What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Ban teenages from NRL: Elliott

Should Teenagers Be Banned From Playing First Grade?

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 18.2%
  • No

    Votes: 58 75.3%
  • Don't Know It Depends

    Votes: 5 6.5%

  • Total voters
    77

IanG

Coach
Messages
17,807
AAP said:
Penrith coach and self-confessed hypocrite Matt Elliott says the NRL should go the whole hog with its new national under-20s competition and ban teenagers from first-grade football.

The Panthers voiced major concerns over the new competition - in which all 16 NRL franchises will field a youth team for the full 26 rounds - even as they became the first club to announce a coach and sponsor for their under-20s side.

"Earlier in the season I was not a supporter of the 20s competition as it's been proposed," Elliott told AAP as the Panthers announced Premier League coach Steve Georgalis as their National Youth 20s mentor.

"I think that the developmental process that has been in place in our game for a while is the one thing in our sport that has consistently worked, and we're tampering with it.

"You either embrace it or you don't so our decision is to embrace it.

"What I'm saying is, if you're going to embrace it, let's go the whole way and you can't play first grade until your 21st year.

"I certainly can be accused of not practising what I preach because I've got a lot of young guys in our team."

The National Youth 20s competition, to also be known as the Toyota Cup, will provide the curtain-raisers to NRL games, with the NSW-based Premier League moving back to suburban grounds.

But despite Penrith being first off the blocks and turning on a function for the announcement, general manager Michael Leary sounded far from convinced the new competition was a winner.

"It's going to be a wait-and-see product," Leary told AAP.

"There's a lot of things will be answered in 2008 in so far as its success (is concerned).

"I think for youth to be given opportunity in front of good crowds will be a great asset to the game but, as to how far they're going to go from there, I think the jury's out."

North Queensland also announced a coach for their side in NRL assistant Grant Bell.

But the announcements come amidst concerns that teenage players like St George Illawarra's Chase Stanley, Wests Tigers' Chris Lawrence and Melbourne's Israel Folau could fall victim to the NRL's alarming injury rate in the long term.

Elliott raised the issue in his `Big League' column this week and premiership-winning coach and commentator Phil Gould has consistently voiced his concerns.

National Youth 20s tournament boss Michael Buettner said the changes reflected the trend towards youth, adding young players would be educated by the NRL to help them cope with the mental pressures of the jump in profile.

"I guess it's the old theory, if you're good enough you're old enough," Buettner told AAP.

"I don't think it's perceived being such a big issue.

"The programs they're in now as 15, 16-year-olds are way ahead of where they were 15, 20 years ago.

"So physically these guys are coming into the NRL better than they've ever been and, if they've got the skill to go with it, that's a huge advantage and I think we're going to see more of that in years to come.

"This (competition) might actually slow down the process to an extent that there is a (strong) competition there ... where we can hold those players back slightly.

"I can see benefits both ways."
*SOURCE URL: http://news.leaguehq.com.au/ban-teenagers-from-nrl-says-elliott/20075426-pxb.html

Your thoughts
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
57,484
Riiight.

Because banning teenage prodigies from the NRL won't do any damage to the game. It's not like they can go play in the Super 14 or ESL is it?

Here I am thinking the idea was to STOP the player drain. This idea will just see young talent getting sucked away with the established players...
 

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
151,734
the only thing they got right was the self confessed hypocrite bit
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
57,484
I know they've got him on the Big League staff for 'controversy,' but surely he can put more thought into it?

I'd sooner have nospam49 with column inches than Matt Elliot. At least his crap is interesting and sometimes thought provoking.
 

edabomb

First Grade
Messages
7,159
Should we also ban great checkout workers from performing their job until they're >19 too?
 

The Colonel

Immortal
Messages
41,810
They'd still be playing in a televised National competition. To a point I agree with Elliott - some of these kids do risk long term problems from injuries as many are still growing. However the old adage is if you're good enough you are old enough.
 

fourplay

Juniors
Messages
2,234
Actually... if teenagers are banned from the NRL, the under 20's competition could be massive... people would be tuning in just to watch the up and coming superstars.

College football in U.S sells out stadiums.. their grand final gets like 100k lol
 

aqua_duck

Coach
Messages
18,437
I think blokes shouldn't play 1st grade until they're 18, but keeping them in lower grades till 20 is abit ridiculous. Isn't this the same bloke who signed a 16 year old for 100k?
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
57,484
fourplay said:
Actually... if teenagers are banned from the NRL, the under 20's competition could be massive... people would be tuning in just to watch the up and coming superstars.

College football in U.S sells out stadiums.. their grand final gets like 100k lol

The NFL and NCAA have a Gentlemens agreement almost as old as the NFL itself. the NRL doesn't have a particularly strong working agreement with the ARU.
 

Danish

Referee
Messages
31,972
In theory, restricting eligability to the NRL to those over 20 is not a bad idea.


