Just reflecting on saints win last night and the differences in their squad vs ours.

We will have just 4 survivors from our 2018 Grand Final win at the start of next season (1 of those left and came back - bateman) plus Farrell, Powell and Leuleui. Saints on the other hand still have 9 players from the team that narrowly lost the semi to wire in the same year.

Compare our 2013 grand final win with the team that won in 2018 - and again only 4 survivors....a huge reason why we underachieved for the team we had built 2010 onwards, which should really have been a group which won 6/7 out of 10 grand finals like Leeds did..instead we only returned 4

We are generally turning over a full team every 4 years or so....meaning every two years is half a different team.
If we want to compete again we need to rebuild this squad and reduce the rate which we hemorrhage players

Brilliant post, completely agree.
Wigan have done brilliantly the last decade and with Leeds are one of the 2 most successful teams in that period.
That said I am sure we can all agree that with a young squad the feeling walking away from the 2010 grand final was that we were going to dominate.
However we have done well but underachieved.

I think rads intention from what he said at the seminar was to build a successful era around our young forward which to me sounds sensible .

We’ve gone all in on developing our own young players now, so we’ve got to keep them and make sure we feel the benefit of their prime years and not an NRL side, Catalans or Warrington. The club can’t say we are close to the cap because we pay the youngsters a good wage and then lose them before they reach their best.

As an example if we look at a kid like Havard, he’s been up and down in his time in the first team but there is clearly a lot of talent there. We have given him a couple of years worth of experience and stuck with him through the ups and downs. Say he decides to play out next season and go to the NRL, what was the point?! We may as well have gone out and got an experienced prop, who Havard himself may end up being twice as good as but isn’t currently and if Havard is going to be twice the player but is playing In the NRL, we’ve gained very little.

I back the clubs commitment to the youngsters but they have to work out a way of keeping more players long term.

All about the contracts then. Additional years in the clubs favour.

Not sure on the answer tbh. I appreciate we’ll always lose some but we shouldn’t be losing as many as we are IMO. Look at that Saints side last night, they can keep the majority of their club produced players, so it’s not an impossible task.

Why is this? They've got away with losing significant numbers of homegrown youngsters season after season despite being successful. We've been less successful but still seeing this happen (with Gildart leaving).

So why is this happening to us and not them? Is it that NRL clubs can't see past our young players? I don't think it's this?

Is it the club being too soft to the point where we almost encourage our young players to leave us for shores new? Well it's been going on for years starting with Sam, then Sarginson....

Is it the fact that the first to leave of this new group was Mossop who has made a success out of it over there? Close mates with Gildart, Bateman, Williams I believe. They see the life he's having over in Sydney and they wanted the same? This seems the most likely scenario I think.

Will the exodus stop for a few seasons now, I'm thinking so cause we've been diluted that much there's not much left worthy of a chance over there these days.

it would be interesting to see why other clubs players arent going to the NRL. If you look at the last few years Wigan have lost several to NRL (and RU), Leeds for their period of success lost 1 or 2 that i can recall, but in the main kept the nucleus of the side together, Saints have lost 2 that i can think off (1 NRL and 1 RU) and Wire have had a couple i can think of.

On the other hand we seem to have a conveyor belt of players wanting to go over to Oz / RU to play, and we have even lost 1 player before he has made a 1st team appearance to the NRL

whilst you cant knock the players for wanting to test themselves in the best league in the world, and i would assume getting a better salary than playing at Wigan, you then start to question why it feels like we are the only club losing players on a regular basis. Are we really producing better players than all the other clubs? i would say that we have a fantastic setup as demonstrated with the academy success over the years, but the real success should be how many make regular 1st team players, as opposed to winning academy GF. Does this start with the club as players know they can sign a good long term contract with Wigan, but they know if the NRL comes knocking they will be allowed to leave (with the safety blanket of a return gig at Wigan)? is it purely down to management of contracts etc

There are a few factors to it IMO and they do include the fact that Wigan is seen as a rugby league production factory across both codes and that comes from the success of the 80’s and 90’s and then the success of guys like Robinson, Edwards and Farrell in their varying Union roles and then from Down under I think they look at the Wigan academy and see the fact there is no money in the game here and it’s easy pickings.

