KaeruJim wrote:
Thing is Matts that the academy has only ever produced a couple of first teamers a year even in the golden decade.
The team can lose but you have one or two who go on to make it - that’s actually okay. Flip side of course is that winning games and titles at junior level is a general signal of health.
Looking at our pool, I’d say Jack Smith, Lumb, Cassell, Oladipupo, Gannon we know about, Lloyd, Stelfox, Simpson, Littlewood, Ned McCormack…. All decent chances of making first grade.
There is some quality in there especially at back row and centre.
I do think we’ll see more juniors staring to push into the first team over the next few years than we’ve seen for a while. I do agree that I’d like to see more evidence of their potential with team results though.
Jim, im fully aware of the talented players we recruit into the club, theres even more you havnt listed that are more talented than some you have, im also under no illusion that a talented junior does not guarantee a first grade player...But the minum requirement should be a dominant Scholarship intake/player, maintain that into their Academy careers, remain best in class within their peer group, we dont come close, nearly as much as we should
What a club has to do, is to give them the best possible chance of reaching maximum potential, for a club like leeds, that should be best in country, and it isnt anywhere near. The facility's are there, the coaching isnt. You seem to watch a few games like myself, but we are watching through a different lens if you are seeing any kind of learning or mental development in the way these lads are playing, each game is a mirror image of the last...Errors, stupid decisions, weak mentality, bad habits which wernt there in scholarship and generally just not as resilient as the opposition.
The current situation isnt new, its the latest in a long line of poor decisions at Academy/reserves level, so looking historicaly at the pattern of players developing isnt something to eleviate some criticism from the current set up, its more frustrating they haven't yet changed stance on how they operate...Results at this level matter, development coaches hiding behind the cliche phrases associated with development are usually the poor ones. Lads who were best in class at Scholarship but then cant win a game at Academy and reserves and look generally less intelligent players at 17/18 than they did at 15/16, is an issue, They are being cought up and overtaken by their peers
The historic issue since the goldens was 2 fold, recruitment and development, Thankfully we have addressed the recruitment side of our junior programmes, we had become poor, we are now very good, but the development side is not where it needs to be and will eventually harm the recruitment side again.
