Going by some of the posts i take it those who have posted sarcastic replys or listed the years of success believe we dont need to recruit/promote from within to strengthen for 2014 then??

Promote from within? Yes. In progress. Ward will hopefully be back and ready to go. Sutcliffe has forced his way in this year. Singleton's maturing very nicely. A few others are around the fringes and no doubt a couple more will be more prominent next year.

Recruit? Yes, in principle. But not for the sake of it. We have to bring in better than we have. We could do with a hooker, but good ones are like rocking horse dung and clubs don't want to let them go. Other clubs have made signings for next year, but not many of those signings would have really added strength to our squad, the ones that would will have cost a fortune.

My sarcasm is at the panic button pushing (the OP was a particularly good example) not at the more rational discussion of our recruitment. Rumours of our demise have often been greatly exaggerated over the years.

On the plea to sign Shaun Lunt as our saviour and answer to our hooking problem next year.
Does anyone else think he was outplayed by McIllourum last night?

It's not a question of demise, which has been blown out of proportion with sarcastic comments form certain posters.

It's a question of the influence of certain players.

Answer these two questions honestly and you will see what is said. How fundamental is Peacock to what we do? How much longer can Peacock play for?

That is just the one example.

He's hugely important.
If our intention is to replace like-for-like then his replacement (if he can be replaced) needs careful consideration. I agree with you that the club should be looking at this now - though not necessarily making premature announcements about it. Peacock will be good for another season IMO and I'd rather the club used that time to line up someone top-notch (should they decide not to promote from within) rather than go into panic-buy mode.
Remember, there were some posters who claimed Peacock was finished two years ago.

I personally think that our mainline props function well as a unit. That whole situation is built around Peacock being a machine, and everyine else filling the gaps around him. When he retires, I think we could concievably see the whole 4 move on. Leuluai is of equal age as Peacock, Bailey adds some steel but no real go forward and Kirke is Kirke. However, as a unit they function. Take Peacock out and its a poor set of props. I'm not sure anyone is able to fill that role, so I would look at a more balanced set of props when Peacock retires.

From my own pov the ones who "fill the gaps" need replacing now or at the very least 2 of them otherwise we'll have asituation where we need 3/4 FR's at once and will end up with another Ben Cross or 2!!
For me Singleton is 1st choice 17 now and IF Bailey is going to be back 1st choice 17 then he needs to move back to FR also.
I dont see the point of Kirke OR Moore especially as the latter is a bit part FR for injuries which imo can be covered within the squad i.e Foster comes into the 17 and Jjb does a stint at prop or even Yates IF he can settle in.
I really dont want a situation when we lose JP and Kylie at the same time and at Least 1 (Kylie imo) should be replaced or have pressure on his spot for 2014.

So your point is correct, but then you are doing it from a position of weakness, rather than strength, thereby increasing the chances of a fall.

No reason why two of the props couldn't have been changed for next season, or at least one, thereby reducing that impact the year after.

Under the current regime there's always criticism that the club stands by its senior players too long. And, to some extent, that POV's a valid one. But there's another side to the coin: by showing loyalty (sometimes in the face of apparent logic) the club gives our top players (and the odd 2nd tier one, no names mentioned) a greater degree of security than they might experience elsewhere. This has to be a factor in persuading players to stick with us. I think Warrington behave similarly; perhaps it has helped avoid the recent, constant transition that Wigan and Saints seem to be experiencing, as players at their peak or with great potential, the likes of FGB, Eastmond, Tomkins x 2 etc. jump ship.

It would appear that Trinity are likely, and unfortunately for them, to have no choice but to off-load Kirmond. I think that both Gary and Brian should be thinking very seriously about going in for him and bringing him to Headingley. I think he has the next JP written all-over him and would actually like to see him come to play a dual-role as a back and front row, with a view to him taking a 'full-time' front row spot in the couple of seasons, possibly with Delaney also being used in a similar with a similar end-result.

If we are taking about strengthening the current squad then he is the only player I would to take in from outside the club and if we don't/can't get him then I am not sure we should be buying for the sake of it.