In saying that though we have to stop being such an easy touch. At the various fans forums over the years Lenagan has spoken about NRL teams coming for our players as some sort of badge of honour. It really isn’t anymore and the George Williams situation should be a line in the sand for the strategy of letting them go because they’ll come back down the track. How you hold them I don’t know but it clearly can be done. Nobody can tell me Makinson, Percival and Walmsley where just easier to keep than guys like Burgess, Sarginson and Sutton. If we look at somebody like Jack Welsby, I hear no talk of the NRL. Why is that? I can guarantee if he was at Wigan we’d already be hearing talk that clubs down there had eyes on him. Have we just produced that environment of us being a stepping stone? I think we have tbh and that’s then tough to turn around.

Maybe there is a cultural difference between the clubs which makes it easier to hold on to players at Saints? Probably my (impossible to set aside) bias, but rightly or wrongly I see the most recent incarnation of Saints as a club/side that place character and likelihood of contributing to ethic/culture as right at the top of the agenda (players and coaches). Maybe that creates an environment where players want to be and stay?

Amongst other considerations, Wigan haven't always appeared like that to me recently. As I say, I might be miles off.

IMO it’s a mix of issues as pointed out;
i) that NRL and other clubs seem to target our players more than other teams
ii) that we don't seem to have a culture like leeds and saints...where players see wigan as the top and are desperate for success here, rather than chasing it elsewhere
iii) but personally I think your point in bold is the big one…we have been much too much a soft touch on players leaving, and that drives point ii) above – as they see their colleagues going off to big deals in Aus, Catalans or Wire etc and chase it themselves.

Point iii. drives point ii. IMO which is why I’m glad we’ve played hardball with Hardaker (especially when the reasons are tenuous), and think we need to do more of that to keep players here.

BUT the big one for me the club should really look at is partnering with an NRL club and building it into contracts, rather than having players chase them and breach contracts mid-way though a contracted period at wigan.
This leads to the unsettled nature of our squad, high turnover and difficulties we have building momentum.

Say instead, we partnered with West Tigers (for argument sake).
- Every Big 5 year deal offered to our young star players could have a contractual release option for year 3, to play for Wests if the player and WT wish to take up. This would provide an extra year option (in the 4th year), to enhance the value of their 5 year deal.
- Players would have the opportunity of NRL with the security of an agreed contact at wigan to return to if it didn’t work out (ie/ George Williams), but the option of a 2nd year if it did (ie/ Sam Tomkins).
- THEN the player would return to wigan as a much better player (with terms already agreed for the 5th year…to stop the nonsense of greedy players being lured by wire/ catalans outbidding us with their elastic caps etc). If they wanted them upon their return they would need to pay the relevant fee.
- Alternatively, if the player is a huge success and wants to stay in Aus for the rest of their career (ie / Sam Burgess), the aussie club pay a fee at the end of year 4.
- This would lead to not only more players returning and not being lost to rivals, but also critically continue the connection and cultural link to the club…they are still wigan players etc.

Of course, there’s ways this could be exploited, but its better than the current situation of every aussie club plus our rivals taking the mick out of us…..you could almost make a combined wigan team of catalans and wire players who are much better than what we have left at the club….could you imagine saying that about leeds or saints!!
The important part of this option is it retains the wigan link and connections to the club, plus hopefully desire of returning…..gives players a safety net to try the NRL but return to wigan (like we’ve seen with so many it often doesn’t work out), stops every NRL club vulturing off us…if we do a partnership deal with one, its much more likely to be accepted by others that they don’t chase our players as wigan players go to wests etc, and is less likely to have their head turned by wire or catalan etc on their return. If they do, then we get a fee out of our rivals (which limits their ability to keep doing it), rather than off an NRL club which has no impact.

