Should we loan any of our fringe players to the Robins on a month by month basis in view of their fairly thin squad? Logan and Masi might benifit for example as they might have more chance in getting some game time than they have with us in the short term!
Better the Dobbin's perhaps than the questionable culture at somewhere like Toronto??

It benefited last year with Abdul but why would we want any of your fringe players that are no better than what we have I'll take Abdul back when he realises he's not going to get in your team on a regular basis

I think you might be suprised how many games Abdul plays.

All I've heard in the last week is how strong Rovers squad, the season hasn't even started and they are already taking about loans players.

With Addy and Wardill already out before a ball has been kicked if injuries start to bite it might benefit both clubs. Not sure how deep Rovers squad is and not suggesting any of our fringe players will walk into their staring XIII but would surely bolster their bench options!

It's pretty deep - to the point that we might even have one of the better second XIIIs in the league. So it's pretty shocking/worrying that we're looking at loan options at this stage. I think it must be that a few aren't quite done with their rehab, rather than a couple of new injuries.

Still at least we're not taking the stance that they'd undermine the culture we're trying to build, like we did during 2016.

The thing is, I think we'd be looking more at your 19 to 25 to help us (not Manu and Paea, obviously) and you'd be looking more at numbers 26+ to help their development. And tbh they'll probably be better at Doncaster than being 18/19th man or playing 15 minutes from the bench for us.

I still haven't completely forgiven Dave K for trying to palm Ross Osbourne off on us last year. Mind you, I was initially pretty dubious about Abdull and he won me right over.

It really must be. The list of rumoured but no-show signings must run into the twenties. Why are all these players knocking you back? Location? Wages? Sheens? It’s very strange.

While some rumours obviously have more substance than others, I just think we've become a less attractive option in recent years. 'Lack of anticipated winningness', is my explanation.

'Building for the future' sent at best a mixed message to potential recruits and existing players ahead of 2012, and the board 'looking for new investment' in 2013 (and only finding Larvin) made us look less of a stable employer. We were drifting a bit really (on the pitch at least), after Morgan left and that culminated in relegation, and even following promotion we're seen as one of the SL teams who'd be most at risk, and the prospect of a cancelled contract won't be massively enticing (although I understand that rule is being reviewed).

We need to change the perception that we're a perennial middle 8s team to attract better players, I imagine - bit of a catch-22, innit?

For all that I enjoyed Pearson's relaxed and confident years, he kept his foot on the accelerator and it worked out in the end. Fair play. We learned the dangers of long-termism (twice!), while also managing to turnover half the squad every second year. It feels like we're headed broadly in the right direction now, if a bit slowly.

Yes its a double edge sword. You need good players to be a top half team, but unless you are a top half team its very hard to attract top players. You end up having to pay over the odds and you end up with an unbalanced squad. Not sure what the answer is, but first you need to just make sure you are SL next year.

Completely agree.

We did pretty well for a few years after our last promotion and other clubs, such as Cas and Hull, provide impressive recent examples that a team can move up the ladder in relatively short order.

I am wishing you well for the season MR. I hope you do well except when you are playing us of course.

why do we need to load players to kr? their fans have already stated on numerous social media outlets they have the best back up players in the league! maybe we should be asking them haha

Logan will unlikely get a look in as is and needs to play if hes going to progress - could be a good option for KR, Downs another, possibly even Turgut

On a month by month basis perhaps, but all three of those will get game time this year. You only need a couple of injuries in the backs and Logan will be in the team. Likewise a few forwards go down and Turgut and Downs are in. Even with a decent run for injuries I wouldnt be surprised to see Downs play 6-8 games and the other two 12-15 games. So you need to be careful with the kind of deals you arrange.

The post Morgan years have certainly been characterised by a shuddering downwards slide. End of the noughties and Hudge was giving it large about being the best team in Hull, FC being an irrelevance and the target being the best team in Yorkshire. A few years later you're relegated, and therefore only 6th on the Yorkshire list and to compound the misery we're Cup winners at Wembley. I can't imagine how hard that must have been to stomach. What are your board's ambitions now? There seems to be an oscillation between genuine challenging and the apologism of "we're a community club/plucky underdogs". Wakefield of course are now the best underdogs in the comp if that's a target.

I suspect the "perennial middle 8s" stumbling block for recruitment will be overcome now we're in year 3 of Peacock's 5 year plan; as you say, success can create a virtuous circle. But there's still something a bit odd in that the promise of 5 quality signings months ago has been followed by Tommy Lee and one of the Walnes. Surely you're not that unattractive? And back to the loan signing point. I'd be pretty surprised if you thought any of our fringe players were better than yours; don't you have a bigger squad than us already with "superior depth"?

We were so busy with our version of RL seppuku and then trying to recover that your triumphs seemed to me to happen at a distance. Natural coping mechanism, I guess. Like you used to do with club finances, but more languidly aloof.

I've made a few barely veiled criticisms of what I perceive as having been Peacock's strategy of late - but tbf, I don't know how much of what happened was really down to his decisions or advice. Ateotd, there has to be a collective responsibility. Good intentions count for a lot with me, even knowing what they pave.

On the loan of fringe players thing, it only really makes sense if we're struggling to field a fully fit 17. On paper we do have decent depth - if they're contemplating loans, then 6 or 7 must be struggling to be ready for round 1, I assume, in addition to those out long-term.

As for ambition, there possibly a bit of an issue with mixed messages. I'm not sure where it's at. I guess Cas are the obvious ideal to aspire to. But personally I'd like us to play some smash mouth football in the years to come and inflict some suffering. Win or lose, as long as opposition fans go home feeling short changed that's something (even I'm not sure how much that is a mordant joke and how much a bitter truth).