Making a well reasoned post about Karl on here?

You're doomed mate.

In regards to how much we've put into him - are we seeing a significant improvement in Karl Pryce to justify keeping him at the club? From my POV, I think we should cut our losses. I haven't seen any gradual improvement from Karl Pryce in his time at the club to warrant keeping him. I feel we have far more promising players at the club who can in the future takeover Carmont & Gleeson - Marsh, Charnley and Goulding prime examples. Also for me, he doesn't just "look" lethargic - he is. Darrell Goulding this season has completely shown him up. One example of this was when Darrell Goulding had a dead leg all strapped up at Leeds and played on & Karl Pryce hobbled off against Saints with seemingly very little - certainly nothing like what Darrell Goulding played on with.

Karl Pryce was a gamble by Ian Lenagan and IMO it hasn't payed off & we should cut our losses.

Goulding has done his job very well this season, but Pryce has scored his share as well. As for the injury example, unless you have the medical detail to hand, im not sure how you can make that statement.

Errm, he's big !

If keeping him will hinder the development of Charnley, Marsh etc then get rid IMO. No room for sentiment.

Absoulutely no point keeping him, Charnley is already better than him.

It's like having a tree on the wing.

Agreedhe is very bone idol and young Charley will do a better job

I think the fact the club told us about Phelps going but not Pryce might suggest something is going on with regard to Pryce. Maybe there negotiating the terms of his contract as a pay per play or something tricky like that.

The club hasnt said anything about Phelps I dont think? From what i've seen it was just what he put on his Twitter and Wigan Evening Post made a story about it.

I just don't see the harm in keeping him on. If by not renewing his contract it would enable us to bring in a new player then by all means let's to do it. But if that's not the case then he might as well be kept. I'd rather we kept him then let him go and bring no one in, as you never know we may need him down the line, it's our squad size that im my opinion gives us the edge over our nearest rivals.

As for stopping the development of players such as Marsh and Charnley, ultimately it's Madge's decision as to who he selects and play's, which as we've heard from the Maguire himself is determined through how hard the players train during the week. If Pryce is kept and then selected ahead of Marsh for example it'll be because of Karl's hard work. Not because Lenegan is forcing Madge's hand to play him because of the investment the club have put in him as some have suggested on here.