Have a feeling this thread may as well be shut down for a year after yesterday's announcement! It wouldn't surprise me if that's it for 2016 already.



There are no obvious gaps in the squad unless someone moves on. You do get the impression at times our pack would benefit from one or two bigger players (a big prop from the NRL ala Adam Cuthbertson would be ideal). But Wigan seem to be willing to give up a bit of size in favour of agility and durability and in games like last night you can see the benefits of that.



The main conundrum for 2016 is that 4 into 3 does not go. Hampshire, Tomkins, Williams and Smith into 2 halfback positions and 1 fullback spot.

If the marquee signing came in then we probably will move Sam onto it.

His salary then could be invested in securing the best youth around, further and improved deals for those coming OOC. Also maybe the odd signing if, again, we are suddenly surprised by an early departure.

We have a wealth of talent at Wigan. we need to nurture and secure it.

Moving Sam onto the MS would enable the club do that!

Sam Rapira following Samkins to Wigan is doing the rounds on social media.

Yorkshire bound I believe. Not what Wigan need in my view.

Yep, just seen a tweet from Tomkins about it.



You don't think Wigan need a prop? I don't agree with that based on what I've seen.

Not when we've got Mossop, Flower, Clubb, Crosby and Tautai with Sutton and Greenwood in reserve. Our "problems" at prop are massively overstated IMO, we've struggled a bit this season on heavy pitches but we've not really had chance to get our first choice frontrowers out until last night.

I wouldn't mind a prop to add depth but I don't think we need to be spending big money on one.



Flower, Mossop, Clubb, Crosby, Tautai and Sutton is a good group but I'd like a replacement for Patrick.



We're far from desperate in the prop department though as shown in Good Friday and again last night.

Wrong Sam, the one we are after goes by the name of Burgess

Isn't Patrick only here for this season on loan - so at the end of the season as it stands Patrick and jack Hughes will swap around again unless something changes in the meantime - although I am not sure Jack Hughes would have a place back here as we are ok for 2nd rows. That will be an interesting decision to be made.

I'd let Hughes leave and certainly wouldn't sign Patrick on a longer deal. I'd like to see Greg Burke come back to add depth and another prop but we'd probably be fine with what we've got already.



We're in a good spot at the minute. A few weeks back I thought there was a few question marks against the squad but a few of those have been answered.

The issue with Burke is the same as those with Faz x2 & Batman in that they are small in stature.



if Lockers retires then we move Bateman to 13 and fill the other 2nd row spot with a bit of size imo.

St Pete reckons we're in for Sam Burgess should this marquee player rule get passed.



He'll do I suppose

How many marquee players were you planning on having?



(Every big club would be in for Burgess when he gives up Union, including every NRL club. Would be amazed if he didn't just go back to Souths.)

We had Sam Tomkins before so we'll just fit him in as usual.



Big Sam can be our marquee man! (I know there's no chance of it happening btw).

Joel?

Sorry I rushed my OP.



Joel and Lockers are our two biggest back row players and they are both guaranteed starters when fit. After that it's Fax, Bateman and C Faz beind them making up the other spots.



If Lockers retires then naturally one of those steps forward into a starting role which, imo, makes us a little undersized.



I know TT played 13 for Paramatta, could he be moulded back into a 2nd row spot? Whilst he's not got height he's got a decent frame.

Agree to a certain extent. Though at 21, Bateman has still got plenty of opportunity to put size on. Look at Lockers when he was in his early 20's compared to now. Tbh I think the "Farrell and Bateman are undersized" argument is a bit redundant anyway. A L Farrell, J Tomkins and Bateman starting backrow looks excellent to me and will keep us in good stead for years to come. Then it's up to the coaching staff to see whether the likes of C Farrell, Lever, Lloyd are good enough to provide cover or if we need to recruit.

Sorry if it's already been mentioned but according to Koucash on twitter the marquee player rule will only apply to home grown players.

Which in turn begs the question, how exactly is 'home-grown' defined?

So it's basically a rule to get back Brits from the NRL and to maybe stop them going in the first place.



Clubs links to Burgess and Widdop make sense if that's the case.

does the "home grown" mean club trained or federation trained though....???? either way it is 3 seasons before becoming ineligible for a Under 21 squad

The phrase "Home Grown" is long gone. It is now "Club Trained".



I think to be Club Trained a player has to be at a club 3 years by the time he reaches 21.

It doesn't mean a player has come through a club's scholarship or academy system.

I'm pretty sure Jon Wilkin is club trained at Saints due to him going there when 17.

Likewise Richie Myler is club trained at Salford, not Widnes.



Sam would therefore qualify as club trained.

Sam Burgess could only be signed by Bradford on that basis.

I do get the feeling that the good Dr might mean Federation trained. Meaning any British player who's come through a British club's system could qualify as Fed trained.

Messrs Burgess could sign for any SL club on that ruling.

Best wait and see on this one.

Why don't they just open it up to anyone?



Would love to see a few of the games top players come over here for a 12 month stint like Hoffman did.



A rule like this really opens up endless possibilities for attracting over big name players.

Apparently, the Dr also said the rule as it stands would only benefit clubs like Leeds, Saints, Wigan, so I guess it means club trained players.

.