Leeds were known for not paying the best wages ,but could attract the quality of the players by offering them a much better chance of winners medals than signing for another team for more money but less chance of silverware. This dangling of the carrot certainly seemed to work in the sinfield era

I've heard that said a lot and I don't doubt it's true, but equally, I'm sure their top players weren't poor.

Your right pop tart I doubt it would be a pittance, and can turn out be a very short career for some unfortunately . But I do think the draw of medals will have swayed some players into not chasing the wage as apposed to the glory . Unfortunately for us at this present time we can offer the lower wages no problem but would come unstuck when offering the glory . Having said that I would dearly love our club to be in that situation in years to come. I’m hoping the new revamp spurs us all on to bigger and better things .

Absolutely
To be honest, above a certain value, I'd chase the glory too.

Its not just that Leeds pay less. We can I'm sure offer one of their players more than Leeds, we'd just have to reduce the rest of the team wages.
So a player like Peacock as an example could earn more with us, but he'd be on his own, getting battered and winning less than he loses.
At Leeds, earning slightly less, he plays with others of equal calibre, enhancing his value if he does move and more likely to get International honours along the way.

Fifita and TJ are good draws for us. Until his recent issues maybe, players would probably have come to play here because Fifita is here. As a centre you'd want to play alongside Tom.
But when we are struggling with those guys being injured or not playing because they don't want to wear a tracker (!) we end up with Gigot or Innes, with the greatest respect, who no one else wants.

Do not get this Leeds paid poor wages A few year ago Wakefield went after two of Leeds second team .Both said they did not won't to come ,as they were getting paid more to play in the Leeds second team ,than what Wakefild were offering for them to play in the first team

Because it's nonsense. Leeds along with Wigan, Saints, Hull, and Warrington pay top wages, usually, way way more than we do.

What they don't have to do is pay over the odds. If we offer a player X and Leeds match it, the player will generally go to Leeds for overwhelmingly obvious reasons. So Leeds doesn't pay low, they just don't have to pay higher. Interestingly it's less effective with overseas players, who will generally follow the money despite the crud they spout about new challenges.

This is why by comparison most of our SL stars have usually been overseas players as we can't compete at a domestic level.

I think the difference that players stay at Leeds for more than they could get rather than what we could offer.

b
Simple really ,where are these players going to get winners medals ,wakefield or Leeds. As we’ve seen first hand injuries play a big part in any league campaign, would have thought it was a no brainier really , get a chance of a winners medal at leeds or zero chance at wakey . Leeds have always have had bigger ambitions than wakey ,and a young lad starting out would find it hard to resist if called on by the loiners over wakey
It was Sinfield himself who stated this some years ago not some silly chip oil talk

i think if we beat leigh the times we play them that might be enough to survive

I wouldn't sit comfortably if we only had 4/6 points this season. I certainly wouldn't be expecting to stay up.