Re: St Helens and Wigan : Sun Jul 17, 2022 7:43 am  

Judder Man wrote:

Take all that cold hard cash away (salary cap) and the result would be the same Wigan and Saints would still dominate:

This is the saints team with all the money taken away and you can only spend use the academy production line and championship level:

1. Bennison
2. Grace
3. Percival
4 Davies
5. Makinson
6. Lomax
7. Dodd
8. Walmsley
9. Roby
10. Lees
11 Knowles
12. Batchelor
13. Welsby

It would be interesting for fans from other clubs to challenge that quality depth.

[Mild Rover]

Re: St Helens and Wigan : Sun Jul 17, 2022 9:52 am  

Judder Man wrote:

It would be interesting for fans from other clubs to challenge that quality depth.

Because it is a completely different argument that nobody is making, but gets us back to admiring the Saints way?

The Saints way works very well for Saints’ and suits their current circumstances. That’s absolutely fine. If Rovers could afford it, and would see the same sort of return I’d be all for it. Other clubs do have to prioritise though, and when you’re struggling to put food on the table, your wealthy cousin rocking up and suggesting you invest for the long-term and implying you’re profligate or stupid for not doing so can be a little tiresome.

Re: St Helens and Wigan : Sun Jul 17, 2022 10:04 am  

Didnt realise Walmsley or batchelor came through your academy.

1- Hanley
2- Thornley
3- KPP
4- Halsall
5- Marshall
6-Powell
7- Smith
8- Byrne
9- Oneill
10- Havard
11-Smithies
12- Farrell
13- Shorrocks

I know none of these would get in your team as they are not worthy but one must try.

Re: St Helens and Wigan : Sun Jul 17, 2022 10:27 am  

Very impressive as well, that's probably why he said Wigan and Saints would still lead the way.

[Mild Rover]

Re: St Helens and Wigan : Sun Jul 17, 2022 10:45 am  

So we’d all like, hypothetically, to see Saints and/or Wigan run with the same budget for their entire rugby department as Wakefield (for example) do now, for a decade to see how it pans out?

Re: St Helens and Wigan : Sun Jul 17, 2022 11:07 am  

Jason65 wrote:

Didnt realise Walmsley or batchelor came through your academy.

1- Hanley
2- Thornley
3- KPP
4- Halsall
5- Marshall
6-Powell
7- Smith
8- Byrne
9- Oneill
10- Havard
11-Smithies
12- Farrell
13- Shorrocks

I know none of these would get in your team as they are not worthy but one must try.

KPP didn’t come through your academy

Re: St Helens and Wigan : Sun Jul 17, 2022 12:11 pm  

TheWarringtonWolve69 wrote:

KPP didn’t come through your academy

Played for the academy,does that not count.
Did Walmsley come through your academy?

Re: St Helens and Wigan : Sun Jul 17, 2022 12:20 pm  

Judder Man wrote:

It would be interesting for fans from other clubs to challenge that quality depth.

Great work answering your own questions champion.

Re: St Helens and Wigan : Sun Jul 17, 2022 12:23 pm  

Mild Rover wrote:

So we’d all like, hypothetically, to see Saints and/or Wigan run with the same budget for their entire rugby department as Wakefield (for example) do now, for a decade to see how it pans out?

But why are we insisting the tail should wag the dog? Surely we would want Wakefield to spend the same amount as Wigan and Saints for a decade?

[Mild Rover]

Re: St Helens and Wigan : Sun Jul 17, 2022 1:17 pm  

Magic Superbeetle wrote:

But why are we insisting the tail should wag the dog? Surely we would want Wakefield to spend the same amount as Wigan and Saints for a decade?

That’d work too, and would be less mean spirited.

I am quite bitter, in a light-hearted kind of way.

A couple of questions that makes me think about…

What’d be the timeline of decline for a rich club that started to struggle financially? I think the success of Saints and Wigan is sufficiently embedded/entrenched that they could continue to glide if the engines shut down for 3 or 4 years before starting to dip. I guess Bradford would be the best example, but Wigan and Saints have now had another 15 years at the top and there’s a greater sense of exhaustion and hopelessness… on my part at least. I’ve learned to take pleasures in small mercies and consolation in the misery of others. Wigan winning 60-0 is ignorable background noise. Hull losing 60-0 is the music that soothes my withered soul.

Conversely, how long would it take Wakefield (or it could be Rovers) to start competing? That feels like a two-step process. Change the perception of the club and ‘put the roof’ by strengthening the first-team immediately. You’re looking at 5 years to see the first fruits of a revamped, optimised and well-funded development pathway, and 10 years before the full benefits are felt - if all goes well. So they could get most of the way fairly quickly (2 or 3 recruitment cycles)… but it’d take a long time to catch-up fully.

The other point is the threshold at which it all stops being fun or interesting as a sporting entertainment, and when is unreasonable or not sensible to expect more ‘patience’. For me it is around winning less than one game in three for an extended period, with not much prospect of improvement. Below that nothing is sustainable, imo, and you can’t build anything.