National Under 20s - your opinion?

[girvie]

· Premier League is stronger than a National Under-20s competition would be and this means that there is less of a leap between NRL and Premier League.
I would dispute that. Premier League is full of "parked" players who are seeing out the end of their careers. It's a wierd comp because it has these players yet at the same time is seen as a stepping stone for younger guys. It's in limbo.

For Premier League clubs select their 17 best players outside of the NRL, no matter what there age is.

How would National Under-20s be stronger if there are some better players who are unable to be selected because they are too old?

Look at the players who are older than 20 and have made their NRL debut this year. Players like Paul Aiton, Danny Wicks, Michael Gordon, Zeb Taia, Michael Crockett, Isaac De Gois, Adam Cuthbertson, Jeremy Smith, Billy Ngawini, Ben Jones, George Ndaira, Daryl Millars, Lee Te Maari, Germaine Paulson, Jon Green, Adrian Purtell, Josh Cordoba, Ben Roberts, Jarrod Saffy, Chris Bailey, Matthew Bell, Jarrod Hickey, Toshio Laiseni, Craig Trindall, Nick Kouparitsas, Luke Harlen, Brett Kelly, Mailangi Styles, Marcus Perenara, Steve Merefith, Lafi Manua, Josh Lewis and Taniela Tuiaki.

Most of these players were outside their clubs Top-25 players but were still able to make their debut after impressing the NRL coach through their performance in Premier League. A lot of these players would have been in the third tier competition had the National Under-20s competition (even with spots for 8 overage players) been in place this season.

Which are the players seeing out the end of their careers? Perhaps you could argue that for some Qld Cup clubs, but Premier League is full of young players. I think the average age in Premier League would be around 22 or 23.

· By playing in Premier League young players get the opportunity to play with experienced open age players that set an example and that they can learn from. This helps the young players to develop.
Untrue. Clubs will be allowed to us a nominal representation of over 20 year old year old players. I am led to believe this number will be 8. That obviously will be the balance of each club's top 25. These will be the experienced open age players you say will be missing.

If clubs are allowed to play 8 overage players then I don’t see what the difference is to Premier League now. Why don’t they just leave it the way it is and let clubs choose how many players over 20 they want in their side. Be it 8, or any other number.

· Clubs have the option of promoting a teenage player to Premier League if they are good enough. With a National Under-20s competition that option would be taken away.
The progression will become more logical with the new comp. U/16 (Matties), U/18 (Ball) into the new National U/20s. It provides a better pathway for elite juniors without them having to get past a bunch of deadwood PL players that will never see the light of the NRL again. They get the advantage of playing with Top 25 players and are less likely to leave their "home" clubs looking for greener pastures as they won't be hindered by as many retirement home footballers.

I don’t think it provides a better pathway. There are many young players who are Under-20 and have been able to make it to the NRL. Players such as Jarryd Hayne, Luke Douglas, Shannon McDonnell, Stuart Flanagan, Jarrod Mullen, Mickey Paea, Todd Carney, Brett Morris, Charlie Leaeno, Setaimata Sa and Beau Champion. They have had no trouble progressing with the system the way it is. I don’t think it needs to change.

I don’t see what “retirement home footballers” you are talking about.

· There will be a bigger step up between the third tier competition and NRL for those older players who are contracted to NRL clubs.
Realistically though these older players are the deadwood I am talking about. They will be tucked away in JB Cup and used as fill ins for the U/20 comp as injuries occur. Let's face it, a large percentage of current PL players have peaked and are on the decline with little liklihood of becoming regular NRL players anyway. The cream will rise to the top with the new National comp. 8 elite top 25 players and the rest elite juniors.

· There are plenty of older players who haven’t played NRL yet who would lose the opportunity to play in the second tier and therefore they would have a lower chance of stepping up to NRL.
Define older. If players haven't "made it" by the time they are 24-25 they are not going to in most cases. If you are 28 and playing in PL waiting for an improbable regular NRL spot you are dreaming. It's like running second in a 2 man race. You're also last, and going nowhere.

