The main thing that pisses me off is when we substitute an average local junior for an average non-local on similar money with similar playing attributes. It's like a game of musical chairs with no real advantage. I'm sure the coach sees something in the new player that he has recruited, but I feel that we often just switch players for no real reason. Sometimes I think we would get more out of trying to build a stable culture of players with a link to the place, rather than just chopping and changing the also rans.
The whole junior development thing hardly seems worth it these days though. If we lose all our players at once we will have a **** load of money to go and bribe players to the club. Even though you spend a **** load and it comes out of the cap, it's probably more cost effective than putting resources into a 15 year old for 5 years, only for him to piss off to the club that puts the biggest contract in front of him anyway.
At the moment we are recruiting older players who do not need to be taught the "basics" so we cut down on the intricacies of development coaching and probably save money. They also know exactly what is expected of an NRL player and are probably less likely to have attitude problems etc. Well, that's the advantage I see in the way we are doing things, anyway. But of course, retaining some promising juniors would be nice to spice things up and provide some genuine excitement and hope.