as the bubble bust ? or is it a temporary glitch?

Bust. Move aside,here come the wires!

It's good for the game! at one time years back it was Widnes and it got boring, then Wigan and then St Helens and in some ways Leeds.

Warrington have done well and they deserve the success yesterday again, perhaps the play offs will bring a new name to the Trophy at Old Trafford it can only do the game good!

I don't think leeds bubble has burst, they are still good enough to win the grand final and beat anyone, yesterday they was light in the pack with peacock, ali and burgess out.

With a fully fit squad they are as good as any team in super league.

This year has seen both wigan and wolves challenge saints and leeds at the top which is great for the game. Nobody wants to see the same two teams in the grand final every year.

In years gone by, saints and leeds would more or less beat most teams even with 3 or 4 players missing but now teams need a fully fit squad to beat top teams.

Come to an end? Why? When did it begin? When was the last time they won a Challenge Cup?

I think he means overall.

They have won a few finals at old trafford over the last few years

I think the Leeds era of prominence is probably coming to an end as others have done before them.

In the 14 years of professional superleague, Saints have been more or less at the top of the pile over this whole period. Seem to remember our challengers came in the form of Wigan for a season, Bradford Bull for a couple of years, Hull for a season, Leeds for a couple of years.......and possibly Warrington and Wigan in the future. Yet Saints are still very much a threat season after season.

Leeds and Warrington have quite a lot of players around the 30+ years mark, so in 2012, Leeds might struggle having the next crop of players in place, where as Saints could be in a much stronger position, hopefully.

Saints have started to rebuild and blood youg kids while still being able to challenge at the top.

Ali was dropped and peacock has lost his mojo recently.
The only reason we didn't beat them in the semi was because HP's habit (admittedly along with virtually every other SL coach) of playing forwards at HB when we get injuries.

Well done the wire.

Peacock is massive for leeds, him not playing is a big big loss.

Ali was dropped ? what a strange call by leeds.

Leeds beat us in the semi final because PLAYERS made school boy mistakes, had NO halfbacks and leeds was to fast for us around the play the ball.

Time will tell, i wouldn't be suprised if we have a couple of quiet seasons as these next few years is the transition period. New coach in McDermott coming in, ageing squad being replaced. Hopefully we wont, but like i said, i wont be suprised.

Ali was dropped and IMO Peacosk's form has dipped alarmingly. I don't even think he is good enough for england at the moment.

That doesn't make it their era though. Leeds have not been anywhere near as dominant as Saints have during Superleague. They have won the occasional hub cap, won the Challenge Cup when? 1999? And won four Grand Finals. We have done way better than that overall, even winning five Grand Finals (if you include the Championship prior to the Grand Final match itself). We have also attended more Grand Finals which, although we lost them, says a lot about our standard. It is Saints who have had the era. Others have come and gone in that time.

Leeds are champions of 3 seasons passed. It is Leeds' era.

They are a bust without Peacock and have several aging players to replace. It's paramount for them to get a replacement for Peacock because this year has been the year where carrying that pack on his own (in the same way Farrell did for Wigoon for several years did) has caught up with him. Also McGuire, Burrow and Sinfield aren't getting any younger although McGuire and Sinfield still have more than a couple of years left in them. In fact, I could see Sinfield playing on until his was 34.

Whatever the case Leeds have not had a second forward in their pack who is capable of making 100m per game after Peacock. Plenty of them have the potential to hit 100m/game so why don't they? This isn't a new issue. It's been the case for four or five years now, however both Wigoon and Warrington have pulled up alongside Leeds and us meaning that whilst you could get away with having just one great forward now you need a full pack and support for your front row legends i.e. Graham, Peacock, Morley. Wigoon haven't really got a front row legend but Maguire has given their pack lots of drive and if they could get their own Graham they would be a very tough team.

I was refering to the question of, has the bubble burst for leeds.

Leeds have been champs for few years now, nobody has asked to compare saints and leeds over the last 10yrs.

It's obvious which has been the dominant team in super league era, but that wasn't the question.

The title, though, was has the Leeds era come to an end? The other questions were sub questions of that. For an era to come to an end, there has to be an era in the first place. And Leeds haven't had an era. They've won three grand finals and a hubcap in the last three years.

Even if you talk about bubbles bursting, the same applies. They've won a hubcap and three grand finals in the last three years. What bubble? The consecutive Grand Final winners bubble maybe? That's the only one I can think of!

Im not the OP.

Surely an era comes to an end if the club wins nothing after having a run of success ala Saints last year and possibly Leeds this year. I think three straight Grand Final victories counts as a run of success.

Three Grand Final victories counts as a run of success in Grand Finals, yes, but it doesn't count for an era. Wigan in the 80s and 90s, for instance, is an era. Wigan winning the hubcap and Grand Final this year, if you do, is not an era. It's success in 2010. Warrington winning two Challenge Cup finals on the bounce is not a Warrington era; it's a run of success in the Challenge Cup. An era is a time of domination and that suggests more than a run of success in one competition. Saints have been the most dominant team in Superleague because they haven't gone without any silverware for more than one season; they have won in all comps and on one occasion in every comp on offer; they have won team awards, coaching awards, individual awards, sometimes four years on the trot. Like Wigan in the late 80s and 90s they have dominated the sport. That indeed may now be all over but [ithat[/i is an era. It's more than a run of success in one competition.

I agree

Leeds have contested five out of the last six Grand Finals and won four of them. Along with a golden generation of players (the best their club has ever produced) this is their era. One season without a trophy doesn't end an era because I would argue that Saints' era has been continual for the past fifteen years which is damn impressive. We should all be proud.

So you are saying that this has been Leeds era AND Saints era? But it's just that Saints' era has been longer?

Since when can you only have one era at a time? Both Leeds and Saints are enjoying the richest eras in their history. If you're saying you can only have one era in RL then it has been Leeds' era for the past six years. Is six years long enough to have an era? Why isn't it? Are Saints team of the decade? Probably. I see no reason why Leeds fans can't claim it has been their era. If you want to suggest that an era is some indiscriminate and subjective term then we need to set out a definition in which many fans express their thoughts rather than just allowing one person to define that.

For me, I'm happy with people asking the question if the Leeds era is at an end because they have been the most successful team of the past six years.

No problem with that idea. I was just asking if that is what you meant because I found your post a bit confusing. I don't agree but I take your point.


I disagree 100% with this statement. Over the last six years we have undoubtedly been the most successful team. Leeds were pretty much nowhere six years ago. It was only four years ago that we swept the board and lost only four matches by 4, 3, 2, 1 points. So I think you are way off base on this claim. And indeed I would count us reaching the Grand Final four times on the trot as being a measure of success even though we have lost it for the last three years. It is indicative of our standard of play that during those four visits to the Grand Final we also won the Challenge Cup on three consecutive occasions and the hubcap on four consecutive occasions. We also won the World Clup Championship in 2007. I don't see how you can claim Leeds have been the most successful team over the last six years.