Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:07 am
Are England statistically poor at introducing 19/20 year olds compared with other countries? Or, is it just our club structure (salary cap?) that is at fault?
yes, its O'shea's biggest concern. One of the RFU's presentations captures how few minutes of senior rugby U20 age group reps had last season and the season before. They want the Champ clubs to provide homes for 2/3 per club from 25/26, and fund them.....details being worked on.
Do you think that will work as a pathway?
I see the prem clubs and England as having limited imagination/judgement. Just as a theoretical example, should Pollock be adjudged to have a significantly higher ceiling than Underhill, how and when does he get to prove it? Arguing that he has to demand the shirt with club performances is all well and good if a club gives him a chance.
Pollock played 3 PRC games last season and 3 the season before. He also made his Prem debut this season. He's only 19 and whilst I'm pro giving young players a chance I'm also wary of rushing through young players before they have finished developing which might knacker their bodies for the long term.
It's a delicate balance, a French style under 23 league would be a real benefit but with the agreement to slash squad numbers I don't know how feasible that is.
FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 10:29 amPollock played 3 PRC games last season and 3 the season before. He also made his Prem debut this season. He's only 19 and whilst I'm pro giving young players a chance I'm also wary of rushing through young players before they have finished developing which might knacker their bodies for the long term.
It's a delicate balance, a French style under 23 league would be a real benefit but with the agreement to slash squad numbers I don't know how feasible that is.
Hear hear.
I'd also add that I'd be more worried about Underhill blocking Pollock's progress and ability to prove himself at club level if... they played for the same club.
Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:07 am
Are England statistically poor at introducing 19/20 year olds compared with other countries? Or, is it just our club structure (salary cap?) that is at fault?
yes, its O'shea's biggest concern. One of the RFU's presentations captures how few minutes of senior rugby U20 age group reps had last season and the season before. They want the Champ clubs to provide homes for 2/3 per club from 25/26, and fund them.....details being worked on.
It’s an interesting one. When you look across the top 5 or 6 sides, France is really the only one that has really done consistently well with U20 players transitioning to the senior side (and that’s only in the past 5/6 years). Our record is better than most from what I can see?
However, that doesn’t mean the pathway can’t be significantly improved to give emerging players the right amount of opportunity.
The French team had a number of players with a decent bit of Top 14 experience and we have very few that have seen much Premiership action. We could and should be offering our players more opportunities but it has to be on an individual/case by case basis as some players are more ready than others.
Pollock is an interesting one. I’m not sure he is physically ready yet and I’d definitely argue that it’s way too soon to opine that he has a a higher ceiling than Underhill. He should get more opportunity this season in Saints new look back row but I’m not at all surprised that he’s been used sparingly so far.
yes, its O'shea's biggest concern. One of the RFU's presentations captures how few minutes of senior rugby U20 age group reps had last season and the season before. They want the Champ clubs to provide homes for 2/3 per club from 25/26, and fund them.....details being worked on.
Do you think that will work as a pathway?
I see the prem clubs and England as having limited imagination/judgement. Just as a theoretical example, should Pollock be adjudged to have a significantly higher ceiling than Underhill, how and when does he get to prove it? Arguing that he has to demand the shirt with club performances is all well and good if a club gives him a chance.
Pollock played 3 PRC games last season and 3 the season before. He also made his Prem debut this season. He's only 19 and whilst I'm pro giving young players a chance I'm also wary of rushing through young players before they have finished developing which might knacker their bodies for the long term.
It's a delicate balance, a French style under 23 league would be a real benefit but with the agreement to slash squad numbers I don't know how feasible that is.
I'd say Carnduff certainly and Pollack probably are ready to step up. Kerr looks ready to get some game time.
But then i thought the same about Chessum last season, Ilione the one before and i thought Lancaster looked all class.
If they're good enough they will breakthrough. Some quicker than others but we do seem to have a very good group at this level with plenty more to come from those who are eligible next season.
IIRC, Chessum Jnr. spent most of last season injured (maybe FKAS or Puja can expand) which probably explains why he’s still in the academy.
Lancaster and Ilione probably should have kicked on kore than they have but they’re all still young, so plenty of time to get back on track. Lewis Ludlam is probably a good example - won player of the tournament at the U20 RWC and then took 4 or 5 years to break through. Not England, but similar for Tadhg Beirne. The moral of the story being that and instant breakthrough to first team rugby isn’t the be all and end all.
I think most of the pack (Michelow and Sela might struggle on account of the depth in their positions at club level), Kerr and Wills will all see first team action this season.
Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:07 am
Are England statistically poor at introducing 19/20 year olds compared with other countries? Or, is it just our club structure (salary cap?) that is at fault?
yes, its O'shea's biggest concern. One of the RFU's presentations captures how few minutes of senior rugby U20 age group reps had last season and the season before. They want the Champ clubs to provide homes for 2/3 per club from 25/26, and fund them.....details being worked on.
Do you think that will work as a pathway?
I see the prem clubs and England as having limited imagination/judgement. Just as a theoretical example, should Pollock be adjudged to have a significantly higher ceiling than Underhill, how and when does he get to prove it? Arguing that he has to demand the shirt with club performances is all well and good if a club gives him a chance.
it needs establishing but yes, and Pollock definitely needs edges knocking off at Bedford tbh
Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:07 am
Are England statistically poor at introducing 19/20 year olds compared with other countries? Or, is it just our club structure (salary cap?) that is at fault?
yes, its O'shea's biggest concern. One of the RFU's presentations captures how few minutes of senior rugby U20 age group reps had last season and the season before. They want the Champ clubs to provide homes for 2/3 per club from 25/26, and fund them.....details being worked on.
It’s an interesting one. When you look across the top 5 or 6 sides, France is really the only one that has really done consistently well with U20 players transitioning to the senior side (and that’s only in the past 5/6 years). Our record is better than most from what I can see?
However, that doesn’t mean the pathway can’t be significantly improved to give emerging players the right amount of opportunity.
The French team had a number of players with a decent bit of Top 14 experience and we have very few that have seen much Premiership action. We could and should be offering our players more opportunities but it has to be on an individual/case by case basis as some players are more ready than others.
Pollock is an interesting one. I’m not sure he is physically ready yet and I’d definitely argue that it’s way too soon to opine that he has a a higher ceiling than Underhill. He should get more opportunity this season in Saints new look back row but I’m not at all surprised that he’s been used sparingly so far.
no idea on comparing v other countries, but no question u20s have historically not got enough minutes. I am glad its recognised,
Scrumhead wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 5:17 pm
IIRC, Chessum Jnr. spent most of last season injured (maybe FKAS or Puja can expand) which probably explains why he’s still in the academy.
Lancaster and Ilione probably should have kicked on kore than they have but they’re all still young, so plenty of time to get back on track. Lewis Ludlam is probably a good example - won player of the tournament at the U20 RWC and then took 4 or 5 years to break through. Not England, but similar for Tadhg Beirne. The moral of the story being that and instant breakthrough to first team rugby isn’t the be all and end all.
I think most of the pack (Michelow and Sela might struggle on account of the depth in their positions at club level), Kerr and Wills will all see first team action this season.
Chessum Jnr played PRC at the start of the season and then went on loan to Nat 1 with Leicester Lions but got injured before Christmas and hasn't played since. I think someone on the iffy said he'd been seen in pre season training pics so hopefully ready for his comeback.
Ilione has had some injuries and is combining his studies (Medicine at Notts Uni). Felt like he was on the cusp of breaking through last season but didn't quite happen. Hopefully the change in coach will help that a bit, McKellar didn't always go with a specialist openside normally to Tigers loss.
Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:07 am
Are England statistically poor at introducing 19/20 year olds compared with other countries? Or, is it just our club structure (salary cap?) that is at fault?
The thing is that you have so many players you don't need to be rushing your U20s through to national level. However what is being missed is that they are potentially the solution to the financial issues of the clubs. Yes clubs need depth but a layer of that depth should be from U20s and recent graduates from the U20s, rather than decent but not exceptional players commanding large-ish salaries.
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:07 am
Are England statistically poor at introducing 19/20 year olds compared with other countries? Or, is it just our club structure (salary cap?) that is at fault?
The thing is that you have so many players you don't need to be rushing your U20s through to national level. However what is being missed is that they are potentially the solution to the financial issues of the clubs. Yes clubs need depth but a layer of that depth should be from U20s and recent graduates from the U20s, rather than decent but not exceptional players commanding large-ish salaries.
What worries me is that there is no scope in our clubs' thinking for a good 27 year old to be replaced by a potentially better 19 year old. Might England miss a Dupont whereas France did not?
Exeter looked doomed when their top players left but one season with young pretenders suggests otherwise now.
Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:07 am
Are England statistically poor at introducing 19/20 year olds compared with other countries? Or, is it just our club structure (salary cap?) that is at fault?
