Didn't see Sam Hopkins on the list.
If he hits Super League like Hill and Walmsley then he could be a real find.
At present I suspect Hampshire maybe in front of Tierney for the No1 shirt.
With our 3/4 back three of Hampshire, Charnley and Burgess we may not have too much experience but pace to burn. Those three can all turn and catch players who may beat them once. Offiah was V good at that.
As has been said, no point in buying average players from another club if we have better in our own youth system.

Hampshire is looking like the most natural replacement for Sam at FB. He plays a very similar game to him. With us already having quite young HBs, I reckon this is where his place will be over the next couple of years. He's certainly ahead of Tierney, even though Tierney is probably the more natural fullback, Hampshire has that X Factor that Sam has, although possibly not to the same extent.

I'd expect Burgess to get at least 2 or 3 more games before the playoffs. Possibly away at Catalans and maybe the week after the CC Final against Hull. I'd quite like to see him be sent out on loan for the rest of the year though, see how he does for the last 4 games of the year playing SL week in, week out. We'd have to lose him for at least a month though, and I know Wane is wary about that.

In regards to any further signings, i'd expect us to sign at least one more forward. I'd have expected us to sign a winger too [And was championing a bid for Lineham at Hull But having seen what we have in Burgess, i'm not sure we need a Winger now.

They are potential game breakers for sure and they should be in and around the team getting games where possible but its too soon for them to be starters just yet. It's a balancing act between giving them game time but not over burdening them.

I do agree about not signing for signings sake though. The thing with that is though if we don't/can't find a replacement for Tomkins why is he being allowed to go? He's under a contract that says he can't speak to another club for another year yet. If we can't get a top class replacement he simply shouldn't be going!

I look at the 31 players you have picked and I am just wondering if the order you have placed the 31 players in is what you think will be the pecking order for the future.
My feelings are that Manfredi will be nowhere near No 29 once he gets a chance, there is something about him that says he will make it.

Forgot all about Hopkins, there's gonna be one hell of a battle for spots at prop forward! With regard to Hampshire, you're probably right, I just think he would go better at 6 (which is where I'd bring him on at, with either Green taking a rest or McIlorum with Smith going to 9). He's done some great things at full back but he's not quite as good defensively as Tierney from what I've seen, the last thing I'd want is his confidence to get ruined by a few dropped balls or missed tackles, you know how fickle a lot of our 'fans' can be

What about Hampshires match saving tackle at Widnes and the one that saved a try v Saints on Greenwood?

There may be an option to have #1 Burgess, #5 Manfredi and #6 Hampshire. That would be a backline with plenty "toe"

I just stuck him there because he hasn't debuted yet, I'd have him and Burgess battling for the 5 shirt next year unless we can bring in a superstar like Briscoe

I jumped up and down with delight, he's had a couple of blunders too though, which is to be expected given he's still learning to play full back. You watch more academy than me, which of the two would you say is better defensively?

Regardless of who out of the young prospects mentioned ends up playing in the FB and LW positions next season (at the start of the season at least) if we do not sign specific replacements for Pat and Sam could we perhaps see the numbers 1 and 5 not allocated next season? If they were not allocated it could lessen the weight of expectation (from some fans) on the youngsters' shoulders at least psychologically (difficult enough to be given the task of replacing either of those two without having what would be considered to be 'their' number on your back at age 19). None of the potential home grown replacements will have played first team very much either. Slotting into the team with a 22, 26 or 32 on your back doesn't mark you out to the crowd as being the one expected by the coaches to take over from Pat or Sam so less pressure from them to do so immediately. Leaving the numbers unallocated also dangles the carrot that any of the contenders can earn either number for 2015 by performing well (and also means that none of them will face the possibility of losing a starting 13 number the following season and a further dent to their confidence should they be overtaken in the pecking order during the course of next season).