Young players - How are they?

[Kevin77]

Isn't it fantastic to have a whole squad of players that have such massive potential? For so many years it was a drip feed of one or maybe two young players of the required level. All of a sudden we could pick a homegrown starting XV 24 and under with genuine potential (and in many cases already top drawer). See below:

1. Dave Kilcoyne (23)
2. Mike Sherry (24)
3. Stephen Archer (24)/John Ryan
4. Dave Foley (24)
5. Ian Nagle (23)
6. Dave O'Callaghan (22)
7. Peter O'Mahoney (23)
8. Paddy Butler (21)
9. Connor Murray (23)
10. JJ Hanrahan (20)
11. Simon Zebo (22)
12. Danny Barnes (22)
13. Keith Earls (24)
14. Luke O'Dea (22)
15. Sean Scanlon (24)

Throw in Sean Douall (22) who was developed elsewhere along with Tommy O'Donnell who is 25, along with Felix Jones (25) and Ian Keatley (25) and the future is bright.

For years we've been an ageing team. Now we're the young guns.

Which off the list above do you think are the real deal? Who will make it all the way? How good can each of them be?

[East Terrace]

Also at 27 Billy Holland wouldn't be over the hill, superb season from him so far! Ivan Dineen 25 & Scott Deasy 24 may also have plenty to offer with more game-time.

[mr chips]

Jeez, is Earls still only 24?? (...) Yup, only turns 25 next month. That's mad Ted. Obviously he's one of the biggest standouts from that list, plus Conor Murray and Peter O'Mahoney. Of the less high-profile players on that list, I really like what I've seen from Dave O'Callaghan and David Kilcoyne. And of course, all aboard the JJ hype train!

[Sketchy]

Paddy Butler is going to be a standout player without doubt I would say. Not far off MOTM the other night. For a back to play like that at 21 is impressive for a forward is a different level altogether. And take a look at him in this photo from training yesterday... he is massive. Has a look of a young David Wallace in this photo:

[Evil Omer]

The timing has to be the biggest piece of luck (or only possibly) we've had in years. In theory you only really want the drip feed through from your academy. You don't want to spread yourselves thin trying to develop lots of players in lots of positions, to come through in big batches every couple of years, when you know most of them will end up moving on or dropping out. But right now we needed a big batch of players to come through as we've lost so many and so many more are in their final seasons.

[i_like_cake]

1. Dave Kilcoyne (23)
2. Mike Sherry (24)
3. Stephen Archer (24)/John Ryan
4. Dave Foley (24)
5. Ian Nagle (23)
6. Dave O'Callaghan (22)
7. Peter O'Mahoney (23)
8. Paddy Butler (21)
9. Connor Murray (23)
10. JJ Hanrahan (20)
11. Simon Zebo (22)
12. Danny Barnes (22)
13. Keith Earls (24)
14. Luke O'Dea (22)
15. Sean Scanlon (24)

Throw in Sean Douall (22) who was developed elsewhere along with Tommy O'Donnell who is 25, along with Felix Jones (25) and Ian Keatley (25) and the future is bright.

That is a sight for sore eyes... plenty of talent there... plenty.....

[flsghujslkuo]

Paddy Butler is going to be a standout player without doubt I would say. Not far off MOTM the other night. For a back to play like that at 21 is impressive for a forward is a different level altogether. And take a look at him in this photo from training yesterday... he is massive. Has a look of a young David Wallace in this photo:

A lot of people get caught up on upper body strength, and don't get me wrong - it is still very important, but I personally think that like most in the team, some time hitting the squat rack is required (keatly being the exception). Wallace was a freak of nature, but I think he had the right balance - the tree trunks for legs didn't hurt him much.

We need to be ready - the squirrels are coming: www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZM_P-JlOE

[overthehillprop]

I honestly believe that a lot of it is to do with exposure to quality and quantity of game time for these young/developing players. Few players broke into the Munster pack when we were winning HEC's because the starting players were nearly all on central contracts and therefore player welfare programs. Rested early in the season, Comical Eddie bound to pick the same players for Ireland, had to play in the Autumn Internationals so needed HEC and interpros to get match fitness. These guys were internationals and Lions and to break into that pack you needed to hit the ground running and not take time settle in or adapt. very few managed that. Most of those who did break in happened due to injury and they took their chance.

Now there is less influence by central contracts, less central contracts, more retirements (players stayed/were kept on too long as well) and injuries in a short period that have opened the door for players. Guys like Donncha Ryan got gametime and proved they were worth their place, guys like Billy Holland are finally showing what they are capable and the injuries in the back row are giving development time to players like POM, Butler, DOC2.0 that they wouldn't have got if they appeared on the scene 4 or 5 years ago.

