Re: Chris Hill : Mon Aug 09, 2021 7:36 pm  

Sparky1967 wrote:

So going back to my previous post when do you start to consider Doro, Longstaff and Robson. When their 30. You’ve got to give them a chance to see how they perform, otherwise it’s pointless having an academy. I presume everyone on here would take Oldeski of Leeds tomorrow. Had we heard of him 18 months ago. No . Leeds took a punt from their academy and now they’ve got an England
prop. Are we going to keep giving them 1 year deals and then sending them out on loan. We gave Luis Johnson only a few run outs before deciding he wasn’t for us. To be fair we’ve got the better end of the deal with Mulhern signing.
Going back to Harrison, (who has been signed on the recommendation of our new coach) along with Holmes will be for me considered a first teamer otherwise what was the point of the signing. We’ve got enough possible first teamer’s. I’ll stick my neck out and predict that the coaching staff will hope he will have the same impact as Hill when he first signed and Walmsley of St Helen’s.
I’d love Chris Hill to stay but if other teams are offering longer contracts on more money then there is only going to be one outcome.
We need to win Super League to get the monkey off our backs. That is why Steve Price relies on experienced players. The board though for me have waited long enough and if it doesn’t happen this season they are going to want Powell to start fresh and introduce a new younger team and possibly wait another season for it to gel.

Longstaff is a back rower, one of the reasons I wouldn’t want Clark to stay is that he holds up a spot for a young’un.. Hill staying / going has no impact on Longstaff, who looks good.

I don’t think Robson is good enough.

Not sure on Doro, not sure he’s going to be big enough. He has time though, only 20 and can fight it out with Davis for a 13 / sub 13 role. Starting prop / prop rotation is a way away for him yet.

Re: Chris Hill : Mon Aug 09, 2021 8:13 pm  

Alffi_7 wrote:

Longstaff is a back rower, one of the reasons I wouldn’t want Clark to stay is that he holds up a spot for a young’un.. Hill staying / going has no impact on Longstaff, who looks good.

I don’t think Robson is good enough.

Not sure on Doro, not sure he’s going to be big enough. He has time though, only 20 and can fight it out with Davis for a 13 / sub 13 role. Starting prop / prop rotation is a way away for him yet.

Fair enough opinions. My comments were on the pack overall.
So my main point is then.
What is the point of the academy, if young players we’re investing in are not good enough?
It’s ok to have a opinion that certain players are not good enough but what do you base it on. The guy’s not played more than 5 games for us.

People forget that the owners at the end of the year have got to find new training facilities. Moran and the directors have already invested heavily in the training facilities we’ve got hoping in the future they don’t have to keep on shelling out big money on transfer fees etc.
They must be well cheesed off when 8000 spectators turn up for the Wigan game.

Re: Chris Hill : Mon Aug 09, 2021 8:35 pm  

ninearches wrote:

Does the monkey on our back really matter that much ? We beat the glory boys regularly these days ,so much so in fact that our games against Wigan ,Saints & Leeds are becoming tedious .

I think it does matter in the fact that we beat them in meaningless games.
We’ve got to beat them in the game that matters at Old Trafford.
I’m all for more teams in Super League and going back to a top position wins the league. Nothing convinces me that the present format works anymore.
Teams will have less money to share in the short term but hopefully a better product on the field will entice better sponsors in the future and crowds in the future.

Re: Chris Hill : Mon Aug 09, 2021 9:30 pm  

Sparky1967 wrote:

Fair enough opinions. My comments were on the pack overall.
So my main point is then.
What is the point of the academy, if young players we’re investing in are not good enough?
It’s ok to have a opinion that certain players are not good enough but what do you base it on. The guy’s not played more than 5 games for us.

People forget that the owners at the end of the year have got to find new training facilities. Moran and the directors have already invested heavily in the training facilities we’ve got hoping in the future they don’t have to keep on shelling out big money on transfer fees etc.
They must be well cheesed off when 8000 spectators turn up for the Wigan game.

On Robson, the club seemed ok with him signing with Ottawa before that fell through, players don’t just show they are first team worthy when they get a shot in the first team. They need to look the part in training, I assume if he had, he wouldn’t have signed for a Champ 1 club - He’ll be 23 before the end of the year.

I think the club has shown if the player is good enough they will be given time to develop, Currie, Philbin, King are examples of that. Problem is we don’t produce them often enough. I don’t believe the answer is to put them in whether you think they are good enough or not. We need to be better in the talent I.D and development phase. It wouldn’t surprise me if we spent more on our academy / youth set up than Saints, but the output is poor in comparison to the investment, this is what we need to work on.

We don’t have any big props coming in, so we will have to recruit and bring in from outside. We have Longstaff coming through for the back row, I think he has a shot. In 3 years when Holmes is out of contract he’ll be 22 and looking for a regular spot, until then he works his socks off and takes every opportunity afforded to him.

