I see what your saying Rogues and maybe it is an over reaction just because Wigan is where my loyalties lie.

But my general perception is that the teams around us seem to be keen on improving their squads no matter where the talent comes from. As for Wigan I get the feeling we would rather play a youngster a year too soon than sign an overseas player who takes up a place for two years and then the youngster would be wasted for that extra year.

I personally think Wire are doing good business with Gidley, Sandow plus the rumours of them being in for Eastmond etc.

I think everyone would agree that ideally this years team would need 1 or 2 signings (in addition to Sam) even before anyone left. However, I think we will probably lose a few and just replace those like for like

Is Zeb Taia off? Blow if that's true on top of Whitehead.

We're just a prop short IMO if there's no more major exits. I think Galloway could have been that man. Maybe Sam Tomkins will know of a big, mean, block busting prop we can sign from the Warriors who'd not cost the earth.

Sorry Rogues but you're clouding the argument here. Why would we have to merge our academy with anyone? The point is that there are good Aussie options being taken up, in the forwards particularly, by other clubs. It doesn't matter whether Galloway is an improvement on Peacock, he is an improvement on any of our current prop options. Similarly, I'm of the opinion that Taylor would immeasurably strengthen our pack. Now, it may be that we have signings in the pipeline as Nicky Kiss mentioned but, if we don't, I can understand if people start to comment on it at the very least, not least for the fact that, as you yourself say, we are operating under the cap already and will be losing players next year, freeing up even more space. If it transpires that IL spends the cap money augmenting the contracts of our current personnel I for one would be less than ecstatic about it.

Tomkins of course.

I think you are missing my point a little.

Sandow isn't Wire's only signing is he. Leeds have brought in Garbut, Galloway and Mullally. Sam might be better than all of them but he's only one guy. The players i've mentioned are all ready made players for the here and now and not for 3/5 years time like the kids we will more than likely be bringing through



Why can't we do both? Why does it have to be one or the other?

I'd personally be happy to run with a smaller squad if it meant injecting a bit more quality in it. For example i would have been happy replacing two from 6 if Tomkins and Galloway replaced Bowen, Burgess, Patrick, Logan, Thornley & Hughes.

I'll return the compliment and say "spot on!". At the beginning of the season I was of the opinion that our depth would be our biggest asset but now I'm not so sure. I know we are kind of criticising things whilst we are sitting pretty in the league but I yearn for quality, like you. It's a reflection of our squad (or perhaps just my view of it) that I view Galloway as "quality".

What if that current player was Hampshire?

On one hand we criticise the club for not finding a way to accommodate this talented kid in the first team, and on the other we complain that we aren't signing any Aussie imports (who, by the nature of the beast, will not be among the best in the NRL).

Don't get me wrong ... I'm worried about our recruitment too. I think our props are largely crap, and we are desperately in need of a quality centre.

But if money is being spent on keeping our best young players - in other words, trying to prevent another Burgess situation - I wouldn't be terribly unhappy.

I'd give you Hampshire at a pinch but feel the analogy with Burgess is being too kind to him. However, given those presumably exiting it shouldn't be too difficult to meet his financial demands. Also, I suspect money won't be the primary issue with Hampshire, it will be about first team opportunities which the coach isn't giving him at the moment.

I think there's a big difference between quality and quantity. I personally think even with 6 players leaving there's still enough squad players to cover the loss of 4 of them. That to me is a massive indicator of how swelled we appear to be.

Agreed about Galloway but you made a decent point on another thread about all this being relative. When you are comparing him to the quality of props both at our club and in SL in general he is undoubted quality. Galloway like Cuthbertson might not compare to top NRL props but they are easily good enough to make a big impact at Wigan.

Then its simply bad management imo.

If you have a player as talented as Hampshire then you don't bring in someone who is a direct competition for him. Why does it have to be one or the other? You can retain youngsters and at the same time sign decent players.

To be fair, that's guesswork. We don't know what his primary issue is, but we know that money always helps. I too doubt we'd be competing with anyone in the NRL for him, but to lose him to Saints would be even worse.

However, I take your overall point. I'm worried that we lack ambition in recruitment terms. I don't buy the argument that we finished 3rd so everything must be okay. We know we have glaring weaknesses in this team, and with no sign that anyone is coming to fill these gaps, it's hardly reassuring.

But I don't think we can ignore the Burgess issue. When a starlet signs to go to Aus before he's even made it in the British game, that should worry us. If we're shoring up contracts to prevent that happening again, I wouldn't be displeased.

I think what we have to do is look how to improve our squad.

If there is someone ready to step up and replace a first 17 player then fantastic. We then need to consider balance within the squad maybe we can afford to lose a little quality in one area if it means we can gain in another.

If there isn't the quality then we need to recruit, it's not rocket science.

Looking at our squad going into this year I and others would have liked an experienced stop gap at 6 and a Prop at the very least. I still think we would be much better placed had we done so rather than sign a couple of Secondrow come Props.

Moving forward there are serious issues to address. Obviously upfront we still lack a quality experienced Prop. Patrick has to go. Woeful signing. You don't find experienced quality first team leaders in the youth system so you have to look to recruit. Simple.

Our backrow lacks size, again another glaring issue. Do we have a real quality big young backrow in the youth set up? No. We need to recruit. Connor Farrell will not fit into our 17 if we are to retain his big brother and Bateman.

Not recruiting a half last year has cost us dear. Powell has shown glimpses but never enough to think he was ever going to be a first team regular at a top club. Williams should have gone to half, 2 year deal for am experienced 6 with Rocky backing him up would give us quality, consistency and an easing into first team rugby of 2 quality young players. We haven't and we are shocking at hooker when MM goes off and we are more than likely going to lose Rocky as soon as he can get away. Given the decisions made last year though we now need to stick with what we have in that position.

Wing is covered with Manfredi but we lack any backup beyond that and also look very stretched if we pick up a knock in the centre. Ideally I would like us to sign a utility wing/centre to cover that position.

Backup hooker is a massive issue but Wane has cast his dice and now we look stook with what we have.

We have already made some very poor decisions in our recruitment. We are clearly weaker than last year and we need to recruit at least 3 players to get it moving forward again.

Hubris in our youth system is costing us in my opinion and our seemingly Wigan bias/mentality is also holding the club back at times.

I think people become frustrated seeing players signed by other clubs who we know style wise we are crying out for. Galloway instantly gives us what we need upfront, Taylor gives us size in the backrow that we so badly need. I appreciate we may have bid and lost out it may have other irons in the fire and this could be all premature concern when the time line up for fixture 1 of the 2016 season, but given our recent activity in this department especially last year I think the concern is justified at the moment.