Wouldn't go for Lockeyer unless it was on a 'reasonable' salary. Obviously a signing like him would increase massively the commercial opportunities and sell plenty of shirts but we cannot pay too much to him as i wouldn't want the team to lose its balance.

Money could be spent on youth and a young halfback instead perhaps.

Why?
If you wanted a chance of a trophy pretty sharpish, then signing Lockyer would be a decent way of going about it.
If you wanted to be 'building for the future' (still) then yep a young British half-back would be just the ticket.
I'd go for the former any day of the week. Lockyer is a bona fide RL legend and Wire should move heaven and earth to get him.

Two words: Leeds United.

Two more words - salary cap.

We might get the success of Leeds but without the risk of going bust.

Leeds United never signed the best footballer on the planet.
They signed Seth Johnson.

If you have to backfill after a couple of seasons then theres no problem with that, you can look around the market, see whos in form and whos a good bet for signing at the time. What would happen if Britain produced a young halfback that was even better than Myler, or if we produced one ourselves....? Saints had Jason Hooper in for a couple of years then Leon Pryce came on the market and they got him in.

There's no point looking for longevity if the player is not top dollar. If we signed Greg Inglis then that would be someone we could look at filling the void for a decade, but there are still questions over Myler...if we had him for the next decade are there any guarantees he would be better than Briers was for a decade?

Also lets stop talking so much in 5 year plans, long term everything, how about get things right for the here and now. Put a quality team on the pitch and bring young players through into it. Then when players come off contract you look around at the market and make the best decision for then.

In 1993 we had a decent team with some good hard working players, and Jonathan Davies came on the market and he made us a top side and took us to within an inch of the title. Would we have been better off going for someone like Graham Holroyd or Tony Smith who could have been our halfback for a decade?

As I've said, I'd be fine with Lockyer signing, irrespective of age etc. If that's the way the club wants to go, to just make sure that Warrington Wolves get the best players in the world, then I'd be cool with that. For me, looking for a return on investment, I'd always take Myler, as I say, you potentially get a long term return on him, he'd be on substantially less money than a Lockyer/Inglis, and you don't have the same worries that you have about NRL stars coming to England and having to settle.

From what I have seen, I think Myler will be, if not the, one of the best halfback in England for years to come, so that's why I would like to see him snapped up. More than that, I don't think he's a bad one now, and your talking a year down the line when he'll have circa 30 SL games under his belt too. There are no more question marks over Myler, than there are any potential overseas signing that we could make. We've sign first hand last year, in two instances, how players from the NRL who look so impressive, can struggle so badly in SL to find that level of performance. If we signed Myler, and it took him a year to settle, but we had him for 5-10 years more, I'd be cool with that. Not so if we had an Australian on a two year deal, I think there's greater emphasis placed on them cutting it straight away.

Had we had stability in the halves over the last 5 years, ie, a Myler of sort alongside Briers, who says we wouldn't have won trophies by now. Since at the HJ, we've had,

Nat Wood
Chris Bridge
Michael Sullivan
Michael Monaghan

During the same period Leeds have had Burrow & McGuire, and will do for years to come.

jamie Lyon has come out and said that the only club he will sign for in super league is Saints, but money talks and saint have none !!

RLFans made-up fact of the day.

Where has all this belief that Myler is a world beater come from?

At the start of Nat Wood's final season we signed a 20 year old Chris Bridge, he was being talked about as a potential GB player just like Myler is now. If Bridge had been the business then after Wood retired he could have been our halfback for a decade but he couldn't cut it as a first choice playmaker so we had to bring in an experienced player.

In came Sullivan who was young enough to do us 7 seasons at least, but again he couldn't cut it as a first choice playmaker so we had to bring in Monaghan (who we signed on a four year deal, rarely do any clubs sign players on longer than that).

Just because Myler is young doesn't give any guarantees - if we're aiming to be a trophy winning club then he needs to be top drawer - if not then he would be someone else we looked to move on after a couple of years.

