TOMCAT wrote:
Obviously with out detailed numbers for the costs, our opinions are based on gut feel and guess work. But from my perspective. Home grown tallent is surely more economical than the two major alternatives, buy in quality and pay a transfer fee as well as the wages OR don't buy in quality and watch income fall as the team ends up as also rans every season. Additionally if we produce more tallent than we can field, we potentially get additionl revenue from transfer fees.
Their is the further benefit from raising our own in that they are known quantities, should understand the prevailing culture and be able to "fit in" at the club.
The point I was trying to make is you can get plenty of quality players in the NRL - we should know we have plenty - without any transfer fee. How many youngsters have been through our academy and attracted a substantial transfer fee?
It is preferable from an interest point of view to see youngsters come through also from an aspirational point for the amateur game. Whether it is cost effective I am unsure especially if you look at the number of coaching/conditioning staff required to support it?
It looks good when you are producing a production line as in early 2000's but it clearly isn't delivering if the last 18 months is anything to go by