Leinster went through the same thing 6 or 7 years ago (timing might be slightly off) A bunch of youngsters given gametime and time to develop (Fitz, Kearney, Heaslip etc). They are now facing some similar problems in terms of established international players - who replaces D'Arcy and BOD - both of whom are still first choice HEC players despite the likes of McFadden, Conway etc coming through.

[Sketchy]

A lot of people get caught up on upper body strength, and don't get me wrong - it is still very important, but I personally think that like most in the team, some time hitting the squat rack is required (keatly being the exception). Wallace was a freak of nature, but I think he had the right balance - the tree trunks for legs didn't hurt him much.

We need to be ready - the squirrels are coming: www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZM_P-JlOE

Agreed. I think Butler is definitely shaping up nicely though. He broke through a number of tackles against the Dragons, which would suggest he packs power in his legs. Tough as nails to boot. Imagine how big strong he'll be in 2 years time.

Regarding the squirrels... are we talking Red or Grey? Cos our Red squirrels have been taking a serious hammering from those English Grey ****s for quite some time now. A resurgence is welcomed and long over due.

[flsghujslkuo]

Agreed. I think Butler is definitely shaping up nicely though. He broke through a number of tackles against the Dragons, which would suggest he packs power in his legs. Tough as nails to boot. Imagine how big strong he'll be in 2 years time.

Regarding the squirrels... are we talking Red or Grey? Cos our Red squirrels have been taking a serious hammering from those English Grey ****s for quite some time now. A resurgence is welcomed and long over due.

I know Irish players don't have the huge muscular athletic genes (obvious exceptions to the rule) but for the great players we have, I feel we always lacked a bit of bulk and power. I must say have been really impressed by this years preseason - the entrie team looks to have bulked up whilst maintaining the cardio (I can't wait to see POM in action now he has a few more Kilos) - but it makes me think, what the hell was going on in the previous preseasons?? Was it just fitness?

[joeriddick]

I know Irish players don't have the huge muscular athletic genes (obvious exceptions to the rule) but for the great players we have, I feel we always lacked a bit of bulk and power.

So Irish players don't have muscular genes except for the Irish players that do? Interesting. So the exceptions (i.e comparable with other top level Test players) in the power/muscular stakes would be the likes of Ferris, O'Brien, Wallace, Quinlan, Leamy, Heaslip, Healy, BOD, DOC, POC, Buckley, Flannery (in his prime), D. Ryan, Hayes etc etc etc? That's a lot of exceptions.

I've heard this idea bandied about with little to no evidence for it. I think the biggest problem with Irish players (and in particular Munster players) physicality issues were based around where their conditioning was focused on - speed, endurance. I agree with you that it's great to see the young lads gearing more towards power.

[Dudz]

Agreed. I think Butler is definitely shaping up nicely though. He broke through a number of tackles against the Dragons, which would suggest he packs power in his legs. Tough as nails to boot. Imagine how big strong he'll be in 2 years time.

Regarding the squirrels... are we talking Red or Grey? Cos our Red squirrels have been taking a serious hammering from those English Grey ****s for quite some time now. A resurgence is welcomed and long over due.

Think you'll find those Greys' are yanks not English....Shissh never thought I'd be defending the English but there you go..

[Sketchy]

So Irish players don't have muscular genes except for the Irish players that do? Interesting. So the exceptions (i.e comparable with other top level Test players) in the power/muscular stakes would be the likes of Ferris, O'Brien, Wallace, Quinlan, Leamy, Heaslip, Healy, BOD, DOC, POC, Buckley, Flannery (in his prime), D. Ryan, Hayes etc etc etc? That's a lot of exceptions.

I've heard this idea bandied about with little to no evidence for it. I think the biggest problem with Irish players (and in particular Munster players) physicality issues were based around where their conditioning was focused on - speed, endurance. I agree with you that it's great to see the young lads gearing more towards power.

There seems to be less emphasis on bulk and strength in the Irish underage structures. I'm only basing this on looking at an Irish u20s side versus for example an English u20s side. Their players invariably have bigger muscle mass than our Irish counterparts at a younger age. Is it a culture thing or what? We certainly catch up in our early 20s.

[munstermum]

Do not rush them too much,it's not a great idea to build a large tree house on a small tree,Celtic genes here,we have to give their physique time to develop naturally!It's great that the lads are finally getting game time,their skill levels in most positions should keep them safe,let their bulk should develop with their bone structure,not ahead of it.Look at the Bull as a perfect example!

[Sketchy]

Think you'll find those Greys' are yanks not English....Shissh never thought I'd be defending the English but there you go..

http://www.noticenature.ie/Grey_Squirrel.html

They were from North America alright, but they had English accents by the time they reached these shores!!!