A few years ago there was this sort of talk about Luke Robinson and Chris Thorman, but they generally get scoffed at now by a lot of fans....would these type of players, or for instance Danny Orr, have been the type that could have taken us to maybe win a title or two alongside Briers?

What if you compare the period from 2002-2005....Warrington had the stability of Wood & Briers (with Appo as back up), and won nothing, whilst Leeds shifted through Ben Walker, Sheridan, Sinfield, Dunemann, Burrow and McGuire playing in the halves, reached 2 CC finals, 2 Grand finals and won one SL and one WCC.

Well, I've not given up on Chris Bridge just yet, but that's a different debate for a different day.

The belief in Myler, is belief, nothing more.

Your point about guarantess is exactly my point really, Myler could be an outstanding halfback for the next decade, would sign on a relatively small salary, and could repay it ten times over, he could be flop, an enigma, just doesn't kick on, as you rightly say, a Luke Robinson. But any NRL player, a Lockyer, Inglis, could prove to be just as bigger of a flop if not bigger, a Michael Sullivan, but would cost you far more, and in the meantime would take one of your quota slots. If your asking me, which is my preferred option of risk, it's the young English lad who could be special, as oppose in this instance to a 32 year old Australian who has been/still could be special.

If the there isn't a young English lad available. I'll risk the 32 year old Aussie, who has been/is special.

Just because a top-drawer NRL player comes over, does not guarantee they will be a success.

There are as many factors on an overseas player settling, as there are a youngster making the step-up.

Surely there is less of a gamble signing Inglis or Lockyer than there is signing a 'young English lad'. There's a difference between signing Inglis/Lockyer and players like Sullivan who have turned out to be flops.

Look at Wigan, when they signed Lam or Barrett you knew they were getting quality. When they signed Denis Moran, Tim Smith you knew it was a gamble.

If Myler is as good as you're rating him then would he really sign on a low salary? If we were paying him a low salary and he was good then surely he would do what Danny Brough did to Hull. British halfbacks get very well paid, look at Deacon/Harris etc.

I don't think there are any young English players worth looking at in the halves, if we could pick up a young English forward like Sam Burgess or James Graham then this wouldn't be a gamble but if its a case of pick up a halfback because he's English, try and get him on a cheap deal, and hope for the best, then that doesnt sound like a strategy for trying to win SL. Targeting the best - like Saints did when they got Leon Pryce from Bradford - is what we should be doing.

I think your doing Myler an injustice to tell you the truth, this season being the acid test of course, but I really do think he's got alot of potential, and I don't think it's just a case of trying to 'nick some kid and try him', I think he's got a very big future ahead of him. When I say 'low contract', I mean in comparison to Lockyer of course, I'm sure it'd be a healthy contract he'd want, with increments for GB call ups etc. I just think that with salary cap constraints etc, a Lockyer/Inglis eating a chunk of your cap is a dangerous way forward.

Like you say, Wigan had Barrett, but it brought them no success did it ? They were weak in other areas, maybe because they had him eating a chunk of cap up. You say that Inglis/Lockyer are unlikely to be flops, and they are different to Sullivan, but there's plenty of Scott Hills, Matt Kings, Shaun Berrigans who just for whatever reason don't settle, and if you only have the bloke or a relatively short stay, it can quickly be a bum deal. Saints were a bit lucky, they didn't target Pryce, he just got fed up of being shunted around positionally, and wanted to play in the halves, if Bradford had given him this opportunity, chances are he'd still be there. Saints got him when he was seeking a change, and the rest is history.

As I say, I'd be happy with a quality Australian, who wouldn't be, but my first choice would be Myler. I think there's something about him, and being young & British that adds to the appeal for me. Maybe if Monas goes home, we could do both, get a Lockyer alongside a Myler and have the best of both worlds.

You not rate Myler much then Sally ?