If you look at the facts though, he’s at the best club, with the best team, with the international coach working there, winning routinely… he’s not looking for a new challenge a few miles down the road, the NRL would take a punt at his price. So we’re paying more, or he’s not wanted. If we pay him more, no problem if he returns on the investment, if not we lose more ground. But his best years are ahead of him, he’s really experienced, and an experienced winner, and we have a convincing coach who seems to connect well with players.

I’m really struggling to find anything negative in the (potential) signing of Byrne. Don’t think he will be Vaughan’s replacement but that will become clearer as time passes. As for Wigan not offering him a better deal, see G Williams and M Nicholson.

[quote="Captain Hook":1nuchnzx]I’m really struggling to find anything negative in the (potential) signing of Byrne. Don’t think he will be Vaughan’s replacement but that will become clearer as time passes. As for Wigan not offering him a better deal, see G Williams and M Nicholson.[/quote:1nuchnzx] We literally outbid them on both. And the Nicholson one is a good example actually, if we take Bryne and Hill has a clear path in the first team in the same way Nsemba has in the absence of Nicholson, they win. They get more, for less. And their rival pay more, for less. And as much as I like Nicholson, Nsemba was more effective last year. In a salary cap sport (for those in the mix, although I think the salary cap deserves its own discussion), you need to get return on the money you pay, we need to find something to close the gap and overpaying for players isn’t the way. I’m not being negative about it, I just think we need to get to the bottom of why he is available. If we’re rolling together the Crowther and Wood money and think Byrne will do the job of both, great. Completely understand that. But if we’re using 70-80% or more of Vaughan money on Byrne, there’s not enough money remaining to add enough to see that our pack doesn’t regress. Because you know, you just KNOW that Wigan have another Byrne, and another Hill and a Smithies, a Partington etc etc etc waiting in the wings being paid peanuts to do the same or better job. It’s up to us to make him deliver on the investment, or the gap opens wider. Not just that, but it blocks the path of Thomas, Green, Whitehead… Prudent recruitment would be to wait until May time and challenge those kids to kick the door down and make the Byrne deal seem unnecessary, but the November 1st negotiation date makes that difficult, as you’d be beaten to the signature.

[quote="karetaker":1qcu7n6x]It’s not a case of them allowing him to leave. With this new thing of players in last year of contract now able to talk to other clubs sooner my guess is we have offered him a better deal than Wigan wanted to.[/quote:1qcu7n6x] I think you are probably correct. A good signing for you.

[quote="Or thane":1hx8rs63]Talking of Hill, i keep thinking a 1 year for chris Hill wouldn't be bad........before you find me and beat me up. He wouldn't play every week, still does a good job, and my thinking is mainly for the experience, knowledge and professional attitude he could pass on and help develop our younger guys. Especially the forwards such as Wood, Thomas, Green, Whitehead, Holroyd etc So i'm not saying we desperately need him but he could be pretty useful. Been thinking it for awhile, but the guys on the radio were just on about it so thought cool, it's not just me then [/quote:1hx8rs63] I think I'd rather have Burgess nurture our young props than Chris Hill. You can't compare abilities or achievements.