Fans of any kind of sporting club crave “big name signings”, we do here as well. It gets the juices flowing and the fans something/something else to get excited about.

Bringing through youngsters is something that builds slowly. Unless you’re going watching academy games week in week out the majority of fans wouldn’t know whos who except for word of mouth. I hadn’t a clue who Marshall/Davies were when they made their Wigan debut - it sure didn’t take long to find out though with the level of their performances keeping Burgess out of the side. Youngsters that have that special quality that Sam had when he first broke through get the same reaction from fans as big name signings IMO. It excites the fans seeing a top class youngster named in the squad and watching him play. Williams was the next player of that ilk to come along.

I’m not too sure we’ve produced another brilliantly skilled player such as Sam when he first broke through. I just mentioned above about Williams and yes he is a class player on his day but we can all agree that since his mega money deal his form has taken a nose dive and Tomkins still hasn’t got going after returning from the NRL. Burgess and Gildart are very good players but their form also has taken a plunge recently.

What I don’t and never have understood either is the policy of re-signing players who have left for the NRL. Re-signing J Tomkins, Mossop and Leuluai were unnecessary and a bit naive IMHO in that we thought they were coming back better players when in actual fact they were probably worse off. I’ve not included Sarginson on that list as we haven’t seen enough of him to judge properly yet. Signing back Tomkins and Burgess simply couldn’t be argued with at the time both were rather unlucky in the NRL and Burgess showed glimpses of class at Souths.

With the exception of Burgess/S Tomkins signing back players doesn’t get anyone excited. I would much rather have seen a youth player promoted where possible or a decent signing made in their place. I don’t think signing failed NRL players is the future and we are doing it right with the youth at the club, having said that it does have to be properly balanced out. We can’t rely solely on youth, nor can we rely solely on big signings.

Not sure how you put Flower in the bang average bracket when he's achieved more than plenty of the Leeds players in your list.

For that matter, I'd argue Sarge has had a bigger impact in winning trophys than some of those Leeds names, Ferres, Griffin & Garbutt (so far) to name a few.

Thanks Jeff, I honestly couldn't understand his point as Leeds, to me, as a good mixture of local and signings.

They had the likes of Sinfield, Burrow, Danny Mags, but also brought in the likes of Peacock. Webb, Hardaker, Senior, Kyle to name few.

they aren't signings though (other than Burgess, slight exception as he came back). youth is youth, signings are signings. neither inspired me last year and still have a fair way to go this season to justify what they want or demand.

and again let me point out, i'm not saying our youth isn't good enough, it really is fantastic, but after one or two seasons they seem to think they can take on a team of thurstons and be paid accordingly. so my point remains, I don't think the club is handling them very well.

If only we had the junior set-up that the Aussies have! We see teenagers walk into NRL teams and be star players, whereas their equivalents in SL are undercooked in comparison. And the reason is that those Aussie kids, although only 18 or 19, have been battle-hardened in the tough junior comps there.

And herein lies my point
If gildart has 6 months left on his contract and wire or hull or nrl (slightly different argument) come in and sign him they would see that as a big signing and would pay him accordingly.
Why shouldn't we?
Tom Davies signed a new contract late last year, why shouldn't we see that as a new signing and why shouldn't he get paid in line with his performances and in line with his market value?
Etc.

Now some people can choose not to look at it that way (and tend to be the more critical of posters?).
Some may never have considered that particular view point (I hadn't really up until 4/5 months ago when Someone said it to me). And if they don't agree fair enough, if they do fair enough.

But I wanted to put that argument across so that people consider it when complaining about lack of signings because without a doubt this way of bringing the youth through impacts on what we do with the money at the top end.
Ps. What we then do with the money and who we sign etc from outside (or bring people back) is a different argument.

Not sure why some people would be happy if we signed a Percival and paid him top dollar and would praise the club but we don't seem to appreciate it when the club sign gildart and also want him to be paid less?