It this indicative of our current youth setup?

[Bill W (2)]

I didn't see (say? ed) Cockers had been successful Bill!

True!!

[POSTIGER]

I didn't see (say? ed) Cockers had been successful Bill!

True!!

It's been a long day Bill!

[tigerblood]

How much do the Academy boys see of Cockers and O'Connor?

They see a reasonable amount of O' Connor and Cockers, but not in the right environment, whilst a lot of work is done as a complete squad the academy boys are cannon fodder. My feelings were that we were judged on the ability to hold a tackle shield rather than rugby ability. I have no issue with the fact that Tigers employ a meritocracy (that is the way it should be) and watching guys like Crofty and Coley move up the ladder shows it can be done, but it's a bitter pill to swallow watching as others have pointed out someone being brought in as cover where it is unclear as to whether they are actually better than the academy product.

Gloucester were the clear example a few years ago of how not to use your academy (ie. as your first team) and they destroyed some pretty talented players (Ryan Lamb for example and almost our very own Anthony Allen), but now they have a balance and ended up top 4. The key will be when the cap changes are made. The academy players will become a relative gold mine then.

Hope Everard and the boys at the JWC can pull it off this afternoon!!

[The Boy Dave]

Totally understand your thoughts Tigerblood!
It's very difficult for the young lads as on top of getting an education and trying to impress the people that matter on the few occasions they can they are also used as cannon fodder. It's a very intimidating place at times on the pitch and when you are seen as cannon fodder to regular players it's difficult to show you can compete with the fringe players. These fringe players have all day every day to train and fit into the squad and the young lads are up against it with everything they have on their plates. It can be a bad experience for many lads at acadamies and it's often over for them before they have even had a chance to blink.

[Cardiff Tig]

whats the problem with academy players leaving tigers to get first team rugby in the championship? if they're not happy getting the occasional game time in the LV cup then thats up to them, i don't see why tigers should have to risk results testing a player who hasn't shown that much promise and who it is unclear whether they will actually reach premiership standard? the academy games are at a much lower standard than first team rugby.

the stars in the making e.g. croft, cole, youngs, manu have made the break through so if the talent is there it can obviously happen. if they were leaving to other premiership clubs it might be more of a signal about the academy.

[Cardiff Tig]

While there is clear evidence that success can come, fine. But if there are greater opportunities at other clubs that are succeeding.......

i wouldn't say there are greater opportunities at other premiership clubs though - most of the top teams in the league don't have more than 1 or 2 players that break through each season, similar to tigers.

i think that the players would happily stay if the club offers them a contract - the players that have left this time are the ones that haven't been.

[Bill W (2)]

You cannot afford for that to become the general perception.

This is IMHO the nub of the matter.

[4071]

whats the problem with academy players leaving tigers to get first team rugby in the championship? if they're not happy getting the occasional game time in the LV cup then thats up to them, i don't see why tigers should have to risk results testing a player who hasn't shown that much promise and who it is unclear whether they will actually reach premiership standard? the academy games are at a much lower standard than first team rugby.

the stars in the making e.g. croft, cole, youngs, manu have made the break through so if the talent is there it can obviously happen. if they were leaving to other premiership clubs it might be more of a signal about the academy.

Might be worth mentioning that when Cole was making his breakthrough under Heynecke Meyer, he was actually a bit of a liability in the scrum. For the first half of the 2008-9 season, he was really struggling and there were several matches when he came off the bench and the scrum started going backwards.

The problem was that whilst he was a very good age-grade player, he was still young. He hadn't fully developed into a top class player, and needed to spend time playing in the Premiership to get up to that level.

In time he did get up to that level - by the start of the following season he was a fine scrummager and went on to make his England debut that year.

What happened, you see, was that a 21-year old prop was not the finished article. He may have been a bit of a liability, in fact. But the coach at the time kept picking him and kept exposing him to top class rugby and - very quickly - he turned into an international-class player.

It may shock you to hear this, but very very very very few players come straight out of an Academy as top-class internationals. When they are young, they require games and they require development. And the end result is that the young player gets better and better.

This is EXACTLY what you are now suggestion should NOT happen.

And you are wrong.

And so is Cockerill.


Oddly, he still doesn't seem to have noticed that you don't have to come top of the League to win the competition. It is possible to lose games and still make the play-offs. And given that safety-net, the balance of risk involved in giving inexperienced young players games is that much better.

As it happens, I think a lot of our young fringe players are already as good or better than several of the regulars, and that picking the likes of Harrison, Twelvetrees, Everard, Bower, Armes, Forsyth, etc on the bench (and even letting them have more than 60 seconds of rugby) will not automatically result in defeat. But even if it did – even if they made schoolboy errors (like Geordan Murphy and Jeremy Staunton and George Skivington did in the dying seconds of games over the season) then it’s unlikely to be a season-ending error.

Even when we had guaranteed qualification for the play-offs with several weeks of the season left, Cockerill refused to juggle his team. Even when we secured a home semi-final, he refused to juggle the team.

How are the next lot of Academy stars going to break through when they are not given any games under any circumstances?

