Tend to agree it's as much to do with attitude once you above 16 stone. Moses Leota around that weight and hits the line like a rocket in attack and defence. Sangare is 18 stone plus but I know which one of the two I would rather tackle. In our competition Matty Lees is only around 16 stone but runs and tackles every pound of it.
The handful of 18 stone plus props in the world who can play big minutes with the same intensity in attack and defence command the highest salaries for a reason.

Take Muizz as an example, at 5,8 and all the will in the world, heart and desire would never make up for him not being able to get above 100k by the limits of his height, to get to the top of the game as its now played.

The priority for quota spots is undoubtedly a quality half, though any hopes I had are fading and Myler, Frawley, Miller or is looking increasingly possible. I think we need to be looking at paying a fee for one of the key positions we need in order to work around the spots we have available.

As has been said already, the approach looks like developing a team built on qualities that would seem in the main to achieve a top 6 spot more regularly but without the class to really compete right at the top.

Agreed on the prop front.

I might be reading too much into it, but I wonder if some of the signings are treading a fine line of not blocking top academy products from coming through. Frawley is a steady journeyman, who Sinfield or another top talent should surpass in the next couple of years. I think Miller is around 30, so again leaves space for Edgell or Lumb to come through in a couple of years.

Perhaps they are waiting for the right kind of signing at 7 to develop that next batch, rather than take a spot in the long term.

I could see the sense in that, particularly with spine positions. If you look at both ours and Saints period of dominance, one of the common denominators was the fact that we had home grown players in those spine positions, it would generally mean costs on those expensive positions are less and quota spaces can be used on more ‘luxuries’ if you will.

It would be a big risk to take though.

It would be a huge risk not just in terms of whether the Academy kids make it, but as it would also consign us to not challenging while we wait and see. Frawley to help see Sinfield through I can understand, but the other half must be someone who makes a difference. Frawley's not quick at all, if we're to have a hope we need some speed there.

Good points above; at the end of the day we just need the best players possible, but yes we also need players who are reliable and committed (as we have experienced again this year).

I'm not giving up hope yet on who we're going to sign, there is plenty of time for things to change, especially when NRL clubs reshuffle so aggressively. We are in very dangerous territory if we don't nail a good 7 and a good centre at the minimum for 2024 though. If I was RS I'd have an enormously squeaky bum for next season without more genuine quality in that roster.

He had a big lad and coming to the right age ,
He won’t be on big money and he might not play many games but at least he is the correct size to run and break the line .
As long as we spend some money on better players I don’t see what can go wrong with this signing !!

It’s quite possible he runs with Myler at 7 for one year with a view to Sinfield being the pick in 2025. I hope he gets an SH for 2 years and lets Sinfield fill in for 2 years.
I hope Smith gets a quality centre and SH to give him a decent shot next year

I think we will be looking at longer than 2025 before sinfield is ready for the starting shirt. Myler with Frawley won't see us fare much better than this year.

Ronald Volkman for 2 years, then Sinfield. Between Frawley and Myler they should be able to help Sinfield come through.

The prop really does need to be Burgess or Sutton I think. Centre and half have to be the OQ spots