Thought Kirmond had or will be signing for Warrington?
And that is the point.
We are letting the likes of Walmsley, Amor, Lunt maybe and possibly Kirmond move on to teams that are competing with us at the top instead of signing them to fill the gaps eventually.
Because we are Leeds we tend to think everyone will sign for us at reduced terms.
Our recent signings be it for the first team or the U19`s have not been up to much apart from Moon.
McAvoy was hailed as the new Sam Burgess and Briscoe was a shoe in for international honours within no time at all.
If you were doing a risk assessment of the team you would be on high alert now as our pack and our props in particular are getting older each year.
It has worked up to now but at some time the bubble might burst and we will be up the creek without a paddle.

I do agree with signing a new prop for 2014 as eventually Leuluai and Peacock will break down. I also would like to ask the question about those who are saying Singleton is the future (I hope so to) but I can find nothing online as to how long his contract with the club is for???

Overall, yes but only because of a poor substitution by Anderson. IMO it's no coincidence that Huddersfield were on top when Lunt and Crabtree were on the field. When he took them off Wigan wrestled control and he left JKyle Wood on far too long. By the time Lunt was back, it was over.

I like McIllorum but Lunt has played far better this year.

I would agree with this.we are more than likely going to have to bring in two props of a good standard to go alogside singleton to even start to go close to fill the void that will be left.

Take Peacock out of the equation, and the rest of the props at Leeds are competent at what they do. If you accept that you're not going to be able to replace Peacock with another prop who can do 65 minutes per game and make 3,000m per season (only Crabtree this year has come remotely close to his figures), then those other, competent props are going to need to be upgraded to maintain the same balance in the group.

Finding upgrades on Kirke, Moore and Bailey shouldn't be too difficult according to popular opinion, while Singleton and possibly Mulhern and Yates should improve through natural progression.

The key is ensuring that whoever replaces Peacock as "pack leader" doesn't leave too big a performance gap that other new signings/internal promotions can't make up the difference.

Personally I don't see that there needs to be this 12 month transition where you have the "new leader" playing alongside Peacock. Rugby players are a fairly flexible bunch, they can usually slot straight into a team straight away particularly in the front row where the job isn't very different no matter where you are.

Last I heard it was Warrington & Leeds who were looking at Kirmond seriously... and of course Salford, which goes without saying!

What is this obsession with converting perfectly good back-rowers into props?

You could probably play Kirmond in that ball-carrying loose-forward role in the same way Leeds have used Bailey and Singleton this season, but I wouldn't want to rely on him as part of a four-man rotation at prop.

It's a valid point, especially when Kirmond looks such a good back rower. However, rather than Peacock, I would liken Kirmond to Westwood more, and he didn't make a bad job of that suggested shift in positions.

It'll never catch on

Yours in unison

Adrian Morley
Jamie Peacock

I think you'll find they're in 1eague3.

I think you hit both my nails on the head here.

We need to replace Peacock at some point. We won't do that by rushing around buying anything that comes to hand.

My instinct is that, basically, we can't replace Jamie Peacock, because there isn't anything comparable remotely available.

So, we need to replace him with 2 men. One of whom might be Bradley Singleton. This puts prop up there with hooker as positions we should be looking to strengthen, but only if and when the right quality becomes available. People get obsessed with making signings as a mark of progress and strengthening. It's only a way of doing that if we sign the right players. In a salary cap era it isn't so easy for big clubs to flash the cash at less affluent clubs, because those who have the players you'd like (take Crabtree for example) have the same player budget as we do.

Patience is a watch word here I think. I don't see next year being the problem, so panic buying is not the order of the day IMO.

Whatever happens in the next month, one of the most useful developments will have been the maturing of Singleton and hopefully his socialisation into play-off rugby. Hopefully we're working on the next one. Props mature slower than some other positions, but if it comes to a choice between me and Brian McDermott, I know who I trust to spot a promising forward.

"soialisation" Hark at 'er. Speak plain English lad. Majority of your readers are Yorkshire folk, not fancy dans from Royal leamington Spa!!!

Explain Ian Kirke.

Well, I have learned from reading [iSouthstander.com[/i that he fulfils an invaluable role as third-man-in-at-the-tackle.
A scarce skill, that.

I will thank impertinent upstarts like you not to speak out of turn, thank you. You're getting ideas above your station.