Think of the young talent that has entered the comp in the last few years...

SBW: Shoulders and knees of glass
Marshall: Massive shoulder problems
Pearce: Disc problems
Mullen: Knees
Inglis: Ankles

Very few manage to go more than 12-24 months before picking up a very serious injury.

Imagine how good the teen "prodigies" would be right now given an extra couple years to mature and strengthen their bodies prior to entering the big time.

Also, I don't know about the rest of you, but I would be knocking off work early to see the under 20s game before the main event tonight at the SFS to see Inglis and Falau running around.

The only problem is, in practise these players would just go elsewhere to get their money. So realistically it can never be, which makes it a pretty pointless argument to raise.
 

Spike

First Grade
Messages
7,115
Elliott's opinion on anything is about as valuable as his coaching ability.
 

aqua_duck

Coach
Messages
18,437
fourplay said:
Actually... if teenagers are banned from the NRL, the under 20's competition could be massive... people would be tuning in just to watch the up and coming superstars.

College football in U.S sells out stadiums.. their grand final gets like 100k lol
college sports in the US is a completely different kettle of fish. There's alot more backing, alot bigger supporter bases, bigger population, and alot of coverage driven by the draft.
While the crowds for the rose bowl are huge you have to look at why. 92,000 people attended the rose bowl last year between USC and Michigan. However USC has about 15,000 staff and 35,000 students not to mention almost 200,000 alumni, Michigan has 40,000 students, not to mention NFL fans who want to see a player their team might potentially draft. The National 20's comp will never be that big, even if the cream of the crop are kept in it, all you might get are some lob-sided scorelines
 

PARRA_FAN

Coach
Messages
17,296
no, dont ban teenagers from the NRL.

If they think theyre good enough, let em play, regardless if theyre 17, 18 or 19.

If they play bad, then they can still play in the Under 20's which I think will be successful.
 

donkey|rope

Juniors
Messages
494
I donno, it’s a good idea in theory but you can’t just say okay: no under 20’s. That’s anti-competitive, there should be incentives for players under 20 to peruse the under 20 competition.

I’ve sort thought about this a fair bit, and this is by no means perfect but here what I think needs to happen. Its probably too late with the under-20 competition structured the way it is, but here’s my two cents.

The under 20 (u20) competition must not be a second/third tier competition for NRL clubs. They need to be independent franchises. This means it could potentially be a huge cash cow the NRL in terms of TV rights, merchandise etc. These u20 clubs should each align each align themselves with a combination of schools, tafes, apprenticeship programs, universities and businesses in their area. They would also receive a grant through the NRL/ARL. The view should be to take junior development grants out of the hands of the NRL clubs and develop a new model, either an independent body to handle it, or delegate it to the u20 clubs.

That sort of leads me on to the next point; the players in the competition should not be signed with NRL clubs. However, they should have the freedom of leaving the u20 and perusing a contract with an NRL club at any time. The idea is not to restrict players and their options, rather to provide them incentives to stay in u20. These are just a couple of incentives I came up with, but I think there is a lot of scope for a bunch of different ideas:
- If a player completes a 3 year stay (this is assuming that most players will be coming in at 17) they are guaranteed a 2 year deal when they sign with an NRL club and a wage that is at least 10-20% above the NRL minimum wage. The NRL provide salary cap relief the clubs who sign players who come out of the u20 by paying the additional 10-20%.
- A draft is implemented. The best 16 players from the u20 have the option of entering a draft. The draft is similar to the NBA draft system, where the clubs at the bottom of the NRL competition have the best chance of picking up the top draft picks through a lottery. Players who enter the lottery are guaranteed a 4 year deal with a salary of a $100,000 (clubs can renegotiate the contract upwards at anytime). NRL subsidize these players’ salaries; club only has to pay the minimum wage and the NRL adds on the rest. This would also mean the best Rugby League prospects in the country couldn’t be poached by Union or the ESL for at least 4 years.
- Every year a player competes in the u20; they get a certain amount of money put into a retirement trust fund..
- A player who leaves the u20 before that 3 year period, is effectively a free agent, and receives none of the above guaranteed benefits, except for the retirement fund.
 

mxlegend99

Referee
Messages
23,139
You guys are taking this out of context. Elliott has no problem with teenagers in the NRL under the current system. With the new one... he is making a valid point.

With the new competition, players Over 20 don't have Premier League to go back to. So every teenager can play NRL or under 20's. But every 21 year is either first grade material, or facing a massive drop to play for a feeder club.

He believes that with the changes that the Under 20's comp will bring... they should change the rules of first grade. Panthers have 10 people competing for our backline next season (Wesser, Gordon, Jennings, Daniela, Rooney, Lewis, Youngquest, Blair, Tighe, Sammut), with only 5 jerseys available. Say the guy who misses out is over 20... what happens to him then?
 

Latest posts

Top