Such a deal could also see us take those players in exchange who have yet to make NRL grade….ie/ when Lachlan lam was 17/18, he could have done a year here to give him game time and get a break in the NRL. They could effectively ‘fill the position’ for us, until our player returned, and be part of the contract negotiation if the wigan player wanted to remain in the NRL (we agree it, but would take an option for another 1-2 years to delay the return of a top aussie player….similar to the hastings arrangement).

Got to be better than the current mess we have, and I struggle to see how this wouldn’t have a positive effect on turnover.

There has been too much emphesis at Wigan in the last three seasons or so of players from the Academy and not enough on the signing of better top quallity experienced players from both within our own game and also from down under.

St Helens have got it right where the blending of Academy and outside experience players is concerned as shown by the comings and goings during the same period which has led in their regular success on the fiel

Blending academy players in is easy when you have a pretty much fully fit side and can literally drip feed them in.

Our problem has been that they have had far too many minutes in recent years. It works on one hand and doesn't on the other.

I still stand by my belief that our squad depth is better than anybody else in SL and the fact we managed to play all 25 games when we were missing 8,9,10 and even one week 13 players shows that. Was it three side this year that failed to raise a team? Not only did we raise a team, it went on to win the game more often that not.

You could be right, but culture is a difficult thing to measure, unless you start doing the corporate thing and asking everyone do they like it here etc etc (sorry i work in an organisation where we get these twice a year

), and then that way you could compare how the staff feel playing for wigan v saints etc

however, there is something in your point and what i was sort of alluding to / trying to get to in my earlier post. When i look at Leeds and Saints, there doesnt seem to be a clamour to leave and play in Oz / RU. yes, both clubs have lost the odd player, but in the main have managed to retain a consistent squad / balanced squad with homegrown and planned overseas players (and i know you dont always get it right, but that applies to every club).

So what are Saints now & Leeds previously, doing differently to Wigan at this moment in time? We seem to have it year on year, where a player (s) want to test their hands in Oz. At the end of the day we all have the same salary cap to play with, so all clubs have the same challenges of balancing overseas and young player promotion etc.

This year we've lost Jackson Hastings and Oliver Gildart.
Last year Sean Oloughlin.
Year before George Williams
Year before that Sam Tomkins and John Bateman
Year before that Mike McIlorum and Joel Tomkins (albeit disciplinary)
Year before that lost Josh Charnley and Dan Sarginson
Year before that Joe Burgess and Scott Taylor

That is essentially your spine that has gone in Tomkins, Williams, McIlorum and Lockers + now a 36? Year old Leuluai who would be 37 if he goes round again. It is the heart beat of the team.

By comparison the only top talent Saints have lost in that time has been Luke Thompson.

Why do so many players seem to want to leave Wigan, but not St.Helens?

The decade has been and gone much faster than you might have thought……

In SuperLeague there’s now clear daylight between Saints and Leeds/Wigan over the last decade. The last 10 seasons (lifted straight off “a.n.other” forum…)

2012 LLS Wigan GF Champions Leeds

2013 LLS Huddersfield GF Champions Wigan

2014 LLS Saints GF Champions Saints

2015 LLS Leeds GF Champions Leeds

2016 LLS Wire GF Champions Wigan

2017 LLS Castleford GF Champions Leeds

2018 LLS Saints GF Champions Wigan

2019 LLS Saints GF Champions Saints

2020 LLS Wigan GF Champions Saints

2021 LLS Catalans GF Champions Saints

Sport is cyclical, but Leeds dominance wasn’t really in the last decade it was 2007-11, however their treble in 15 was a fantastic achievement.


