Ideally we need to concentrate on a SH who is around the 23-25 year old mark. Someone who has experience but who is young enough to play for Wigan for the next 5,6,7 years with Sam.

The only way to make this possible (sadly) is by throwing money at the players club and the player, if they are Aussie, make it worth their while to play for Wigan.

Contracts can be broken if the money is right for the player and the club.

We can't achieve this with Orford, despite being a great player we'll only get two years out of him tops.

So who are the targets? Players who can't play Rep footy, players who can't get into the state team, this doesn't mean they are bad players, just players who aren't as good as, primarily, Lockyer and Thurston.

So who fits this bill?

Dobson
Soward
Finch
Cronk
Herbert
etc

Yes the majority are contracted but contracts will be ended if the money is right. Make Wigan desirable for the player.

yes .it has freed up nearly $300,000

now benny might get karmicheal hunt in the red V



craig wing has been a 1.5million$$ 3year deal with the bulls

We won't be getting Cronk. The Salary cap restrictions would not allow us to throw the money at him which would be required.

I think we should take a risk with Myler, if it's not working out straight away we will still have Leuluai, Phelps, Roberts who can and have all played in the halves.

I would also love to sign Orford, but although I would rather sign him, Myler is the more realistic option. I think IL is more likely to be after Orford though as I heard that IL was being stubborn about the fact we need and old head to partner Sam.

Non-Avaliable to avaliable is usually a matter of throwing some dollars in the right direction.

There are very few Aussies from that list who I would want anyhow.

why does no-one think the Tommy and Sam partnership will work?

As an interested observer, just how 'rich' a club are Wigan nowadays??

I know you threw big cash at Fielden, mainly out of desparation to avoid the drop, but since then only Gleeson has seen you splash the cash.

Just curious, as I never thought Lenegan was a big spending type of guy??...

i would say IL is thirfty rather than tight/skint. id say wigan have the same backing as wire do financially. its just a case of being sensible with the money

Seeing as theres only us paid a decent transfer fee in god knows how long id say were still pretty rich. I dont think theres many other sides can afford to max out the cap plus pay out 100k on a transfer fee plus be paying their coach 200k a year. The last point could be an interesting one if IL and BN sit down and talk about a new deal as Nobby got his crazy money deal under the old regime.

That's an excellent point...The problem with spending money on transfer fees nowadays is that it is, 99% of the time, dead money with no return on it.

Fielden, for example, will not command any type of fee when he goes on his way, unlike in the old days where clubs would at least try to recoup some money on a player.

I suppose it actually makes the transfer market an even trickier place nowadays....Using the Gleeson deal as an example, I'm guessing Wigan would have to have carried out a big costing plan, weighing up the pro's and con's of signing a player who potentially could hammer a big hole in your finances, not just now, but in the future.

fielden is a good example of a player who, at the time, was well worth the transfer fee we paid. problem is, he hasnt lived up to that fee (for whatever reason) and in a lot of peoples eyes will be seen as a failure at wigan

the £100k for gleeson, if it came from IL pocket, is chump change to him. however, it would have taken some fancy accounting if it came out the clubs coffers

To be fair to your accounting team, they wouldn't be the first to play around with figures...



I think the Warrington/Andrew Johns deal was basically a Simon Moran- sponsored plaything, with plenty of 'hidden' strings....

....I'm guessing the Johns' deal was the forerunner for the recent changing of the tax rules concerning overseas players...

Does anybody think we've actually signed players but have yet to announce it, or are we going down that slippery slope of being left with scraping the bottom of the barrel. Surely we've got to strike soon everybody's being snapped up left right and centre and it's time to get the chequebook out and make some decisions.
I'm not calling for rash decisions but like Lenegan says we've had plays earmarked for a while and if he's now met them and isn't satisfied with what he sees surely the club has a plan B.

Some interesting points about signings and money.

I for one would sooner have IL to be sensible with the spending and only splash the cash when the perfect deal comes along.

To spend big on the right player/player will be far more worthwhile then spending the same amount and several 'average' average players who add squad size but very little else to our team.

At this stage I truly believe we are only 3 players away from being a team who can realistically challenge for the league. So offloading more players for less coming in isn't a bad thing, as long as we recruit strongly in key areas.

Backing up this point I would seriously sooner see IL come back empty handed than spend the CAP on someone who, to be honest, isn't good enough for what we want to achieve, hold on to the CAP and spend wisely.

I truly believe structure and a long partnership in the halves is not what we need, not a 'quick 2yr fix' as we'd be getting with Orford.
Stability in the halves is needed, and our lack of stability in this key area has reflected on our performances.

For one I think loosing what stability we had in the halves (losing Barrett) caused a massive hangover which resulted in poor displays of attack.

Despite the fact that overall I think Orford is a good 7, I think it's short sighted without a long term back-up plan.

I wouldn't have this issue with aging props, but the halves is clearly different.

Just a case of seeing who's available and on what deal.

I'm pleased IL is being strict with his signings. This way when we do make a signing it'll be a well thought out move that will truly benefit our team.

With Brian Noble's future still being unclear, who exactly is in charge of your recruitment??

Fair enough if its Lenegan, I guess its his money to do with as he wants, but you only have to look at Wire as an example of what can happen if you allow a 'supporter' loose with his chequebook....Its took Simon Moran quite a while to finally realise that you need somebody with a Rugby brain to sort out your squad...

IL's seems to be cautious with his chq book and the CAP, for this reason I'm unconsidered about him making rash signings.

Ok, he won't make rash signings, but does he have the know-how to make the RIGHT signings??....



In this era of the salary cap, its even more vital to get recruitment correct....I think its fair to say that a number of clubs, Wigan & Wire included, are just 1 or 2 signings from having the right blend for success....For this reason, I'd make sure your future coach is being given adequate input to what is needed.

Obviously.

That's actually quite and interesting point if Noble isn't being retained at the end of the year and Lenegan has already got somebody lined up, maybe the new coach is already influencing the signings telling Lenegan who he wants without nobles knowledge.

Don't let your mind wonder too far!

Stranger things have happened you never know.

Steven Kearney.

Andy Lynch has signed a new contract with the Bulls, so for those who wanted him, it's not going to happen.

it already did on page 58