: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:08 pm  

We've not paid a transfer fee for a while - what do you think Bradford would do if we put a £400k bid in for Sam Burgess.

Would it be worth doing ?

With Lee Smith potentially going (aledgedly) and plenty of room on salary cap (aledgedly), and no quota implications from this, it might be a good time to try make a move.

: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:13 pm  

Raymond Luxury-Yacht wrote:

We've not paid a transfer fee for a while - what do you think Bradford would do if we put a £400k bid in for Sam Burgess.

Would it be worth doing ?

With Lee Smith potentially going (aledgedly) and plenty of room on salary cap (aledgedly), and no quota implications from this, it might be a good time to try make a move.

I think they would laugh themselves silly at being able to fleece that kind of money out of Leeds for a player who has had one good season. The cheque would be in the bank before the ink was dry.

: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:13 pm  

tvoc wrote:

So the upshot is GH replaced the departing Scruton, Ellis, Toopi and Tansey with Buderus and now has no plans to replace the non appearance of Eastwood.

Four players contributing a combined total of 90 appearances in 2008 replaced by one that will be lucky to make 20.

Maybe the salary cap's just biting. You've won the league twice on the bounce, I would suggest that that gives your current players a bit of leverage when it comes to their contract renewels. That might be where your wages are going.

: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:14 pm  

tvoc wrote:

So the upshot is GH replaced the departing Scruton, Ellis, Toopi and Tansey with Buderus and now has no plans to replace the non appearance of Eastwood.

Four players contributing a combined total of 90 appearances in 2008 replaced by one that will be lucky to make 20.

That's a pretty spectacular fail for the necessary '09 recruitment by the back to back Champions.

Leeds must have some outstanding kids on the fringes for this to come good in 2009. Reserve results might suggest they'll struggle though with the step up into a overstretched first team squad as the season wears on.

That will have no bearing whatsoever on the youngster's ability to "step up" as they will be surrounded by big game players with success,experience and confidence to support them.
I honestly don't see the panic at all my reading of the situation is thus:
Tansey- Buderus,Mcshane.
Toopi-watkins,gibson and ablett.
Scruton-burgess(will play more)kirke can play there and then there's ambler to step up.
Ellis- This is the only player imo that hasn't been replaced like for like with eastwood not coming but we do have a more than capable back-row with Ali,Jjb,Kirke,Ablett,Worrall and of course the versatility within our squad means peacock and bailey can fit in there comfortably imo aswell as the youngster's i.e manning and liam brown.
Calm down!!

: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:14 pm  

Lord_Percy wrote:

I've changed my mind, you're absolutely correct, Leeds must go out and sign Inglis, Burgess and Hindmarsh if we are to have any chance of winning silverware this year.

It's attitudes like this that have proved so successful in the past.

2005 and 2006 weren't successful in my view and Leeds probably had cap space available in those seasons as well.

Have you seen the state of Inglis this season, he's turned into a bigger blimp then Eastwood.

I expect Leeds (or any Champion team) to not rest on their laurels if they want and expect to stay at the top. I'd expect any Leeds team to use their fullish cap allocation.

I'd expect the Eastwood situation to have been resolved far sooner than it was and Leeds now to be making a replacement happen. If Eastwood was required (and he was) why isn't a replacement needed?

: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:15 pm  

We're doomed. Doomed I tell ya!

: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:15 pm  

tvoc wrote:

Leeds' 5 props in 2008 (from a potential 35 games = 140 prop appearances assuming 2+2 bench)

Leuluai - 32
Peacock - 32
Bailey - 24
Scruton - 30
Burgess - 21

Total 139

Leeds 4 props in 2009 (from a potential 7 games so far)

Leuluai - 7
Peacock - 7
Bailey - 6
Burgess - 7

As injuries and fatigue (which itself contributes to injuries) sets in someone is going to have to make the numbers up but who?

Kirke can cover the front row. Ablett is not playing in the backs now and we also have Buderus (subject to injury) as a forward replacement.

I do not see an issue here.

: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:16 pm  

tvoc wrote:

why isn't a replacement needed?

Needed doesn't equate to available - how many players of the required standard are currently without a club?

: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:16 pm  

tvoc wrote:

2005 and 2006 weren't successful in my view and Leeds probably had cap space available in those seasons as well.

2005 was succesful in my view.

I'd imagine Leeds have had cap space available in every Sl season, including 2004, 2007 and 2008.

Since when did spending right up to or even above the cap guarantee success Mr Whelan?

: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:17 pm  

tvoc wrote:

So the upshot is GH replaced the departing Scruton, Ellis, Toopi and Tansey with Buderus and now has no plans to replace the non appearance of Eastwood.

Four players contributing a combined total of 90 appearances in 2008 replaced by one that will be lucky to make 20.

That's a pretty spectacular fail for the necessary '09 recruitment by the back to back Champions.

Leeds must have some outstanding kids on the fringes for this to come good in 2009. Reserve results might suggest they'll struggle though with the step up into a overstretched first team squad as the season wears on.

Danny Allan appears to be Tansey's replacement. Ablett is back in the forwards with the gametime that Gibson & Watkins are getting these will have more games than Toopi.
Kirke will up his appearances