The comp needs a strong Wigan and Leeds otherwise it’s a race to the bottom. I expect a resurgence in effort this season from Wigan but it’s a period of rebuilding and getting rid of the dead wood in my opinion.

That may be so, but the fact remains that unlike St Helens, we do not have the right blend of Academy players and better class experienced players from within our own game and down under.

Hence, the lack of success of the last three seasons or so!

No matter who leaves at St Helens, they somehow always seemed to find a decent replacement.

Yes we do. They've all been injured.

At one stage this season I think we were missing our entire 1-7 in squad numbers amd have had our first choice SRs in the centres.

Let me know how you think they'd get on missing Coote, Makinson, Percival, Grace and Fages. Then take Batchelor and Matuatia out the pack and play them centre and Knowles is also out injured.

I'll give you a clue how I think they'd get on.....every weak team they have played has lost.

They are an exceptional side there is no doubting that, but they have also had the luxury of their best players being fit for long periods. I'd be very interested to see in the last 3 years how many combined games their 1-13 has played and how many ours has played.

I'm not saying we would beat them BTW but we'd have a far better chance than some of the sides we've turned up with. On GF 2019 for example we had our 3rd choice SH playing and even he went off injured.

Put this into context slightly...look at Liverpool over the last 3 seasons.

2019 - played thier best players most weeks, won the CL unlucky not to win the league lost 1 game.
2020 - played their best players most weeks, won the league losing 1 game.
2021 - VVD was injured for long periods and they had midfielders at centre back. Lost 7 in a row at home.

They still finished 3rd as they have a better squad than most and I think Saints would probably be heavy favourites come the playoffs with all their big guns back, but I don't believe their squad/recruitment is majorly better than ours is.

Their injury record is
Ability to keep their best players / spine / settled squad
Ability to blend in youth on their terms (mostly) rather than being forced to

I'm not sure how they keep their best players, that also helps yes but only if they stay fit. Perhaps they've been lucky in signing players like SOL who never went to the NRL or Kris Radlinski. Maybe Walmsley (or his wife) are homebirds and don't want the lifestyle. We have a group of talented young lads who can all up sticks at their age as they have no settled family life. Signing Walmsley is no good though if he spends the next 2 seasons in the stands.

Their injury record allows them to blend the youth players in. I highly doubt we wanted Smith to play every game this season and be our lead SH but we had no choice. Similarly, KPP probably wasn't supposed to play as many games as he did but with all our back row either injured or in the centres we had no choice.

A coach who insisted on putting round pegs in square holes also hasn't helped us get the best from our squad.

Again though...how much is that 'luck' or is it good management? The rate we pick up injuries at wigan is another huge issue, which cant be ascribed to luck. The Saints 13 vs our 13 would be an interesting comparison, but more interesting would be comparing now with our injury levels in the Bitcon days IMO.

Lets hope this new guy...Head of Analysis, Jack Phillips is as good as they say he is as an industry leader in analytics. This is exactly the type of data he should be looking at to establish what is going wrong and why and how we can put it right. Although, anecdotally, I have a fair idea what the results would show in terms of changes to our conditioning regime and level of performance and injuries on field.

We have lost the cutting edge not only because of our failure to retain the best players, but also because our player conditioning isn't anywhere near our rivals. Its why they are often puffing in the second half, don't have energy for creative plays or do the basics (such as support the ball carrier). IMO is also a huge factor in our 'unlucky' levels of injuries.

You put bitcon back or someone of similar ilk to condition our players and we'd also be a different proposition

I don't think our fitness has ever been an issue in terms of playing the full 80, but yes we need to look at the injuries issue but we have apparently played at least 2 players before we should have done.

Have to say, that whole "Shucks, we got it wrong, it was probably mostly our fault" thing about both Burgess and French always seemed dubious to me.

It definitely wasn't an issue. In fact, at the start of the season many commented on how strongly we finished games.

Our fitness, along with our dogged defence, are two plus points from last year.