Genuine questions here, what would be the preferred plan for bringing juniors through? The reason I ask is:
- If you put someone like Lomax in for round 1 and he doesn't fire in attack or defensively is found to be a liability and contributes to us losing the first game, how many more games do we persist with him? This applies to all youngsters. Do we risk losing 3 or 4 games at the start of the season just to find out if a player is capable of performing in the NRL? that puts us behind the 8 ball from the get go.
- If we are keen to buy quality players from elsewhere, where does the blooding youngsters come into it? My personal opinion is that you can't have both. Financially you might be able to, but having a viable plan to bring young players through creates an issue when you have a 1 or 2 quality players with experience standing in front of them in all positions. That creates issues and you risk losing those players.
- How many youngsters are you prepared to have in the team at once? There has to be a balance in both first grade and res grade. Too many young inexperienced players in the team creates a Newcastle situation and we risk languishing at the bottom of the table for a couple of years while we continue to bring them through
- When do you stop the 'blooding of youngsters'? Each year there is going to be a batch of new viable players coming through - as we are finding now. If you don't stop at some point you will be in a constant state of rebuild. At some point you have say we have a reasonable team - we need to let some of the up and comers go.
I think it's OK to say bring this player or that player through because they show promise, but for me it appears alot more complicated than that. i think you need a good balance and you need to manage their progression to ensure their confidence isn't broken etc. Also, the step up is bigger for some than others and it's about identifying that difference in players.