[ormond lad]

There seems to be less emphasis on bulk and strength in the Irish underage structures. I'm only basing this on looking at an Irish u20s side versus for example an English u20s side. Their players invariably have bigger muscle mass than our Irish counterparts at a younger age. Is it a culture thing or what? We certainly catch up in our early 20s.

I wouldnt agree with that. There was a very big emphasis on bulk and strength,esp bulk, in irish underage structures up until recently. IMO its slightly different now with much more emphasis on skill development as the bulk can come later
Comparing 20s is difficult and we generally are smaller as our players in most cases are not in professional academies as long as players from other countries at 19/20 years of age. Ive argued this on the other side that we need to be getting kids in earlier but as long as kids skill levels are very high the bulking up etc can come in the early 20s

You can also throw Philly Donnellan into the 2nd row

[joeriddick]

There seems to be less emphasis on bulk and strength in the Irish underage structures. I'm only basing this on looking at an Irish u20s side versus for example an English u20s side. Their players invariably have bigger muscle mass than our Irish counterparts at a younger age. Is it a culture thing or what? We certainly catch up in our early 20s.

As Ormond Lad says, I'd imagine that this is only due to the time truly professional S&C training starts with the youngsters as opposed to anything at all to do with some supposed Celtic genetic inferiority.

[Sketchy]

As Ormond Lad says, I'd imagine that this is only due to the time truly professional S&C training starts with the youngsters as opposed to anything at all to do with some supposed Celtic genetic inferiority.

Ya, i'm certainly not suggesting it is our Celtic inferiority.

[joeriddick]

Ya, i'm certainly not suggesting it is our Celtic inferiority.

I know you're not. I'm just referring to the idea that Celtic genes somehow produce less muscular athletes than other genotypes as suggested farther up the thread.

[HurlerOnDeDitch]

Isn't it fantastic to have a whole squad of players that have such massive potential? For so many years it was a drip feed of one or maybe two young players of the required level. All of a sudden we could pick a homegrown starting XV 24 and under with genuine potential (and in many cases already top drawer). See below:

1. Dave Kilcoyne (23)
2. Mike Sherry (24)
3. Stephen Archer (24)/John Ryan
4. Dave Foley (24)
5. Ian Nagle (23)
6. Dave O'Callaghan (22)
7. Peter O'Mahoney (23)
8. Paddy Butler (21)
9. Connor Murray (23)
10. JJ Hanrahan (20)
11. Simon Zebo (22)
12. Danny Barnes (22)
13. Keith Earls (24)
14. Luke O'Dea (22)
15. Sean Scanlon (24)

Throw in Sean Douall (22) who was developed elsewhere along with Tommy O'Donnell who is 25, along with Felix Jones (25) and Ian Keatley (25) and the future is bright.

For years we've been an ageing team. Now we're the young guns.

Which off the list above do you think are the real deal? Who will make it all the way? How good can each of them be?

Kilcoyne, Archer, O'Callaghan, Butler and Hanrahan all look like they have what it takes if they continue to improve.

O'Mahoney and Murray are already established in the Intetrnational squad and Zebo looks a dead cert to accumulate a fair few caps if he keeps his head screwed on and works hard.


For me, Sherry looks like a massive player for a guy that young. I think he will become one of ther first names on the Ireland teamsheet in a couple of years.


O'Dea reminds me of Dowling a bit. I think he could be a star for Munster but a guy his size need to be greased lightening
to make it at the top table and I am not sure he has that blistering pace.

Quite like the look of that Earls kid too!

[Liam2me]

There seems to be less emphasis on bulk and strength in the Irish underage structures. I'm only basing this on looking at an Irish u20s side versus for example an English u20s side. Their players invariably have bigger muscle mass than our Irish counterparts at a younger age. Is it a culture thing or what? We certainly catch up in our early 20s.

Different philosophies. The English have the idea that they can pick great athletes at a young age and teach them to be good footballers, the IRFU pick good footballers knowing that putting in bulk will come with age, which us why the English usually do quite well at underage level but don't translate that into the senior game.

[mr chips]

From what I've seen of O'Dea to date, pace is one thing he doesn't lack.

[joeriddick]

From what I've seen of O'Dea to date, pace is one thing he doesn't lack.

I agree.

This thing about whether a winger does or doesn't have "out and out gas" is a bit of a subjective knock i.e. George Crook on Bowe a few years back. O'Dea is fast, and fast enough to be a dangerous weapon for Munster and Ireland down the road.

[flsghujslkuo]

I know you're not. I'm just referring to the idea that Celtic genes somehow produce less muscular athletes than other genotypes as suggested farther up the thread.

Poppycock. Genes are responsible for performance. Look at the Kenyan marathon runners, the Jamaican sprinters, look at the ethnicity of most of the professional American football players or basketball players. Genes matter.