How are we going to retain them when they see all the generations of Academy sides ahead of them being dumped, with one of the smallest ratios of successful graduates in the league?

And when they see teams like Quins, Sarries and Gloucester picking their Academy players AND winning trophies, then what draw is Leicester going to have?

[Bill W (2)]

Might be worth mentioning that when Cole was making his breakthrough under Heynecke Meyer, he was actually a bit of a liability in the scrum. For the first half of the 2008-9 season, he was really struggling and there were several matches when he came off the bench and the scrum started going backwards.

The problem was that whilst he was a very good age-grade player, he was still young. He hadn't fully developed into a top class player, and needed to spend time playing in the Premiership to get up to that level.

In time he did get up to that level - by the start of the following season he was a fine scrummager and went on to make his England debut that year.

What happened, you see, was that a 21-year old prop was not the finished article. He may have been a bit of a liability, in fact. But the coach at the time kept picking him and kept exposing him to top class rugby and - very quickly - he turned into an international-class player.

It may shock you to hear this, but very very very very few players come straight out of an Academy as top-class internationals. When they are young, they require games and they require development. And the end result is that the young player gets better and better.

This is EXACTLY what you are now suggestion should NOT happen.

And you are wrong.

And so is Cockerill.


Oddly, he still doesn't seem to have noticed that you don't have to come top of the League to win the competition. It is possible to lose games and still make the play-offs. And given that safety-net, the balance of risk involved in giving inexperienced young players games is that much better.

As it happens, I think a lot of our young fringe players are already as good or better than several of the regulars, and that picking the likes of Harrison, Twelvetrees, Everard, Bower, Armes, Forsyth, etc on the bench (and even letting them have more than 60 seconds of rugby) will not automatically result in defeat. But even if it did – even if they made schoolboy errors (like Geordan Murphy and Jeremy Staunton and George Skivington did in the dying seconds of games over the season) then it’s unlikely to be a season-ending error.

Even when we had guaranteed qualification for the play-offs with several weeks of the season left, Cockerill refused to juggle his team. Even when we secured a home semi-final, he refused to juggle the team.

How are the next lot of Academy stars going to break through when they are not given any games under any circumstances?

How are we going to retain them when they see all the generations of Academy sides ahead of them being dumped, with one of the smallest ratios of successful graduates in the league?

And when they see teams like Quins, Sarries and Gloucester picking their Academy players AND winning trophies, then what draw is Leicester going to have?

Very well said 4071. I agree completely.

[Cardiff Tig]

i never said that players come straight out the academy and become international players. what i said is that the players who obviously have the talent to become international have come through the academy and been developed. maybe the players let go have not actually shown that they are likely going to be worth investing in, and why should the risk be taken in players that are only going to be

name one player who has left tigers before establishing himself who has gone on to get international honours? i cant think of any!

[4071]

While there is clear evidence that success can come, fine. But if there are greater opportunities at other clubs that are succeeding.......

i wouldn't say there are greater opportunities at other premiership clubs though - most of the top teams in the league don't have more than 1 or 2 players that break through each season, similar to tigers.

You're wrong -.

Look at the likes of Sharples, May, Pasqualin, Lewis, Burns Thomas and Trinder at Gloucester - all played 10 or more games this season.

Look at Sarries, with Farrell, Short, Goode, George Cato and Saull who all played at least 20 games (plus the likes of Kruis, Wray and Saunders who got more games this season than most of our Academy players get in their Leicester careers).


Tiger have picked just 2 home-grown players on anything like a regular basis - the rest have had barely a sniff.

[4071]

i never said that players come straight out the academy and become international players. what i said is that the players who obviously have the talent to become international have come through the academy and been developed. maybe the players let go have not actually shown that they are likely going to be worth investing in, and why should the risk be taken in players that are only going to be

name one player who has left tigers before establishing himself who has gone on to get international honours? i cant think of any!

We'll see.

My contention is that this waste of the Academy system is a recent thing, so the players that have left (been kicked out) haven't had much of a chance to win caps. But when you see the number of Leicester age-grade internationals who seem to be wasted in comparison to their contemporaries, I suspect it's only a matter of time.

[sam16111986]

Even when we had guaranteed qualification for the play-offs with several weeks of the season left, Cockerill refused to juggle his team. Even when we secured a home semi-final, he refused to juggle the team.

Actually against both Gloucester and Newcastle the team was reshuffled so that first team players could take a break and fringe players likely to be involved in the knock out stages could start.

Look at Sarries, with Farrell, Short, Goode, George Cato and Saull who all played at least 20 games

Goode and Saull have been first team regulars for at least two seasons now and it's debatable they would have received the same opportunities otherwise, Cato rarely gets much more than a bench appearence (has also been released), George is third choice and not usually in the squad unless there is an injury and Short and Farrell were only given their opportunity due to injuries. How is that any different to Tigers? In fact we have more academy graduates in our first team than Sarries do. The only teams that readily use their academies more than us are Newcastle and LI because they have no cash and so little choice and Gloucester who have made a concious decision to do so in order to maintain a larger squad.