And the two actual props available didn't make 100m in the game between them! 4 of Leeds back 5 apart from the one made of glass all carrier the ball 100m plus and thats the issue. We could sign the worlds best scrum half and they would struggle to spare a back line that is knackered from doing the forwards work for them.

It's not a fantasy league though. Your approach would leave us in a massive hole regards recruitment, as well as throwing out the babies with the bath water. How will we ever attract young players to the club if we kick them out ( at our expense) at the first sign of adversity? Allowing for the players from the 24 squad who have left and are likely to leave - Myler, Olpherts, Martin, Fus, Donno, Hudson, Roberts - I reckon we have maybe 400k to spend even allowing for the arrival of Hall. To my mind that's probably a marquee prop, another prop and maybe a second row if we can make a European player (Bousquet?) part of the equation. That, in my opinion, makes us a very competitive outfit next year.

I'd love to sign RCG, but don't think it's realistic. Arthur will have some players in mind, and Blease has said today in the media that we're honing in on an overseas target for next season already.

Tetavano is a cautionary tale to not spend over the odds on a big name overseas prop on extender money. Hopefully we get the sensible balance of cost, quality and age.

But its not the first sign of adversity is it, we have given out extended contracts to some of these sick notes hence why our cap is in bits,
Hudson never played super league ever and was injured for 12 previous months, and we give him a contract, utter madness Simpson not played for 2 years, thats not a bit of adversity thats a player who might never play at the super league level or ever again.

Don't disagree with you on Hudson. Maybe the worse project signing in our long and pretty undistinguished history of project signings. But by all acounts he is on his way. Simpson got thrown in when he was still a boy, got an injury as a result and then picked up another one in pre-season. I think we need to give him a fair crack next year. I have less sympathy with Holroyd who seems to be perennially unavailable, but he's OOC at the end of 25. Let's see if Arthur can light the blue touch paper before letting him go. Gannon has the potential to be great player. I'd be loathe to let him go, out of pure frustration.

I hope Gannon can get back on track, he'll be another player Arthur would enjoy working with and he'd really benefit from the approach we're seeing

Morgan is still only 20, any talk of getting rid because of his injury is daft.

He’ll be like an extra signing next year, we’ve rightly treated him with kid gloves this year, give him the time to work on his physique, he’s a real talent.

Not quite what i said though is it? We shouldn’t be offering contract extensions though to Players are are hardly available for selection, thats utter madness and like i say thats why our cap is in a mess.

https://x.com/aaronbower/status/1827285 ... 20999?s=46 Looking at Jordan Rapana apparently

https://x.com/aaronbower/status/1827285 ... 20999?s=46 Looking at Jordan Rapana apparently

That just wouldn't make any sense

Nope it would be a shocker

Yep. That would be Bleases credibility straight out of the window. Pure clickbait - like Watkins, like Knight, like Hastings - I'd hazard.

Re Gannon, Holroyd and Simpson, like it or not hard decisions might have to be made at some point.

In the case of Gannon the question is not about how good he might be, but whether he should play at all. I know they are being ultra-careful until he's turned 21, but if he keeps getting put out of the game for long periods through head knocks, at some stage he and the club will have to think about him giving it up.

Simpson has missed a hell of a lot of rugby. These are key developmental years, so even assuming he comes back fit next season, he's way behind in terms of experience. Fingers crossed though.

Holroyd's just been a mess one way or another for some time. He's 23 and last season was the first time he's even got close to playing a full season. I'd hope he can improve a lot next year, his lack of punch with the ball is utterly weird to me, he's a big lad, perfect build for a prop and unlike Sangare he seems to move reasonably well. But again, promise or otherwise, at some stage he'll have to be let go if he can't play enough games at a decent quality.

These three are in our top 25, and while it sounds harsh, we can't keep hanging on waiting for players to get fit or find form. SL squads just aren't big enough for that and we've suffered for years from underperforming players hanging around way too long. I'm not saying jettison any of them now, but as rollin thunder says, renewal is another thing altogether.

Actually he didn't say that. He said any player with a less than 50% appearance rate should be moved on "regardless of age or potential." There was no mention of end of contract. Of course number of appearances is a valuable gauge when it comes to contract renewal, but it's rash (and very expensive) to rush to judgement before then.

No, you said any player with less than 50% appearances should be sacked off. Not sure why you think kids like Simpson and Warren should be playing that many games even if fit tbh.