Yes, but none were really expected to be. The key phrase is 'became regulars'. It's one thing to be open to a player earning a spot, another to be suggesting it should be his already. None of those 3 were really first picks after 5 games, either. Lancaster could well be first choice by the end of the season, but at this stage he has not earned first crack at it, and I don't personally see it in the team's best interests yet.

I think pace in the backs is exactly in the teams best interests. I'd be happy with Michaels on the wing, but that would mean Yeaman at centre, which doesn't address the pace problem either.
Wing is probably the easiest position to put a youngster in. Our backs are painfully slow.

Pace in the backs is an asset, but it depends at what cost it comes whether it's worthwhile. No matter how much you keep talking like it's the only factor here, it still isn't.

The backs have balance imo. Is some pace in among it. But it's also big. Power full. Defensively sound. And solid under high balls etc.
Regarding pace wire are 1 of the favourites for the title
Russell - shaul - shaul faster
Reece Evans - Lineham -Lineham faster
Bridge - Sa - I'd sat bridge but neither pace merchants
Atkins - Michaels - Michaels faster even tho Atkinson can shift for a big guy
Monaghan - Talanoa - monaghan faster but not much. He's among the best finishers but not a pace merchant

Look at the squads n do match ups. Wigan n Leeds don't look faster either. Other well favoured teams like hudd n Catalans are not pacey. Need balance in this era. Attack has evolved to be cynical n to focus on the weaknesses of opposition. Probably to a degree it's almost as much about that as making your own chances.

I don't think Cunningham will get a game unless Houghton gets injured. I think Houghton will play the full 80 and Rankin will be on the bench

As an outsider looking in I think your starting 17 looks pretty good on paper. The question marks are in 3 areas for me. 1. The halfbacks and how well they gel, Pryce can disappear when it gets tough and Sneyd can be a bit up and down. 2. The slight lack of quality depth up front, prop and backrow look short on experience and quality if a few of the main players get injuries 3. The coach - who isn't very convincing and I think is out of his depth.

I like the look of some of your younger players and there's a big opportunity for some to make a name for themselves in the forwards.

You have a squad capable of creeping into the 8 but I think you'll just miss out and finish 9th just behind Cas but above HKR. Then again I think the league places from 6-10 are very hard to predict.

I've never said it's the only factor, but I don't think we lose enough through not having Talanoa in the team to warrant having a very slow back line.

A back line of Talanoa, Yeaman (it will happen), Sa & Lineham is not pacey at all. Are you suggesting that by swapping Talanoa for Lancaster we suddenly become defensively unsound?

Not sure we're you get that Shaul is faster than Russell from, or that Evans is slower than Lineham! Michaels won't play in front of Yeaman so I don't think that's a realistic comparison.

Wigan & Leeds don't look faster? Are you for real?

Hardaker, Briscoe, Hall, Watkins & Moon are a lot faster than Shaul, Lineham, Sa, Yeaman & Talanoa. Apart from Bowen, Wigans are faster too.

I want a back line of Shaul, Lineham, Sa, Michaels & Lancaster. If (and its a big if) Michaels does play in front of Yeaman then playing Talanoa in front of Lancaster wouldn't be the worst thing.

Fair enough comments. HBs are key, Radford hasn't delivered yet. Hopefully our depth in the pack will prove OK as our academy players step up although probably a season too early for the likes of Turgut, BTW etc to make big first team impact.

It's also fair to say that expectations amongst our own fans range from pretty modest to suicidal. With so much hinging on a risky HB pairing and a longer term youth development strategy that's sensible, if a bit downbeat for me as a glass half full supporter.

I think a lot of fans are really underrating our chances. It kind of makes a welcome change from being expected to do well and underachieving. To say "a squad capable of creeping into the 8" suggests the best we can achieve is 8th. I don't expect trophies or anything but I consider 8th to be bare minimum. We are capable of 5th if everything clicks. I think we are better than Cas, similar to Huddersfield, and there are big question marks over Salford and Leeds too.

I agree with your question marks though. Apart from the back row, we have some very good youngsters in that area.

You think Evans is quicker than Lineham, seriously?

Lineham would leave him standing.

Seemed to get away pretty easy last time I saw them match up.

Which game was that?

Here's a fact for you. Rhys Evans has only played against Tom Lineham once. In that Evans was at centre and didn't score. You've clearly made that up.

Yes, because centres never come up against wingers do they? And who mentioned him scoring?

It's alright, Lineham's obviously bullet like in comparison, because ARL said so. Even if it did turn out that he was marginally faster, it hardly backs up the 'it's ok to have that back line because everybody else's is slow' line, does it?

Facts are these, the back line we'll most likely have will be slow barring Lineham. Which basically means that unless our halves only unlock defences within 10m of the opponents try line we'll be chased down. We must have the worst record for converting breaks in to tries in the entire league, we are and have been for years, poor in this aspect of the game.