By older I mean over 20. There are plenty of 21 and 22 year olds around who should not be discarded.

Players who are in their early 20s are hardly deadwood.

Most Premier League players haven’t peaked. They are mainly on their way up. But now they will not be able to keep developing at the level below NRL. They will be pushed lower.

· Foundation clubs North Sydney, Newtown, Balmain and Western Suburbs will be demoted from Premier League to a metropolitan cup. In Queensland the traditional clubs will be demoted to the third tier.
Well none of them are supplying an NRL team are they. The harsh reality (cons flame proof suit) is that they are no longer needed. The better players will be looked after because all those clubs are feeders and the senior clubs still have to put those excess Top Squad players somewhere.

They are still important clubs in rugby league. There is more to league than NRL, and the current system allows these clubs to be involved in the second tier in NSW and Qld.

There are many fans, including me, who follow their club in Premier League or Queensland Cup. And I don’t think that these clubs should be pushed to a lower level just because they are not an NRL club.

· A National Under-20s competition would increase costs for clubs.
No it will decrease the costs. One of the aims of the comp is to foster each areas juniors and have them stay put. Therefore salary cap exempt until included in the top 25. The comp may well mean no more need for the second tier cap (save $300,000 - that'll be the travel). Juniors cost less to pay and the reality is that clubs are paying millions in salaries to run PL teams. Some will say this is not so but it is. Clubs can pay those outside the top 25 whatever they want. It's only problematic if they appear in the NRL when their payments then have to go in the main cap. An example is at Cronulla 2 PL forwards were on $200k each. That's the second tier cap blown on 2 players. Result - they rarely saw first grade. 1 game in 1 year for one of them and 3 games in 2 years for the other. If there are no injuries (theoretically) then 8 of your PL side are being paid from the main cap. That means initially at least 9 have to be paid contract money. Juniors will command less money. This will be offset by travel of course but this will be the only "real" cost that is extra. Gear, insurance etc would of been paid for anyway.

Costs will increase because the players in the National Under-20s competition would be on higher contracts. Plus the cost of travel and accommodation.

It will increase costs because clubs will be desperate to have the best Under-20s players in their teams, so they will spend more purchasing the best players. There will be bidding wars for players who are Under-20 which will mean that clubs will be spending more.

It will make it worse for local juniors. Currently they get a chance to play 2 years of Jersey Flegg before they need to step up to Premier League. If the National Under-20s competition comes in then these players will need to play in that, and if they are not up to standard then their club will look to country areas, Qld, NZ for better players or they will sign players from other clubs.

Those players at Cronulla who are on $200k would not be part of the second tier cap they would be in the Top-25.

· The young players would be on the road more often making it more difficult to complete study, work or apprenticeships.
They'll be professional footballers. They can study part time. There is an advantage to it in that it will mean their time is taken up in work (footy) and study leaving less time for the shenanigans players are increasingly getting up to. School age kids will likely go into Sports highs which understand the demands and uni age players will be working around uni like the rest of the population has to. No big deal.

