How are they going to develop, if they aren't playing in the first team?

Sutcliffe's too old to play in the Academy, so do you farm him out to the Championship somewhere and in the meantime make do with some mediocre off-contract import looking to top up their pension? Leeds sent Lilley out on dual reg at Hunslet this year, and they ended up playing the lad at full-back against one of the best teams in the competition FFS.

Leeds don't need another half-back, if they sign a new first choice hooker.

Well I did not design the system. Neither am I suggesting some mediocre off contract import. Like the replacement of Aiton we need quality. However as it stands we have invested in the JP & Kylie replacements which could be wasted if we do not invest in Sinfield's replacement. Just look at the hullabaloo on here over losing the game management abilities of Sinfield while he has been playing at hooker.

Under the new extended season it is going to be important to rotate not just forwards but backs too. With a new quality half back we could still give plenty of game time to Sutcliffe, Lilley and Golding giving the ageing McGuire & Burrow plenty of rests. Which of the aforementioned are proven game managers?

Unless the new hooker is also a game manager then yes we do need a controlling quality halfback next year.

I want to see Sutcliffe and McGuire at 6&7 next year with Burrow / lilley fighting for the bench spot.assuming we sign a 9

Sutcliffe is far too good for the Championship, he was giving Sinfield a run for his money before he got injured, his form was good and he would have been well in the running for young SL player of the year were he still fit imo.

I agree with you, we need a hooker that much clear and a priority, but Sutcliffe has proved he is ready to step in as first choice HB(although not the finished article) alongside McGuire and with Burrow as cover aswell as Lilley we have enough for next year at least.

Basically, sign a hooker (hopefully Clark) and i would be more than happy with the make up of our squad for next season.

We do have 2. We just chose not to utilize Robbie Ward.

Feel free to tell me where this experienced half-back on a short-term contract is going to come from, in that case.

Throw me some names out there of players who are going to be available and willing to come in on a short-term basis for a year or two.

Agree with AG we don't need another halfback until one of McGuire or Burrow retires.

I think some people are getting carried away thinking we need 4 half backs because we've had the luxury of 4 for the last couple of years (McGuire, Burrow, Sinfield & Sutcliffe).
Most clubs can barely scrape 2 quality half backs in to their squad never mind 3 or 4.

As AG says getting another would limit Sutcliffe.
We don't need to sign a replacement for Sinfield, Sutcliffe is his replacement.

The only halfback signing id make is if a relatively young, quality one is available as an eventual replacement for McGuire. Brierley for example, or if Widdop was available. Because quality players don't always become available just when you need one.
But I wouldn't be looking to sign a stop-gap halfback. We don't need it.

If another hooker comes in, Leeds will potentially have four half-back options - McGuire, Sutcliffe, Burrow and Lilley. Quite why some people seem to think we need to add another one to that mix, lord only knows.

Spot on

Who are you going to get that is Top 4 quality but happy to be some sort of stopgap/backup?

In the backs it's not easy to have quality backups because you don't rotate them or they don't pick up injuries like the forwards do. It's why BJB left because he didn't want to hang around getting 4/5 starts a season.

Lilley is still unproven, Sutcliffe, may not recover from his injury, and Burrow isn't utilised in the halves. Had Sutcliffe not done his knee I'd have given him the starting gig next season, however, we have no idea how he'll recover.

Hooker has to be the priority though. I also have no idea why anyone would think we needed a prop. This is the first time I can remember on this board where the consensus seems to be that we've got a good set of props.

Until Leeds enquired on Garbutt he wasn't available. Hang on, until Leeds enquired on Galloway he wasn't available, still under contract. Oh wait a minute, until Leeds enquired on Clark he definitely was not an option, now looking likely.

If the timing Is right and the right deal, a lot of players are available, they don't have to be out of contract.

So if Sutcliffe doesn't deliver from his injury, people are happy with Burrow at scrumhalf? the same guy who hasn't performed in that role for the last few years, and who the coach has only played there in minimal games when he had to. I don't think the issue is for someone to stump Sutcliffes game, it's that you can not go from a team completely managed by it's main half, to having no one in the half positions who has shown they can control a team in a game.

I'd prefer to see the club give serious time to developing Mulhern and Baldwinson than sign another prop.

I'd also prefer the club to give Sutcliffe the jersey for 2016. If he isn't developing the way we like, sign a short term "dunneman" style stop gap for 2017 and if we think he isn't going to make the grade sign a permanent replacement.

Think you will end up with Pelissier at No.9 personally.

Don't think that would be a bad thing though, very similar to Aiton behind a better pack. Could be a shrewd signing.

Now where did I say it would be easy? I am pointing out our needs for next year.

Feel free to tell me who will do our game management in Sinfield's absence and please give examples of where they have consistently proven they have this ability?

Couple of points about Sutcliffe: firstly, he'd be very unlucky were he not to recover from his injury as plenty others have survived similar, particularly in more recent times. Also, I don't entirely subscribe to the notion that he can't manage games. While he's certainly not at Sinfield's level I think there were signs that he was improving the more games he played. Not a linear improvement for sure but not many young halves can make that claim.