Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:01 pm  

dany1979 wrote:

In addition to the players already mentioned I still expect more signings including Bowen in that.

We must have some serious spending power.

If we sign Bowen, Sarginson and Clubb in addition to Pettybourne and Hopkins I think that will be us done tbh. I'm not saying we'll have spent our full budget but I'm not convinced we ever do when you compare the talent that walks through the door to that coming in.

I think we're a winger short tbh. I hear nothing to suggest Briscoe will be coming here but with the emergence of Manfredi and Burgess that may be no bad thing.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:05 pm  

NickyKiss wrote:

If we sign Bowen, Sarginson and Clubb in addition to Pettybourne and Hopkins I think that will be us done tbh. I'm not saying we'll have spent our full budget but I'm not convinced we ever do when you compare the talent that walks through the door to that coming in.

I think we're a winger short tbh. I hear nothing to suggest Briscoe will be coming here but with the emergence of Manfredi and Burgess that may be no bad thing.

Be interesting to see if there are further departures too - Lauaki?

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:07 pm  

Bowen, Sarginson, Clubb, Pettybourne and Hopkins

Out: Tomkins, Richards, Mossop, Tuson

We are definately weaker for quality next year. Going for more bodies with a lesser quality is what it looks like.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sun Sep 22, 2013 7:42 am  

Tricky Dicky wrote:

Bowen, Sarginson, Clubb, Pettybourne and Hopkins

Out: Tomkins, Richards, Mossop, Tuson

We are definately weaker for quality next year. Going for more bodies with a lesser quality is what it looks like.

Do we not count the emergence of Hampshire,Williams,Burgess,Manfredi, Greenwood etc. and their more than likely extra game time next year as additions? (In both terms of quality and numbers).
I mean their places as numbers in the squad will also be filled by up and coming talent from the 19s i.e Gildart etc. so in reality they're possible promotion to say 20/25 in the squad will also be additions to the front line squad?

If we do release 4 players each season then it seems that we only look at the established players we bring in to compare. To me this is wrong as IL has always said he would divert a large proportion of freed up money to pay more to and keep more of the youngsters.

It's a fine line, I mean where do you get another Tomkins? But if we can improve other positions and/or develop players and give them time to become established I think we make the transition easier than if we ignore the youth and try and replace like for like, player for player.

It's also like the Richards issue, we're not losing a 28 year old Richards. We're replacing a player that by common consent is at the right stage of his career to let him go. Do we hang on for 2/3 more years and get ever decreasing value or do we get less out of the youngsters short term but at least give them a chance to develop and get more value out of them down the line as they improve.
It's certainly better than losing them now for want of keeping a player too long.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:08 am  

Jukesays wrote:

Do we not count the emergence of Hampshire,Williams,Burgess,Manfredi, Greenwood etc. and their more than likely extra game time next year as additions? (In both terms of quality and numbers).
I mean their places as numbers in the squad will also be filled by up and coming talent from the 19s i.e Gildart etc. so in reality they're possible promotion to say 20/25 in the squad will also be additions to the front line squad?

If we do release 4 players each season then it seems that we only look at the established players we bring in to compare. To me this is wrong as IL has always said he would divert a large proportion of freed up money to pay more to and keep more of the youngsters.

It's a fine line, I mean where do you get another Tomkins? But if we can improve other positions and/or develop players and give them time to become established I think we make the transition easier than if we ignore the youth and try and replace like for like, player for player.

It's also like the Richards issue, we're not losing a 28 year old Richards. We're replacing a player that by common consent is at the right stage of his career to let him go. Do we hang on for 2/3 more years and get ever decreasing value or do we get less out of the youngsters short term but at least give them a chance to develop and get more value out of them down the line as they improve.
It's certainly better than losing them now for want of keeping a player too long.

Spot on.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:17 am  

Geoff wrote:

Spot on.

I agree but also disagree.

We have let 4 go but appear to be bringing in 5. I would much ratjher let 4 go and instaed of bringing in 5 new players, then bring in 3 much m,ore high quality players and rely on the youth for depth. This would surely give the youngsters more game time.

Players such as club and sarginson will block the way for the likes of burgess and greenwood becuase of the sheer volume of new recruits. They will need game time where as if we signed fewer players then the depth would come from the youth.

I would have prefeerred to not sign sarginson or club and to have signed briscoe..

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:38 pm  

Jukesays wrote:

Do we not count the emergence of Hampshire,Williams,Burgess,Manfredi, Greenwood etc. and their more than likely extra game time next year as additions? (In both terms of quality and numbers).
I mean their places as numbers in the squad will also be filled by up and coming talent from the 19s i.e Gildart etc. so in reality they're possible promotion to say 20/25 in the squad will also be additions to the front line squad?

If we do release 4 players each season then it seems that we only look at the established players we bring in to compare. To me this is wrong as IL has always said he would divert a large proportion of freed up money to pay more to and keep more of the youngsters.

It's a fine line, I mean where do you get another Tomkins? But if we can improve other positions and/or develop players and give them time to become established I think we make the transition easier than if we ignore the youth and try and replace like for like, player for player.

It's also like the Richards issue, we're not losing a 28 year old Richards. We're replacing a player that by common consent is at the right stage of his career to let him go. Do we hang on for 2/3 more years and get ever decreasing value or do we get less out of the youngsters short term but at least give them a chance to develop and get more value out of them down the line as they improve.
It's certainly better than losing them now for want of keeping a player too long.

^This 110%

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:47 pm  

Tricky Dicky wrote:

I agree but also disagree.

We have let 4 go but appear to be bringing in 5. I would much ratjher let 4 go and instaed of bringing in 5 new players, then bring in 3 much m,ore high quality players and rely on the youth for depth. This would surely give the youngsters more game time.

Players such as club and sarginson will block the way for the likes of burgess and greenwood becuase of the sheer volume of new recruits. They will need game time where as if we signed fewer players then the depth would come from the youth.

I would have prefeerred to not sign sarginson or club and to have signed briscoe..

Burgess looks set to take the 5 shirt, and Sarginson seems to have been signed as a squad player, how is Sarginson blocking Burgess' progress? There are 4 prop spots every week as well and it's a position where there are a lot of injuries so Greenwood will get his chance if he plays well enough. Having said thar he's right at the back of the queue at the start of the year anyway.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sun Sep 22, 2013 9:08 pm  

Tomorrow is announcement day, so prepare for this forum to go into meltdown when Clubb/Sarginson are unveiled haha

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sun Sep 22, 2013 9:33 pm  

Jukesays wrote:

Do we not count the emergence of Hampshire,Williams,Burgess,Manfredi, Greenwood etc. and their more than likely extra game time next year as additions? (In both terms of quality and numbers).
I mean their places as numbers in the squad will also be filled by up and coming talent from the 19s i.e Gildart etc. so in reality they're possible promotion to say 20/25 in the squad will also be additions to the front line squad?

If we do release 4 players each season then it seems that we only look at the established players we bring in to compare. To me this is wrong as IL has always said he would divert a large proportion of freed up money to pay more to and keep more of the youngsters.

It's a fine line, I mean where do you get another Tomkins? But if we can improve other positions and/or develop players and give them time to become established I think we make the transition easier than if we ignore the youth and try and replace like for like, player for player.

It's also like the Richards issue, we're not losing a 28 year old Richards. We're replacing a player that by common consent is at the right stage of his career to let him go. Do we hang on for 2/3 more years and get ever decreasing value or do we get less out of the youngsters short term but at least give them a chance to develop and get more value out of them down the line as they improve.
It's certainly better than losing them now for want of keeping a player too long.

Very good point sir.