North Harbour should stop chasing Auckland's cast-offs and build
Watching us raid Auckland's reject bin every off-season while our own academy kids sit on the bench is the actual joke here 🤡 I'd happily eat a couple of bottom-table seasons at Albany if it means the next Suaalii-type comes through OUR system instead of warming Auckland's seat. Funny how the same blokes crying about development then bet on us making the semis 😏
14 posts
-
✓Two bottom-table seasons and our juniors train against nobodies. Where does the "next Suaalii" actually develop there, exactly?
-
Nah GloryDays you've got it backwards mate 😅 where do you think Auckland's guys developed? Playing weeks of ugly footy for sides that got pumped. Juniors develop by getting game time, even in a 40-point loss, better than rotting on our bench behind some bloke Auckland didn't want anyway 😤 Look at our own lot, how many of our favourite memories are academy boys who got thrown in the deep end when we were rubbish? Through thick and thin, that's what being a Harbour fan actually IS. I'd rather finish bottom two seasons knowing every minute went into OUR kids than celebrate a semi some Auckland cast-off dragged us to ah well, nowt to do 🙌 you just know the payoff's worth it
-
Supporter_23 has the core of it, and the tape agrees with him more than GloryDays thinks. Ugly minutes beat no minutes, any coach will tell you development happens under fatigue and pressure, and a 40-point loss still gives a young 10 real kicks under a real rush defence. Small sample though: one or two seasons of bottom-half footy proves nothing either way, so I'd want at least three years of academy minutes logged before we judge it 📊 The nuance I'd add is game time versus quality of environment. Auckland cast-offs arrive finished in their habits; our kids at least get coached inside our structures before anyone else stamps them. Two lean seasons is a price I'd pay, but only if the bench spots genuinely rotate through Albany juniors, if we sacrifice the table and still pick the Auckland retreads, we've copped the pain and skipped the payoff.
-
Back in the day we built everything from Onewa Rd up anyway, academy boys were the heart of it. Took the lean years gladly then. Old school? maybe 😉Watch as long as I have and you'll get it.
-
-
Easy to say from the couch when it's someone else's job being lost though 😅 I coach juniors up here and I'd love nothing more than a full academy side running out at Albany... but two bottom seasons means two years of kids leaving for Auckland or Northland when there's no winning culture to hold them. Development minutes are great until your best 19-year-old signs elsewhere cos we keep getting pumped by 40. Where's the line for you lot then, three lean years? Five? Cos I'll back them all day, just wanna know what the actual plan is 🔥You don't abandon your own.
-
i hear you StandsGuy88, coaching juniors gives you a better view than most of us couch pundits 😉 but seen worse than a lean season or two, back in my day at Onewa Area we copped floggings from Auckland boys and still turned out half the backbone of Harbour sides that actually lifted silverware. patience pays, always has.Been here longer than some have followed.
-
@UnderdogNightmare nah this bloke gets it 👏 copping floggings and still producing backbone players, that's the whole point surely?? our lot never make it easy but you don't build anything by renting Auckland's leftovers 💪 I coach juniors too and tbh the kids just want a chance, not a cast-off blocking their spot 🔥
-
Every rep those academy boys get in NPC football is worth more than any cast-off's one decent season, and the lads who came through when we copped floggings still turned out the core of sides that actually competed. Problem is two bottom seasons only works if the union actually commits. Sounds good but halfway through year one everyone gets twitchy and signs another Auckland fringe player. Convince me the patience exists and I'm on board, on condition that the pathway to real game time is written down somewhere.Numbers are honest, takes aren't.
-
There's a middle column missing from everyone's ledger here, and I think it's the one that actually decides this. I keep my tables every round, and the pattern across the NPC is that unions who "committed" to youth without a plan got two bottom seasons AND no academy dividend, the kids got capped at 40 minutes off the bench, learned losing habits, and left. The commitment RobbedAgainHator318 mentions has to be minutes, not sentiment: if a 19-year-old from our own patch starts 10 games, even in a flogging, that's development. If he gets 20 minutes when the cast-off's tired, we've been conned twice. So my honest position: I could be wrong, but I'd sign up for two lean years only if the union guarantees academy minutes in writing, so to speak — otherwise we cop the floggings AND keep the reject bin. Would I trade a semi-final for that? Ask me again the week after one, because my heart says Albany academy boys forever and my spreadsheet says finals pay the bills.Do the math before you argue.
-
FrontRowFan's middle column is the one I'd hedge on too, I could be wrong, but the academy dividend only shows up if those kids actually get game time rather than a bench seat behind a loan signing. Depends how you count "development" as well: appearances at NPC level are worth more than any winter in the development squad. The union committing has to mean selections, not statements.
-
😏 bench seat behind a loan signing. Heard that exact worry from someone inside the union, and they weren't smiling. word going round the plan changes next season, but the source won't hold 🤫Those who know, know.
-