Leeds have, because they keep losing their players. Wigan have had to promote these players, but there's no point doing it for the sake of it. And in that list of yours (Gelling??) there are three players (McIlorum, O'Loughlin and either Tomkins or Farrell) who would get into the Leeds 17.

If you're going to make a statement get the facts straight and give it some valuable context.

Come on now, you only listed Ward and Simgleton for us because they've only come through recently (so not included JJB and Ablett) but then include O'Loughlin and McIlorum for Wigan who came through a long time ago as well.

Like has been mentioned, Wigan's team has a lot to do with how many they've lost also in recent seasons. Had Mossop stayed would Sutton be where he is? If Burgess was staying would any new wingers get a look in for the foreseeable future?

You have just completely changed you argument - first it was kids can't get through at Wigan because of overseas signings now Wigan have to give youth the chance because they have lost so many - which is it?

On Gelling he hasn't played first grade for anyone other than Wigan - but I take the point

Wigan are less bothered about losing key players e.g. Tomkins, Richards - I doubt you would see them fielding 2 37 year old props. They do appear to have a better/more consistent pipeline younger players and more confidence in using them

I can't believe that (the first bit, that is; I can't imagine many sides wishing to play 2 37 year old props apart from ourselves). I think they're probably phlegmatic about losing Richards - sort of similar to our losing Buderus, i.e. not one we've brought through, but I can't imagine they'd not be bothered about losing the likes of Tomkins (presume you're talking Sam here and not Joel although I shouldn't imagine they were ecstatic about losing either).

While I may give you Leuluai (although whether he represents better than value than the likes of Pettybourne, Lauaki or Tautai is arguable), I suspect there are very few Wigan fans who wouldn't happily trade Dom Crosby for Jamie Peacock, irrespective of their ages.

Absolutely.JP is a one off who who would still command a place at any SL club,just like Menzies in his last few years over here.These guys are exceptions not the norm.Kylie is debatable.

Agreed on Micky Mac and Sean O'Loughlin, Farrell, maybe yet Tomkins?

No I haven't you're just reading it wrong and exaggerating what I put.

Firstly, no mention of "overseas" signings, most have come from SL.

Secondly, I never said they can't get through because of the signings, but highlighted the signings they made to show that the pathway that is emerging there isn't exaclty easy. Note I also wrote "today".....it's all very well pointing to the last few years but the Top 8 structure allowed Wane to throw some kids in there, even he has admitted this and said he won't be doing it as much now with the Top 4 system in place.

My points make perfect sense when you consider the structure has changed. Yes they did give kids a chance (top 8 era)......will they be doing it as often (top 4 era) or be going with those players they've signed? Did they play a young academy lad at centre the first 2 weeks with Sarginson missing or did they push the tried and tested Tomkins back there? Is George Williams starting at halfback because he was there first choice or because they tried unsuccessfully to get Blake Green to sign a new 2 year deal last summer? Is Logan Tomkins really Top 4 club standard of is he only there because of his surname?

For someone who hung on the fact that McDermott didn't say the word "excellent" I don't think you in any position to say anyone has read your comments wrong and exaggerated.

You mentioned a number of overseas players in your post including Asotasi, Sims etc. The pathway may be difficult but you have a coach who is not afraid to play youngsters. If they show up well in training he will play them - reputation is not as big a thing at Wigan as it is at Leeds. Wane never said he wouldn't do it but he would be more careful about how he did it. Evidence of the team he played against Widnes and Huddersfield suggests nothing has changed in his philosophy regarding young players. If they haven't got a young centre of the right quality they can't promote just for the sake of it. If they had one I bet he would have played. No club can have ready made replacements in all positions.

You are really stretching a point on Williams - look at the half backs that have come into SL this year. Are seriously suggesting if Wigan were so worried about Williams they could not have signed Kelly, Roberts, Campese, Burns? Logan Tomkins is not an elite standard player OK for the likes of Widnes a bit similar to Chris Clarkson in that respect.

Yes, their philosophy certainly differs from ours. But it's really only now that our golden gen is reaching its endgame that meaningful debate about which is the more successful can start. Up until now, we win hands down. If Wigan go on to enjoy say five years of success at our expense then we're pretty much even. That's my (subjective) reading of it.

The Rhinos Academy fell from being Grade 1 to Grade 3 last year, it's not the standard by which all others are judged anymore. There are some serious improvements to be made before they can rebuild their reputation for the excellence they once had.

Clubs like Wakefield don't offer any more or even as much money to players but they do offer educational qualifications and have ties to Colleges and Universities just the same as Leeds Rhinos, Wigan etc..

An attraction of accepting an offer from Wakefield over Leeds would be the shorter route to 1st team football. There are lots of examples of players who've successfully followed that path, Gareth Ellis being the prime one. Some young players will prefer that opportunity over money, facilities or a badge.

On Cameron Smith, he's a great tallent but there are still a number of questions around him that won't be answered immediately. Everything points toward him being the next junior to make a major, Burgess type, impact on the game but he may also never make it at SL level let alone International.

Warrington will definitely come a calling, chequebook in hand, maybe they already have. I'd bet £25,000 that they've already approached Smith and been sent away with a flea in their ear, never the less I can see Wire fans singing the Smith Smith song in a few years.

leeds fell from a 1 to a 3 because the RFL didnt run the training/assessments necessary to accredit two England internationals as youth coaches, thats it. The RFL will run these course, they players will be accredited and Leeds will be back being a 1.

Doesnt seem much of a problem to me, more a highlight of the stupidity of box ticking excercises

It's all a box ticking excercise.

You think Leeds dropped from Grade 1 to Grade 3 solely for that reason even though the RFL knew they hadn't run the requisite number of UKCC Level 3 courses?

Really?

If the coaches didn't have the right qualifications, then there would be a downgrade. The reason for the lack of qualifications would be irrelevant to the grading. Reasons for the gradings and all on the RFL site.

I'm not suggesting for a second that the Coach qualifications weren't a part of the reason just that it's more than that, nothing that can't be fixed with work and time though.

I'm amazed at people's propensity to be offended by a non offensive (certainly not intended) comments that are based in fact.