[Fantastic Mr Catpiss]

Re: Chris Hill : Tue Aug 10, 2021 9:13 am  

Alffi_7 wrote:

On Robson, the club seemed ok with him signing with Ottawa before that fell through, players don’t just show they are first team worthy when they get a shot in the first team. They need to look the part in training, I assume if he had, he wouldn’t have signed for a Champ 1 club - He’ll be 23 before the end of the year.

I think the club has shown if the player is good enough they will be given time to develop, Currie, Philbin, King are examples of that. Problem is we don’t produce them often enough. I don’t believe the answer is to put them in whether you think they are good enough or not. We need to be better in the talent I.D and development phase. It wouldn’t surprise me if we spent more on our academy / youth set up than Saints, but the output is poor in comparison to the investment, this is what we need to work on.

We don’t have any big props coming in, so we will have to recruit and bring in from outside. We have Longstaff coming through for the back row, I think he has a shot. In 3 years when Holmes is out of contract he’ll be 22 and looking for a regular spot, until then he works his socks off and takes every opportunity afforded to him.

currie king and philbin all came through under smith though.and were pretty much established first teamers (king was 3rd choice centre)

Price has been questionable in his usage of youngsters during his 4 years here.

Re: Chris Hill : Tue Aug 10, 2021 10:17 am  

Fantastic Mr Catpiss wrote:

currie king and philbin all came through under smith though.and were pretty much established first teamers (king was 3rd choice centre)

Price has been questionable in his usage of youngsters during his 4 years here.

I was referring to the club rather than Price, although the coach obviously has a significant impact on that, some are more risk averse and would rather play experienced players out of position than give a youngster a chance.

Price himself has given Thewlis plenty of game time though and we’ve seen Wrench and Longstaff given opportunities this year. It’s back to the same point, the problem with young players coming through the system has more to do with the success of our player ID and pathways than the coach currently in my view. Thewlis proved he was good enough in training and games and was given an extended run.

[Winslade's Offload]

Re: Chris Hill : Tue Aug 10, 2021 11:13 am  

Alffi_7 wrote:

I was referring to the club rather than Price, although the coach obviously has a significant impact on that, some are more risk averse and would rather play experienced players out of position than give a youngster a chance.

Price himself has given Thewlis plenty of game time though and we’ve seen Wrench and Longstaff given opportunities this year. It’s back to the same point, the problem with young players coming through the system has more to do with the success of our player ID and pathways than the coach currently in my view. Thewlis proved he was good enough in training and games and was given an extended run.

I don't think Longstaff has done much wrong, and yet he has played two SL games, one of which was against Leigh. In total this year I think he has also had one game in the U19's and two for Newcastle. That's hardly going to provide him with much development time is it ?

Thewlis is a much easier choice for Price because he virtually looked the complete footballer when he was in the U16's, let alone when he came up to the U19's. He doesn't make many mistakes ( his two dropped catches were a bit of a surprise though), reads the game well, has captained the junior sides and understands the technical aspects of FB. His limitation I would say are probably speed and size.

Connor Wrench has had 3 SL games this year, again one of which was against Leigh, plus two other games with Newcastle.

The above three players I would say are our best chances of bringing through new first team players but they are starved of game time unfortunately. I am not saying the job of the coach is an easy one as Price is under constant pressure to win matches. But he is only here for 3 years and needs to go home with some sort of success story if he is to continue coaching. His conservative approach, lack of experience at this level, and less need to worry about future players has not helped the development of a genuinely good crop of youngsters.

[Fantastic Mr Catpiss]

Re: Chris Hill : Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:06 pm  

Alffi_7 wrote:

I was referring to the club rather than Price, although the coach obviously has a significant impact on that, some are more risk averse and would rather play experienced players out of position than give a youngster a chance.

Price himself has given Thewlis plenty of game time though and we’ve seen Wrench and Longstaff given opportunities this year. It’s back to the same point, the problem with young players coming through the system has more to do with the success of our player ID and pathways than the coach currently in my view. Thewlis proved he was good enough in training and games and was given an extended run.

Thewlis has done alright, though if ashton was fit I'd wonder if he'd have the same minutes.

Connor wrench's last appearance was a non playing sub when we had a prop on the wing.

Theres opportunities and opportunities

Re: Chris Hill : Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:45 pm  

Alffi_7 wrote:

On Robson, the club seemed ok with him signing with Ottawa before that fell through, players don’t just show they are first team worthy when they get a shot in the first team.

Robson's deal didn't fall through, he got some game time towards the end of the season and showed how good he is. So we offered him a new deal and he chose to stay with us. Robsons a good forward, better and faster attack then hughes and better than Doro, he weirdly just doesn't get much game time. But The little time that he does play he goes 100% and hits hard in defence. I'd play him over Jason Clark, he'd make a decent 13.

Re: Chris Hill : Tue Aug 10, 2021 2:26 pm  

The issue of young players is surely worth its own topic?