Given that Lynch didn't want to leave but Peter Hood practically forced his hand, I assume for financial reasons, it would not be massively surprising if we didn't recruit a replacement.

it'd be incredibly ridiculous, as any sane person can see we are desperate for another couple of forwards, but not surprising.

TBH in that sense think a move to prop could benefit langley. couple of 20 minute stints instead of 60+ minutes every week should help in terms of him picking up injuries less frequently.

Maybe so but if Langley's off the field for 40mins and Lynch is gone we're either going to need to recruit a grafter or get the others to share the work more.

goes without saying. but just say we had choice of recruiting a solid but not necessarily fantastic prop OR a top quality second row/loose. which way would we go, given we have 4 props in squad already and possibility of moving langley into props too.?

Everything I've heard suggests were looking at a direct replacement for lynch but could see above scenario playing out too.

I'd go for a player of real quality every time. We need someone who can lead the pack and who demands the respect of the team and who can show the way to younger players.

Sort of depends how he's used. If, as in your scenario, he is picked as prop and just does their rotations then I'd agree, but it may be that he's picked as SR or Loose and pops into prop during the game,to give someone a break or to cover for injury. To be honest this tends to be the way older second rows are 'gently' introduced to
the rigours of propping.