Celtic people are, generally, genetic predisposed to be a certain build which is different to other nations. Be it height weight or whatever. One can add to that build for sure. But you will reach a 'critical mass' i.e. if you go over one's optimal muscle then other things suffer (case in point POC, when he trimmed down he upped his game). People from other countries poses genes which allow their critical mass to be higher than the celts.

[joeriddick]

Poppycock. Genes are responsible for performance. Look at the Kenyan marathon runners, the Jamaican sprinters, look at the ethnicity of most of the professional American football players or basketball players. Genes matter.

Celtic people are, generally, genetic predisposed to be a certain build which is different to other nations. Be it height weight or whatever. One can add to that build for sure. But you will reach a 'critical mass' i.e. if you go over one's optimal muscle then other things suffer (case in point POC, when he trimmed down he upped his game). People from other countries poses genes which allow their critical mass to be higher than the celts.

And this makes them inferior in strength and conditioning in what way?

I'm genuinely interested in this - if you have any sources for your opinion on the Celtic physique then I'd love to see it.

[Cowboy]

Giant oversized heads is one definite trait of yer normal Paddy. We're all stumbling around with skulls as big as silverbacks.

[flsghujslkuo]

And this makes them inferior in strength and conditioning in what way?

I'm genuinely interested in this - if you have any sources for your opinion on the Celtic physique then I'd love to see it.

This is like the question, can I prove God doesn't exist. I can't, but that doesn't God is real or does it?

Anyway, I'll give it a go. I assume it is safe to say we don't need to debate that people from different nations have different genes, and certain genes can lead to increases in performance relative to others.

Whilst I have not specifically performed any study to verify my opinion on the Celtic physique, I have however, by a preponderance of many factors including, for example, Ireland's record in sports requiring sheer power and/or conditioning ( heavy weight boxing, distance running, sprinting weightlifting etc.), come to my opinion. Let's dig a little deeper in to what factors one might consider: let's use Jamaica as an example to demonstrate the Celts inferior genes in terms of speed and explosive power, I am too lazy to search for number of gold medals that Jamaica, with a population less than Ireland, has won at the Olympics, but I think it is safe to say a lot less. So now, let's ask ourselves why is Jamaica different to Ireland? Now isn't it possible that this could apply to strength and stamina in rugby?

[Sketchy]

This is like the question, can I prove God doesn't exist. I can't, but that doesn't God is real or does it?

Anyway, I'll give it a go. I assume it is safe to say we don't need to debate that people from different nations have different genes, and certain genes can lead to increases in performance relative to others.

Whilst I have not specifically performed any study to verify my opinion on the Celtic physique, I have however, by a preponderance of many factors including, for example, Ireland's record in sports requiring sheer power and/or conditioning ( heavy weight boxing, distance running, sprinting weightlifting etc.), come to my opinion. Let's dig a little deeper in to what factors one might consider: let's use Jamaica as an example to demonstrate the Celts inferior genes in terms of speed and explosive power, I am too lazy to search for number of gold medals that Jamaica, with a population less than Ireland, has won at the Olympics, but I think it is safe to say a lot less. So now, let's ask ourselves why is Jamaica different to Ireland? Now isn't it possible that this could apply to strength and stamina in rugby?

I think It's fair to assume JR meant Caucasians. Why use Jamaicans as an example when you have Maoris that actually play the sport.

[munstershane]

Giant oversized heads is one definite trait of yer normal Paddy. We're all stumbling around with skulls as big as silverbacks.

Thats because of our massive brains!

[gavindillon]

It is actually a known fact that Celts are predisposed to smaller frames than Angles, Saxons, Franks, Visi/Ostro-Goths and indeed of course Islander/Maoris. Most good books on Celtic archaeology will back this up. What the Celts did posess was a superior nimble-ness and speed. Celtic literature has numerous descriptions of warriors performing feats of gymnastic athleticism, rather than strength. If i wanted, I'd say this is why Ireland and Wales produced some fairly nifty wingers and centres down through the years.

However, to claim Celtic genes are responsible for anything would ignore the fact that we have had numerous other races settle here. Vikings, Norman (themselves originally Viking), Spanish and English (a mix of anglo-saxon and norman). Ireland and Wales may be predominantly Celtic, but over the last 1200 years they've turned into such a mixing pot genetically that youd need a full-on scientific DNA test.

Ireland and Wales are Celtic nations culturally, not genetically. 15 rugby players on a pitch in varying shapes and sizes reflects our mixed genetic history and the history of settlers/invaders to the island. Keith Earls is actually likely to have more Celtic DNA than POC, but would anyone suggest to either that one was less of Limerick, Munster and Ireland than the other?