True.but there is no indication that either are fading infact JP has been imense.

Bottom line is we all know sometime in the near future both will be gone.we know this,and im sure the club do too and i would like to think they are making conitingency plans for when it happens.

Maxi-I agree totally my post was more aimed at not needing Briscoe at all mate.
BT-I agree 100% re-JP but i do fear at some point the Coach and Club are gonna expect a performance/big stints he can't give so for me a frontline Prop is needed asap.

I agree rhinoms.the signing of a prop to replace those two is going to be a huge move for us though.We wont find another JP thats for sure but it has to be a high quality player.we cant dive in and just sign someone will nilly like a ben cross or even an Achurch,who may come good but is not a pack leader.if its not happening this year i would expect us to be sniffing around every high quality prop off contract next year.

There is a lack of top quality props available since the NRL route has dried up. Which is why it made sense to extend the contracts of Kylie, Kirke & Bailey. Props like a red wine can be at their best when mature. I would guess GH has a reserve fund within the cap should one become available.

I said Kylie had earned his exstension but not at the cost of losing someone like Singleton which i hope won't be the case.
Bailey although hit and miss was also worth a new contract but renewing kirkes deal makes no sense whatsoever imo.
Singleton should be in the 17 when fit as will JP and Bailey also i don't doubt the same applies to Kylie .
Foster ,Delaney ,Jjb ,Ablett ,Clarkson and Ward cover BR that's even before Minichella makes the expected breakthrough.
We've signed Yates and still have Moore under contract so JC imo retaining Kirke makes no sense at all!!

Plus I'm sure a "mutual agreement" for an early release could come around for any senior player not getting playing time.

Our recruitment/retention policy with props has been questionable. Yes, there's a lack of finished-article top props around, but it's nonsense that nothing has been available. Off the top of my head three potentially fine props, all of whom could have been immediate first-teamers and matured through the next decade at Leeds, changed clubs last off-season. Scott Taylor went to Wigan, fair enough. But we ran the rule over Alex Walmsley and rejected him and let Kyle Amor go to Wakefield. Instead we prioritized the re-signing of a 35-year-old impact prop and a 31-year-old non-impact prop. Meanwhile props of varying degrees of talent and potential in Griffin, Burgess and Baldwinson have also fallen out with and out of the club for varying reasons.

Whether or not some red wines are best when mature, which prop rotation would you be happier with for this or next season, and onwards?

Peacock/Leuluai/Bailey/Kirke/Singleton/Moore

Peacock/Bailey/Amor/Walmsley/Singleton/Baldwinson

It makes perfect sense, if you have the next production line to introduce and take over. Don't know if you have noticed but the two planned are now leaving. This was exactly why as suggested on the other thread, Leeds had their priorities all wrong. Now the decision to renew the contracts of the others first has put them in a predicament, with the only two options being, Keep playing over the hill until they are done, or buy exernally and possibly big money.

The fact that people are pitching Amor, Walmsley and Taylor as "top quality" gives you an idea of the dearth at the position.

All three have potential, but still have some way to go.

maybe not top quality but i would have them all over every prop bar peacock, and given there ages they will get a hell of a lot better

Not sure how anybody can argue with this. The club has screwed up...simples.

The backs have been handled just fine, but of no use if the progressively ageing majority clapped out forwards or useless forwards (Kirke) can't compete and set the platform for the backs to excel.

I thought we had lost Singleton only to injury are you suggestion something else?

The 17 should be decided on form. Singleton having proven himself will have an equal chance of a place in the 17. We still need the experienced players who can cut it in the big games. Extending Kirke & Bailey's contracts makes good sense as it takes pressure off the youngsters who will have time come up to the standards required and gain the mental toughness. If the youngsters become regular fixtures in the 17 or if we manage to sign a quality prop then we can let Moore/Kirke/Bailey go if they are overtaken in the pecking order. To throw out 2 or 3 highly experienced props and bet everything on some promising youngsters is foolhardy and naive.

I specifically said "top quality props" It is a nonsense to suggest the 3 you mention as they have not reached this status. Griffin did not cut the mustard and Burgess and the promising but unproven Baldwinson went for the money and a life downunder.

Of the choice you offer I would go with the first group who have a reliable label and a known quality vintage rather than a young screw top that needs longer in the barrel. In other words I rather prefer a Rioja Crianza than a Beaujolais Nouveau.

We already have Singleton developed up to first team standard, the other 2 you speak of jumped ship for the money and a chance in the NRL. In the light of this I would suggest the Leeds management have addressed their priorities rather well by securing 3 loyal and proven champion level props for a further period which will allow youngesters to mature and perhaps quality to be recruited. Now with other back row options we also have the opportunity for Delaney to move up front. You choose to take the negative view while I see this period as a transitional one that needs some old heads as well as young lions.

JC-I agree 100% about the "Transitional period" and the mix of young Lions with quality Experienced players so again where does Kirke fit in and don't you think we should have a quality replacement for at the very least Kylie waiting in the wings amongst the Acadamy?
The pack has loads of experience in the shape of JP ,Kylie ,Bailey ,Jjb ,Delaney ,Abblett ,Moore and younger lads with big experience like Clarkson ,Ward and Mcshane to an extent add in Singleton ,Foster and the promising Minchella plus the untried Yates.
I still see no place or reason for Kirke and to an extent Moore but i do see the need for at the very least 1 other fresh younger Prop!!

There are only some wines that can mature and be better after 10 years and that depends on the grapes you have available to start with.

It’s about the mix really isn’t it.

You might be able to blood a Yates or A.Youngster into a rotation of JP, Kylie and Bailey, but you wouldn’t want to be forced in to playing a youngster in a rotation Bailey, Singleton and Achurch. That’s how I would look at it. Kirke/Moore aren’t there to cover a spot of a youngster, but to cover the spots of the experienced players. If Yates and A.Youngster show themselves as a bolter they can push them further back, if they don’t then we aren’t left lining up with Bailey, Singleton, Achurch, Yates.

Too true and why I believe the viniculture that has produced a proven vintage is a better bet for important occassions than the risk of a young new world product that lacks maturity. Even good grapes can turn out a bad year.

It should be pointed out that the lighter Kirke label while never a Gran Reserva has won several tasting medals and is still improving and still worth keeping in the cellar for a little while longer.

Unfortunately you can't have your cellar full of vintage wines if you only have a limited amount to spend. There is a necessity to have some midrange wines and also some quaffing wines to fill in on occasions. Some of these wines will go sour if you keep them too long.

Hopefully he isn't, still the possibility for NRL sniffing round Watkins or Hall too , but with their new families don't think they'll be tempted just yet. Briscoe has signed for next year though...or so I am lead to believe.

Which is precisely the point. The JP & Kylie bodegas provide our fine wines and it is true we have a limited supply left. The full bodied but light finish of the Kirke label & the robust but acidic Bailey label have sat on the shelves equally in reserve bins (certainly not Reservas) and used for the mid range while the quaffing stuff is only used briefly with Griffin now corked it is left to Moore and any young wines to cover this demand until they are aged for a bit longer.

Hence why we should have kept Amor who in my opinion is better than Moore, Kirke, Griffin and Bailey.
Kirke should have been dumped before Amor was even though he has upteen grand final rings.
What`s to say Amor would not have had a couple had he been retained?

JC-In wine terms Kirke isn't even an old half bottle of Lambrini and shouldn't be in any "Cellar" just the nearest skip!

Bit harsh there rhinoms. I expected you to say something like...not so good on the nose with a hint of raspberry and a weak finish! But that could equally apply to Chateau Bailey.