I think it has been pretty awesome (the WCC apart ) and as a result we currently sit on top of the league.

4 games in and the attack hasnt clicked...hardly surprising.

As I first said, with the arrival of Eastwood. It would just give us a bit extra, a bit more impact, and would allow Ablett to help out in the centres as he did well last year. Or in the centres with someone like Martin Gleeson. (salary cap allowing of course). Thought he was meant to be going down under this last off season? what happened there??

Watkins isnt ready, bluey clearly thinks he isnt ready hence him only being on the bench,

Ablett isnt a centre, he needs to make a second row spot his own this year, constant changing of his position has led to him making quite a few mistakes,

Gibson is seemingly fourth choice centre, he was a quality youngster, but really shouldnt be 4th choice centre to an ageing senior, a newborn Watkins and a second rower at this stage in his career

and I cant see how smith is going to benefit from learning another position, he has shown he can be one of the best wingers and fullbacks in the league, lets use him there, keep him on the wing, give him a few shots at full back and he will be our number 1 in a couple of years,

however we have shown that we can 'carry' a centre, we proved that last year that when we are strong elsewhere we can have someone fill in there and still win things, but we clearly arent as strong as we were last year, we have lost scruton, ellis, tansey, and toopi, and replaced none of them,

i think we are two players from where we would ideally be, we are smaller up front, and have less cover in the backs, if we have the cap space we should spend it, a 2nd row/centre and another forward would be great one of these is hopefully eastwood, but i would still want someone who can come in at centre and take some pressure off Watkins and allow Ablett to become an out and out 2nd rower

We have/did sign Eastwood, Hetherington or the club can do nothing about the red tape.

Gleeson would without a doubt improve our first team, but in the process would keep Gibson Watkins and Smith/Hall from getting in the first team, given how much Gleeson would cost I don't think it would be a wise purchase for the future.

Our squad looks very well balanced (even without Eastwood who we should now just write off realistically), until you consider that Gibson was unproven before he spent 2 years injured, Watkins is 17 ( and as such should not be overused) and Senior is 32 (and Smith has to cover fullback at the moment and has little or no experience at centre). We have Ablett, but we have lost Ellis who he rotated with last year (which simply didn't work so that might be a bonus). The question is do we live with it or do we look to make a short term addition?
Logically I don't think you can say signing a centre would harm Watkins development. Realistically it's going to be 1-2 seasons before he becomes a regular first team player and by that time we will need a replacement for Senior in all probablility. Gibson is a wild card - odds are he crocked and his time has eluded him, but you can't be 100% and the club obviously feel that way too.
Do we sign a centre? "Is there one to sign?" should be the question. We had a promising young full back in Smith, but we signed Brent Webb to replace Mathers - has that hindered Smith? I don't think so. It also indicates that the club will sign quality (at the right price) when it becomes available. I have no doubts we have been looking for a quality 3/4 for sensible money since Toopi did his knee.
I don't think you can bag people on here for wanting us to sign a quality centre, but likewise for the other side of the argument if their isn't one that's better than what we have for money that doesn't look insane then what do you want? We can't make a player appear out of nothing.

We replaced Tansey with Buderus and Toopi (who didn't play anyway) with Watkins and Gibson.

This is what happens when you commit to a youth policy. Players come up through the ranks to replace departing players.

We have to accept that sometimes the players coming through will take time to adjust or may not even make it. However, it's a good policy and one that has paid rich dividends so why depart from it?

Yeah I know fella, lets hope it doesn't fall through.

Your second point, agreed although i would have thought given the players released and not replaced we'd have enough room (Ellis, Tansey, Scruton, Toopi) granted Buderus wouldn't have been cheap but still thats 4 out and only one in, unless we are still paying for toopi giving that he had a year left on his contract ?

IMHO there's enough in this squad to see us through the season and to be in there at the end to fight for the big 1 at OT.
I agree with DHM.G1 and the rest that we should keep faith with our system and there's no point signing someone for the sake of it.
Gh has proved beyond doubt imo that he knows how to control the purse strings and they are ready to be opened as and if/when the quality required becomes available.

The buderus deal was signed before ellis rejected his offer and signed for wests.
We had also agreed terms for soliola before his injuries as well as eastwood so we have plenty of cap space.
We will though have to start looking new deals for the likes of smithy,ablett,kirke,gibson,donald off the top of my head and senior may still decide he wants another year.

Agreed. Excellent post. Some very valid points there. Watkins has a huge future we must look after him and not burn him out. The powers that be at hq will no doubt be well aware.

Its' very relevant to this discussion so I will borrow TVOC's post from another thread.

rlhttp://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?t

Yes true, smith and donald in particular should be no1 priorites to keep, i doubt we'll retain all 5/6 though.

have we? i dont think its right to say that Tansey was a rotation hooker, he wasnt, he gave us cover at half, wing, fullback and hooker, buderus is an out and out hooker, a vastly better one but an out and out hooker,

you say we replaced Toopi with Watkins and Gibson but we havent, we have replaced him with Ablett, who is clearly filling in, and it seems to be hampering his progress imo as a 2nd rower imo,



because i dont think we are doing what we did before, when Mathers came through he ousted Connolly, a good experienced pro, when Burrow came through he was at hooker and halfback, but he had Dunneman to learn from, Bailey came through with a big experienced pack, so did JJB, Diskin came through behind jackson and Mears, even Walker came through with Senior, and Behind Carroll,

Watkins is being asked from a very very young age, to step up, giving him a year or so behind a quality player isnt going to harm him, similarly if Ablett is our replacement for ellis ( i dont think eastwood ever was supposed to be, he will probably be more of a replacement and improvement on Scruton) then he needs to be playing 2nd row when he does it

Yes, tansey was cover at those positions but when he played in the firsts he played rotation hooker, the vast majority of the time.

We're not lacking depth in those other positions. In fact, our over at full back is doing a sterling job (Smith) our Cover at wing is going OK and played a big role in our GH win (Hall).

In reality, Buderus gives us what the team has been desperately lacking and searching for since newton/Jackson. Now we may have lost some depth in other positions (I don't think we really have) but we've fixed a glaring weakness in another.

We have. They may not play there all the time due to age and recovery from injury but in most of this season's games Ablett has played back row.

Besides, did Toopi really need replacing?

We're not the same as before though. before we were building to where we are. We needed old heads like Dunneman and Connolly. Now the spine of the team are champions produced from the Academy. Our needs are very different.

Watkins is being asked to step up. He looks like he can handle it. Personally, I think learning his trade in and around the first team will do him (and us) more good than him walking over inferior opponents in the senior Academy.

The coaching staff seem to think the same. They're handling him well by playing him from the bench in some games and the outset in others.