If their 18s are decent why are they playing 18s and not at least Res Grade? I saw NL v Southy 18s. Most of the NL team are last year's 16s and their 2021 18s have gone to Res.Quote:
Originally Posted by jessepinkman
I think you're mixing your grades up. New Lambton 18s beat Toronto 18s 12-0 in 2021 - their 16s were the side that did well after they picked up the Lakes NPL kids that got cut (not their own players).
However, I don't think 16s results really have any relevance. It's a 2 age group jump. Undertakers' claims make sense for 2023..but not for 2022. I know both Belswans and New Lambton 18s had a LOT of bottom age kids last year who would still be eligible for 18s this year...means Toronto's 18s are a year below them...obviously, a good club is promoting kids to Reserve grade even if they are still age-eligible for 18s (better for their development - that's a whole 'nother debate as some clubs don't do this, they stack 18s instead) so some might not be there, but you would assume both Belswans and NL would be very strong in 18s again considering their teams last year were mostly 16-year-olds turning 17 who would be returning.
The biggest problem with stags 18s last year was what could be heard from the stands as a spectator. No kid wants to be spoken to that way, especially when it's not making any sense from a football point of view either. I mean some kids respond well to coaching sprays... but usually only when they have some sort of football weight/knowledge behind them. Embarrassing. The new good players are mostly those that were cut from Lakes after that debacle, so it's not as if development has been fixed. Hopefully they're focusing on knowledgable coaches who foster player development for this crop they've been handed. If not, it'l just be the same problem again.