The thing is that you have so many players you don't need to be rushing your U20s through to national level. However what is being missed is that they are potentially the solution to the financial issues of the clubs. Yes clubs need depth but a layer of that depth should be from U20s and recent graduates from the U20s, rather than decent but not exceptional players commanding large-ish salaries.
What worries me is that there is no scope in our clubs' thinking for a good 27 year old to be replaced by a potentially better 19 year old. Might England miss a Dupont whereas France did not?
Exeter looked doomed when their top players left but one season with young pretenders suggests otherwise now.
Your financial point is a good one.
As I pointed out earlier it's easier for the French sides. The Espoirs competition allows regular game time for their younger players. Paul Costes at Toulouse went from two seasons regular Espoirs rugby with occasional Toulouse game time last season and then pushes into the first team this season at 21 (starts Euro Final). It's a great development tool for their players and coaches. No reliance on finding a loan club that needs a player in that position, loan clubs also fighting for survival in their own leagues not always a great development opportunity.
Add in the Top14 having more games meaning that they rotate the players more, particularly away from home. Gives the wider squad more exposure. The JIFF rules were a brilliant addition for them also.
I'm sure most Prem clubs want to develop their homegrown players. It's generally cheaper, good from a reputation stand point and if you've got a good set up you'll align the style of rugby from the top down so the players come through playing the style of the first team (nod to Saints and Sarries who seem to do this very well currently). When you've got a small number of games and positional expectations then you also need results which isn't always great for development opportunities. Rob Baxter and Exeter are a slight anomaly as Baxter has so much credit in the bank he can do what he likes, I imagine the wage bill falling dramatically is probably going down well with their owner.
Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:07 am
Are England statistically poor at introducing 19/20 year olds compared with other countries? Or, is it just our club structure (salary cap?) that is at fault?
The thing is that you have so many players you don't need to be rushing your U20s through to national level. However what is being missed is that they are potentially the solution to the financial issues of the clubs. Yes clubs need depth but a layer of that depth should be from U20s and recent graduates from the U20s, rather than decent but not exceptional players commanding large-ish salaries.
Its not about 'rushing them through' but actually having a cohesive dev plan alongside pathways (some go to Prem clubs, some to Champ or even NL1 but for defined periods and with development goals); I've proposed a draft type system, so lets see. Absolutely agree on the financial side (been banging that drum for years too), but just having a load of players is no excuse for the current haphazard player development- sure you can get away with it to some extent with a big pool, but what a waste.
Banquo wrote: ↑Mon Jul 22, 2024 11:49 am
Its not about 'rushing them through' but actually having a cohesive dev plan alongside pathways (some go to Prem clubs, some to Champ or even NL1 but for defined periods and with development goals)
Any clubs without that in place?
Any clubs without a member of the coaching staff with that as their principle brief?
Personally, I dubious of the implication that there's a bunch of highly promising juniors who are plenty good enough for regular club rugby in the top tier, who failed due to lack of management, rather than things like not being good enough, discovering girls / study, injuries, not being driven enough to put the work in etc etc etc.
Last edited by Which Tyler on Mon Jul 22, 2024 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Banquo wrote: ↑Mon Jul 22, 2024 11:49 am
Its not about 'rushing them through' but actually having a cohesive dev plan alongside pathways (some go to Prem clubs, some to Champ or even NL1 but for defined periods and with development goals)
Any clubs without that in place?
Any clubs without a member of the coaching staff with that as their principle brief?
lots, in my experience, of which i have some. I'm particularly referencing U20 grads. At your own club there are three I can name who had no real plan last season. A couple were loaned to us and against us on consecutive weekends (we also had the same thing with Saints and Quins btw). Even coaches may not own coaching plans for individuals.
The proof of the pudding has been the lack of game time some players considered prospects have got over the last couple of seasons; I'm not making this up for the sake of an argument- this is from RFU Elite performance group. So if the plans exist, they are not being enacted.
Banquo wrote: ↑Mon Jul 22, 2024 11:49 am
Its not about 'rushing them through' but actually having a cohesive dev plan alongside pathways (some go to Prem clubs, some to Champ or even NL1 but for defined periods and with development goals)
Any clubs without that in place?
Any clubs without a member of the coaching staff with that as their principle brief?
Personally, I dubious of the implication that there's a bunch of highly promising juniors who are plenty good enough for regular club rugby in the top tier, who failed due to lack of management, rather than things like not being good enough, discovering girls / study, injuries, not being driven enough to put the work in etc etc etc.
I Claudias ?
