Don't get me wrong I would have loved a big nasty metre making prop to come in, I just think with the surgery required to the squad it was unrealistic. - lots can happen during in the season and we may see more additions/departures before the year is out.

What I like about the recruitment this year is every player is an upgrade IMO

Miller > Myler
Momirosvski > Macdonald
Croft >>> daylight, Austin
Frawley > Sezer
Ackers > Leeming/O'Conner
Goudemand > Tetevano

The only loss is Walters, but Hudson may turn out to be a good signing if he can get fit.

I am concerned about prop and believe we needed at least another one, however, we have in my opinion signed the best hooker and stand off in the league and our new centre seems to be well reviewed. I am hoping Miller will be in a similar mould to Field / French. We have on the whole seemingly recruited quite well.

Agree on Mom, Croft, Frawley and Ackers.
Miller remains to be seen. Bit of a gamble with limited experience, but could honestly go either way.
Could be a star, or we could miss the dependable consistency of Myler.

And if Goudemand is the official replacement for Tetevano, then it's very underwhelming.
He's a squad player like Donaldson, not the impact prop we need.

I'd include Holroyd in the list of who we need more from too. I'd be interested to see his yardage stats if anyone can find them.

Tetevano was pretty much rubbish for his entire Leeds career, Goudemand will be far better, which was my point.

Agreed, Tetevano had the potential to score 9 out of 10 but rarely did for us and often he’d be 5/6 out of 10 and was missing often whereas Goudemond I think will be much more consistent on a 7/8 out of 10 basis more often than not…yes not a metre muncher that we could do with, but neither was Tetevano but Goudemond will be a solid grafter for us with few mistakes in him

Yes Tetevano was poor.
But he was signed as an NZ international, marquee, impact prop.
I want what we were hoping for (and expecting) with Tetevano, rather than a 7/10 squad 'middle'.

But what if we signed another NZ international, marquee, impact prop and they turned out like tetavano?

that's the risk you take in every signing.
if the coach doesn't want a forward based game, as in some games last season, it doesn't how many forwards good or otherwise you have.
I think it's wait and see.

Oledski looks in immaculate shape going into this season, hopefully a big injury free season for him

Absolutely, every signing is a gamble - especially from the NRL.
But if every signing was a Goudemand rather than a Tetevano, it would show a distinct lack of ambition.

Said it before, Tetevano was exactly what we wanted on paper. Just didn't work out.
For all we know, his heart issues may have been holding him back for a while.
Goudemand may well be a very useful back up forward, but he's not the impact prop we need.

Tetevano was never an impact prop. He was a very reliable rotation prop - the NRL equivalent of Ian Kirke. Just because he was a Kiwi international doesn't change how he played. Goudemand is a like-for-like replacement for who Tetevano was in reality, not what anyone might have wanted him to be.

I don't disagree that we look light up front though, or that a big yardage forward would fill a gap. Aside from Lisone none of our props make enough yards, especially the bigger lads.

My point is that we shouldn't be replacing what Tetevano was.
We should be replacing what we expected him to be.

Couple of injuries up front (which is very possible) and we are up against it.

Id say every team maybe bar Wigan would be up against it with two injuries to their starting front rowers.

I don't disagree we look a bit light, although I wonder if Ruan could play up the middle. He's certainly big enough.