IN Smith, Green, Thornley

Plus major upgrades for a lot of the younger players - long term contracts and pay increases.

I suspect there is still some room left on the SC as well.

On Wigan Tv Shaun Wane spoke of Taylor and Green as new signings to replace the lads that have left and said "we've got Green and Taylor as well as anybody else that may come in before the end of the year".

Words to that effect anyway so he didn't sound like a bloke that had given up on the idea of new players coming in.

No doubting Finch's quality, but as people have said, in the semi's last year he bottled it big time. Poor kicking, stray passes & the ones that found there mark were generally flat passes to Hock into a wall of defenders. He was a great player for most of his time here no doubt and leaves us with some great memories, but I think Tommy's time out injured showed us who was really making the team tick.

A few of us have been asking that very same question. £500k out of £1.7m is a hell of a big number to lose.

It happens all the time and I have mentioned it before. Player leaves and so he was rubbish. Look at some of the posts about Hock. When it looked like he was off the criticism mounted about his wayward off-loading and discipline that if you mentioned it when he was a nailed on Wigan player these things were minor blemishes on a great players game.

I am not suggesting everyone is as fickle as this but there are certainly some who will slag off players to justify the clubs current signings because as we know, the club can do no wrong.

Bottom line is no matter how good or bad Finch and Tommy where what counts now is how good Green and Smith are. Slagging off former players who clearly were class won't change that.

For most of the season Wane exceeded my expectations, by the end he had just about lived up to them.

To be fair though I've seen players who are considered natural centres who have looking unconvincing against 'proper centres' in games that count. In fact young centres generally have lots of flaws in their game so why would Hughes be any exception? Stefan Marsh was considered an out and out centre but he looked less convincing than Hughes but I'd hazard a guess that if Marsh was still at the club you'd be all for his selection at centre, regardless of whether he's the best option purely because you want someone you consider 'a centre' at centre.

Tomkins wasn't a natural fullback, he had flaws in his game and still does but he's adapted to the role over time. The only way we really got to see how effective Tomkins was at fullback was by giving him a chance and he proved himself to be the best available option.

Versatility isn't a bad thing. It's not like Hughes is going to become a terrible player if he's played at centre. If he plays there and is absolutely awful he'll be dropped and Thornley will play instead. In fact it's not even guaranteed that Hughes will be first choice centre as both he and Thornley will get an opportunity in pre-season.

There's nothing wrong with finding out about a players versatility and in young players it can often be beneficial to give them chances in different positions. Playing on the wing certainly seems to have helped Goulding.

Hughes has only started 6 games at centre for the first team. In Goulding's first 6 starts at Wigan he was far from convincing! (Admittedly the team was garbage). In many games later than that he looked unconvincing.

From what I've seen of Hughes at centre he's had a couple of disappointing games, a couple of very good games and four games where he looked like a decent stand in. I think it's worth giving him a few more opportunities at centre to see whether he's the best option.

Sorry but am I the only one that expected no silveware at all last season? Given the losses of quality, experienced players like Deacon, Coley, Hoffman & Joel I definitely didn't! I thought we'd have finished 3rd at best. Wane exceeded my expectations and I think the attack for most of the season was better than we'd seen under Maguire. It was the crunch clashes where I thought some of our experienced "big name" players didn't perform as expected & really stifled our attack by being too predictable. Hence me not being too bothered about our lack of "big" signings. We've signed lads that have a lot to prove & I think they'll deliver

It's a natural progression for some great players from wing, to centre, to stand off, to loose forward.

I thought you only had Hoffman, Lima and Finch in 2011 (and 2012 for the last two), not 2010. If anything the 2010 side was less special on paper.

Correct. The 2010 GF winning side was as follows -

S Tomkins; Goulding, Gleeson, Carmont, Richards; Deacon, Leuluai; Fielden, McIlorum, Coley; J Tomkins, Hansen, O'Loughlin -- Prescott, Riddell, Feka, Farrell

Compared to this years likely team -

Tomkins (Better than he was 2 years ago)
Charnley (Better winger than Goulding)
Goulding (Actually had a better season than Gleeson ever had at Wigan)
[iHughes[/i (Not as good as Carmont)
[iRichards[/i (Not as good as he used to be - still a decent player)
Green (We won't know until he plays, but Deacon was past his best in 2010)
[iSmith[/i (Can't see him being better than Leuluai but stronger kicking game)
Mossop (Has every chance of being better than Fielden was in 2010)
McIlorum (Much better than he was in 2010)
[iLauaki[/i (We'll gloss over this one)
Hansen (Better than he was in 2010)
Hock (Better than Joel Tomkins)
O'Loughlin (Just as good as ever if not better)

Prescott (Should be better than he was in 2010)
Taylor (Should offer a more balanced game than Feka)
Farrell (Better than he was in 2010)
[iTuson[/i (Someone will have to explain the point of his 15 minute spells because I can't understand it)

Bold is where we're stronger - plain text is where it's uncertain and italic is where we're weaker.

On the £500k and where has it gone. One name missing was Roberts who was rumoured to be on a tidy wedge.
We have Green, Taylor, Smith and Thornley coming in and I don't think the first three would have been cheap or in the bargain style of signing. Thornley will probably be on a decent wage too.
Any surplus money will have gone on incremental increases to players already under contract. Can't imagine there being too much spare cash available after those have been taken into account.

Do you think so? Honestly?

Green, Taylor Smith Thornley would command the same money as Fielden, Roberts, Lululai, Finch, J Tomkins (all the preceeding 4 were on books before he left).

You have a different interpretation than I do if that's the case.

I think you're being very kind to Hansen and O'Loughlin there, I would say they both had their best seasons to date that year. Hansen was doing his usual hard graft in defence but also running some great lines and making himself a threat in attack. O'Loughlin seemed to be more of an attacking threat also but I'd accept he's not much different. Prescott and Farrell are debatable too. Prescott's effectiveness depends largely on whether he can steer clear of injury and keep hold of the ball, Farrell's not really any different to 2010 as far as I've noticed