Which could be 0 on the cap if they use the extra 50k because of his long service.

Which make him amazing value compared to Washbrook, as an example

Yeah I know, I meant Micheals might be worth another year with Yeamo wanting to move in to the pack.

I'd still be surprised if we get value for money.

It's only one discount per club, IIRC, and Whiting also qualifies.

I knew that, but not sure how Hull use it, even if they use 25k on each player it's still good value.

I like micheals he's steady, not my first choice but he does a job when needed.
I suppose a squad could be two ways, either have a small squad of stars & hope to god they stay fit & avoid injury, which lets face it would be almost impossible in a contact sport, or have a huge squad with a decent spine & a few top players & lots of cover in all positions. It's very difficult under the salary cap & the players available on both sides of the world.

Whiting

Not my first choice either and that's why he shouldn't be kept, we shouldn't be signing overseas players as squad players, we have two young wingers with loads of potential, but if I fear that if Michaels signs he would be first choice in Radfords eyes and.

My first thoughts on signing Tuiavave was positive, he looks to have all the physical attributes, he can pass, his off the floor pick up is superb, he can kick, he backs up and I think the motivation [ishould[/i be there for him to do well so that he can possibly get a deal back in the NRL (because let's face it why would any native want to stay away from home for potentially a shed load less money).
I think he'll go really really well at centre and I'd like to think that if Pryce gets injured next season we DON'T put him in at 6 nor look to him being our 6 for 2017 either (though wouldn't be the worst option in the world)

Whilst he might well be able to go great there I really hope that we can focus on keeping players in their positions/not break up partnerships/moving several players around & take the youngsters from the squad when needed.

Is Lancaster ready, I don't know but I guess unless we play him we won't ever know, last time I looked playing a rookie winger and centre worked out amazingly well for us. I'd love Lancaster & CT to play together tbh, with Pritchard on that side I think it'd have a lot of opposition right flanks having a very tough time.
how's that for a bit of positivity

I know nothing about Tuimavave, could be a masterstroke, could be a duffer, have to wait and see.

The point I do want to comment on, however, is something that I have really never understood: The argument that a player is not ready for week in, week out SL, or that they need to be. In what world does anyone ever think that a young player is? How is it ever possible for a young player to come through what is clearly an inferior standard* as a fully-formed SL-standard player? Across all sports improvement relies upon testing yourself against better opponents. Once you're competent/proficient at a level, you need to move up. And contrary to how some people seem to want to portray that in an extreme way in order to ridicule the suggestion, that doesn't mean handing over a first-team shirt to a rookie as your permanent first choice.

* I also find pointing out the gulf between 19s and SL entirely redundant. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows this, but a) there is no way of changing this, and b) how do you ever hope for a player to bridge the gap without being thrown into the first team for a spell? To bring through youngsters you unfortunately have to accept that they will make mistakes. Hopefully they learn from them and progressively make less.

Now I'm not saying that you can't ever see whether or not a player is ready to be given a chance in a few games, obviously sometimes you can. I'm only saying that what I don't understand is when a player is on the fringes with a few games under their belt and looking ok, how can you know for sure that they won't learn and improve quickly unless you give them further opportunity to find out?

For clarity/balance I don't think signing players in the same positions is a heinous crime, either. It is what it is, another option. If the youngster cuts the mustard better than the signing I would hope that they would be given the place.

clubs like hull in mid table,wont take the risk on blooding many young players,with the risk of relagation.

I agree with the thought process you have there, but look at the situation Hull are in for he next 7 games. We have no realistic change of progression to the top 4 so it could be viewed that the next 7 games are trial games for which you can give a run of 3 or 4 games to a few (but only a few) youngsters to gain the experience of top level RL.

The management team are is a no win position in this scenario. Radford has said on the radio, whilst its still possible he will try to get to forth spot. If he doesn't say that the club would be accused of lacking ambition. Would it have been reasonable to openly say "we are using the super 8's as an experience exercise to blood some youth in readiness for a real tilt in 2016?

As regards Carlos T, lets give the kid a chance. Afterall, there were a fair few "experts" on here who wrote off Jordan Thompson before he'd worn the shirt