I'm not sure you are correct, but in any case why not aspire to maximise any potential through a bit of rigour and its definitely missing. People have been moaning for years about why we don't produce more high quality senior players, so why not have a look at what's happening upstream....and that's what the proposal is. Not sure why its even contentious. (of course you'll lose a chunk, but I'm talking about players already on Prem books not progressing)
I have had a personal look at 10+ former Eng u20's contracted to prem clubs who have had naff all senior game time prem/champ in the last couple of seasons......and they for sure have been better than the older guys they've faced at Champ level for the likes of Ealing/pro teams. Opportunity is all they need. I also know a couple have gone to France/Wales (?) to further their ambitions. Anecdotal, but its not a small number.
Banquo wrote: ↑Mon Jul 22, 2024 11:49 am
Its not about 'rushing them through' but actually having a cohesive dev plan alongside pathways (some go to Prem clubs, some to Champ or even NL1 but for defined periods and with development goals)
Any clubs without that in place?
Any clubs without a member of the coaching staff with that as their principle brief?
Personally, I dubious of the implication that there's a bunch of highly promising juniors who are plenty good enough for regular club rugby in the top tier, who failed due to lack of management, rather than things like not being good enough, discovering girls / study, injuries, not being driven enough to put the work in etc etc etc.
I Claudias ?
I'm not sure you are correct, but in any case why not aspire to maximise any potential through a bit of rigour and its definitely missing. People have been moaning for years about why we don't produce more high quality senior players, so why not have a look at what's happening upstream....and that's what the proposal is. Not sure why its even contentious. (of course you'll lose a chunk, but I'm talking about players already on Prem books not progressing)
I have had a personal look at 10+ former Eng u20's contracted to prem clubs who have had naff all senior game time prem/champ in the last couple of seasons......and they for sure have been better than the older guys they've faced at Champ level for the likes of Ealing/pro teams. Opportunity is all they need. I also know a couple have gone to France/Wales (?) to further their ambitions. Anecdotal, but its not a small number.
I don't necessarily disagree. Who are the 10ish former under 20s you were looking at?
Any clubs without that in place?
Any clubs without a member of the coaching staff with that as their principle brief?
Personally, I dubious of the implication that there's a bunch of highly promising juniors who are plenty good enough for regular club rugby in the top tier, who failed due to lack of management, rather than things like not being good enough, discovering girls / study, injuries, not being driven enough to put the work in etc etc etc.
I Claudias ?
I'm not sure you are correct, but in any case why not aspire to maximise any potential through a bit of rigour and its definitely missing. People have been moaning for years about why we don't produce more high quality senior players, so why not have a look at what's happening upstream....and that's what the proposal is. Not sure why its even contentious. (of course you'll lose a chunk, but I'm talking about players already on Prem books not progressing)
I have had a personal look at 10+ former Eng u20's contracted to prem clubs who have had naff all senior game time prem/champ in the last couple of seasons......and they for sure have been better than the older guys they've faced at Champ level for the likes of Ealing/pro teams. Opportunity is all they need. I also know a couple have gone to France/Wales (?) to further their ambitions. Anecdotal, but its not a small number.
I don't necessarily disagree. Who are the 10ish former under 20s you were looking at?
Ones who played for us, is what I meant. The likes of Sam Edwards, Jamie Benson.
Scrumhead wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 11:03 am
Benson is highly rated at Quins. AFAIK, the reason he’s had less involvement is because of his studies (that may be wrong).
We let Will Edwards go so I would expect him to take that 3rd choice 10 spot ahead of Bellamy.
Benson maybe highly rated by Quins, but he's both injured and likely to be playing for Scottish when fit as I understand it. He was studying at Cambridge Uni but has graduated (starred in the varsity match, but its pretty weak these days). He was great for us. TBH he's a better 12 than 10.
I typically take these lists with a pinch of salt, but Angus Hall caught my eye - is it possible we have a 12 ranked in the top 20 global prospects? Surely not …
Scrumhead wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2024 10:35 am
I typically take these lists with a pinch of salt, but Angus Hall caught my eye - is it possible we have a 12 ranked in the top 20 global prospects? Surely not …
Good 12 prospects we have plenty of. Getting them to produce quality performances at club and then international level seems to be where it falls down.
Kelly, Woodward, Atkinson, Ma'asi-White, Kerr, Anyanwu, Litchfield, Ojomoh, Hartley, could even stretch to Dingwall here as well as a youngster who's shown promise and not managed to either breakthrough, replicate form consistently or transfer to international level.