I don’t think that they should be professional footballers at this age if they can't continue to be professional footballers as a career. Many players in this competition will not be contracted as professional footballers when the next season when they are over 20 years old. Only a small number of players will be able to continue as professional players and there will be many players from this competition who will be left to try and get a contract with a Jim Beam Cup or A-Grade club or retirement. And then they will be left with little education or work experience outside of league.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Agree with everything Girvie says.
An under 20s side with up to 8 older players is pretty much what Premier League and Qld Cup is, or at least could be in a few years. The problem with reducing the number of open age players is that there will be a heap of good players thrown on the scrapheap at age 21 who could have played NRL, forwards especially as they often mature later. The more of these players that can be kept in the NRL structure the more will reach their potential.
There's already a bottleneck when it comes to players graduating from age group footy to senior footy. You can have a squad of 20-odd under 20s and a further 20-odd SG Ball players but once they reach 21 how many are going to keep a contract?
Just to add a few names to Girvie's list: what about the players from previous years that haven't played first grade until their mid 20s. Guys like Craig Smith and Paul Rauhihi, they were both Test players and Adam Mogg was a revelation for Queensland. Then there's Charlie Tonga, George Carmont, David Seage, the list goes on and on. It's hard enough for good players to crack an NRL contract if their not in the NRL structure at age 20 or 21. The U20s comp would make it even harder. That might be good news for lower tier competitions, assuming those players keep playing, but it means a lot of players won't reach their potential.
As far as the impact on clubs goes, you only have to look at the Qld Cup to see that feeder clubs aren't always stronger than non-feeder clubs. Redcliffe, Easts, Tweed and Burleigh have been among the best clubs in the Q Cup in recent years, right up there with Toowoomba, Norths and North Qld - the NRL feeder sides. How can you tell them that they are now going to be third tier clubs when they are stronger or as strong as the feeder clubs, especially when the feeder clubs will now become under 20 sides (which will weaken them)?

 

[Frenzy.]

I'll get back to you Girv. Test match about to start.

Good reply BTW.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

Agree with everything Girvie says.
An under 20s side with up to 8 older players is pretty much what Premier League and Qld Cup is, or at least could be in a few years. The problem with reducing the number of open age players is that there will be a heap of good players thrown on the scrapheap at age 21 who could have played NRL, forwards especially as they often mature later. The more of these players that can be kept in the NRL structure the more will reach their potential.
There's already a bottleneck when it comes to players graduating from age group footy to senior footy. You can have a squad of 20-odd under 20s and a further 20-odd SG Ball players but once they reach 21 how many are going to keep a contract?
Just to add a few names to Girvie's list: what about the players from previous years that haven't played first grade until their mid 20s. Guys like Craig Smith and Paul Rauhihi, they were both Test players and Adam Mogg was a revelation for Queensland. Then there's Charlie Tonga, George Carmont, David Seage, the list goes on and on. It's hard enough for good players to crack an NRL contract if their not in the NRL structure at age 20 or 21. The U20s comp would make it even harder. That might be good news for lower tier competitions, assuming those players keep playing, but it means a lot of players won't reach their potential.
As far as the impact on clubs goes, you only have to look at the Qld Cup to see that feeder clubs aren't always stronger than non-feeder clubs. Redcliffe, Easts, Tweed and Burleigh have been among the best clubs in the Q Cup in recent years, right up there with Toowoomba, Norths and North Qld - the NRL feeder sides. How can you tell them that they are now going to be third tier clubs when they are stronger or as strong as the feeder clubs, especially when the feeder clubs will now become under 20 sides (which will weaken them)?

I think I've missed something but how will the NRL U20's affect the QLD cup teams that aren't feeder clubs? From what I understand the U20 comp will just be NRL lite, seperate to the QLD cup.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

I think I've missed something but how will the NRL U20's affect the QLD cup teams that aren't feeder clubs? From what I understand the U20 comp will just be NRL lite, seperate to the QLD cup.

If the clubs that have feeder clubs in the Q Cup field sides in the under 20s comp they will (probably) have no use for the Q Cup. If Brisbane pull out of Toowoomba, Toowoomba will not be able to compete, if Melbourne pull out of Norths, Norths are dead in the water, if North Qld doesn't need the Young Guns they will disappear and if the Titans don't need Burleigh, Tweed and Ipswich those clubs will also miss out on money and players. Basically it has the potential to kill the Q Cup as it currently is.
If the Q Cup is then considered a 3rd tier competition it also can't be good for sponsorship and TV deals etc.
This under 20s bullsh*t is clearly coming from the NSWRL clubs who don't know rugby league exists outside Sydney and probably don't give a sh*t what happens to the game outside their comp. It's all about saving money so they can squander even more making players (and their managers), coaches and administrators even more rich. Expect none of those savings to go into grassroots development.