Oh come on, it's chalk and cheese that you're talking here - last year he would have been an automatic choice because he's quality in a team that had very little quality, strength or depth, you could have put Sam Burgess in our side last year and we'd still have been battered by the large majority of sides, now we're talking about whether he'd make the first 17 and whether he would be good cover for injuries! It's a completely different scenario and you know it.

FWIW, I agree that 7th or 8th is a good and achievable target for next year and I also agree that it's not going to be easy but anyone who thinks that the personnel we retained from last year are automatic dead-beats just because they were in a side that finished bottom is making a mighty big assumption.

I agree entirely that it's totally different given the new personall around, and some players will find a new lease of life.

I've not once said anyone in the Salford squad are dead beats (minus ashurst and howarth, as I've had the misfortune of seeing them in a saints shirt) - all I have said is the quality is lower than in others pushing for the playoffs. That's not to say McPherson, or ashurst or whoever, wouldn't get into any other team in superleague, on the contrary, they'd probably do very well in Bradford or London or wherever, but the gulf in quality between the top and bottom is absolutely massive.

Let's be honest, if Wigan had 2 teams competing in superleague they wouldn't finish bottom (and that pains me as a saints fan) - but that depth is indicative of what it takes - which is why a lot of teams this year have announced squad numbers well into the 30s - and why I just don't feel Salford can match that if injurys come along

Can someone please predict their bottom 2 and stop this nonsense.

If Bradford sort themselves out

13 Wakey
14 London

if they implode

13 Bradford
14 London

The RFL will sort out Bradford's problems and ensure they don't finish in the bottom two.
Bottom - London
13th Widnes.

the times they are a changing....

when I joined these boards the above post would have read...


....well...apart from the Widnes bit

You'd have to think that with 5 weeks to go till the start of the season and London still not having enough players to field a 17 they are going to struggle. Any signings now are going to be hard to gel into a team in a few weeks with only a couple of practice games.

So I would put London in 14th

13th is anybodys guess really
Wakey - have a fairly strong starting 17 (assuming that our new signings get their visas sorted at some point, but we like London will struggle to get them much game time together before the season starts). We are still a couple of players short (a three quarter and a half back imo) but there are deals being worked on.
Cas - have more depth but have lost the one player who copuld win them a game on their own. A lot will depend on keeping Seymour's mind on the job and him hopefully not experiencing the problems he has had in the recent past.
Bradford - as per usual they look to have a reasonable squad but it is one they cannot afford so will depend on whether they bite the bullet and make some savings or blunder on irresponsibly again in the hope that they won't be allowed to fold mid-season.
Widnes - I'll be honest, I haven't seen much about them from a recruitment point of view so hard to say. They have lost Hock which could be a blessing in disguise as he was shocking last season. I would guess they will fare about as well as last year, so will be hovering in around the drop zone.
Salford - they have the potential to do well but I have doubts about whether Chase and Smith will work effectively together. They are also reliant on a lot of older players who may struggle if they pick up injuries.

If the 2x12 3x8 format ever sees the light of day the MM weekend wood be a perfect way to start the second phase of the season, then it’s a fair three home game and three away games rather than some clubs having four and some having three.

I would agree with that and have said so for a while. Play 22 games then split. Then have the 1st round of the 3x8's as some kind of magic weekend do. 2 SL1 games and 2 SL2 games on each day, leaving clubs with 3 home and 3 away games each to complete the "mini season".

To be honest the 2x12, 3x8 format is a bit convoluted for my liking. The whole idea of (after the split) SL1 and SL3 retaining competition points already gained and SL2 restarting with 0 points for a mini league of 7 games is just a bit bizarre but I guess is the only way it can actually work.

From the presentation that Blake Solly and Ralph Rimmer gave to groups of fans last year the proposal in the middle tier is that the 4 clubs coming up into the middle 8 will get 4 home games and the 4 clubs going down into the middle 8 will only get 3.

Without wishing to be accused of de-railing this thread again for which I apologise in advance but I can't resist asking you Fordy, because I'm just naturally curious, about whether you [ireally[/i believe that Salford have recruited that badly that they will be serious contenders for the 13th spot or did you just want to comment generally on whether our half backs will gel and our apparent reliance on 'older players'?

And, just for clarity, I'm only responding to this because if this topic had appeared at the same time last year I would have told everyone that we were nailed on for the 14th spot and would consider 13th a bonus but this year I just can't understand how anyone can be talking about Salford in terms of a topic titled as it is.

Could that see us having 3 separate MWs then perhaps? One for each of the tiers after the split, as an opening round maybe? Then that would leave 3 home and 3 away games for each team before the playoffs. At least that way the MW would not be an additional fixture, but what venues could be used?

Its 11 home 11 away + 1 magic which makes the 23 before the split. I guess the Magic weekend would have to be a random draw to ensure fairness in the extra game

If Widnes can get 20+ games out of Kevin Brown I don't think they'll be in the bottom two. I guess most of the lesser sides start the season with similar mindsets - they need luck with injuries.

I might eat my words but is it just me who look Cas look poor this season? Bradford, London and Wakefield also worse off than last season I think.

Seems a strange way to do it when there are an equal number of games before the spilt, but then an odd number after it. Why have an extra fixture before the split and then have an uneven number of home and away games after it? It would make more sense to do a MW after , leaving 11 home and away games before the split, then 1 neutral game plus 3 home and away games after it.

Cas look poor? We've lost Chase who was good in attack but didn't have a great kicking game and got easily beaten in defence at times.

Other than that Walker, Mason and Thompson have gone. The former two missed a lot of games through injury and the latter is nothing more than average.

We have more depth and a much more experienced stronger squad.