So when I say neither of them are good enough tacklers to be full backs, you agree? I didn't say they can't do their job defensively from stand off, but defending at full back is a lot harder.

1.Tomkins
2.Roberts
3.Glesson
4.Marsh/goulding
5.Richards
6.Brown
7.Finch

I'm undecided on that, actually. Prior to the Widnes game, I'd probably have agreed, and yes, I know it was "only Widnes", but Sam did a pretty good job there. He's made some pretty spectacular chases back to tackle this season, he's got the pace, we know he's good under the bomb - TBH I might pick him there ahead of Phelps (who isn't all that good defensively himself), but behind Amos & Pat.

TBF there is one very simple thing here. If you have good players then it is silly to play them in a lower position.

I hate to use football as an advantage but I feel it is good as a comparison here. Steven Gerrard is capable of scoring goals and would be an adequate striker if needed BUT as a Defensive midfielder he's one of the best footballers in the world.

I dont see why there is any grounds for Brown being brought in. He's too good to be a backup and putting Sam into a weaker position would make him an adequate player not the brilliant one that he is now. I think Brown is a pointless buy unless he can play 7 to be honest.

cant see this happening, he has two years left to run on his contract at the giants and is happy, would take a big transfer fee also, big surprise if he joins you at end of this season.

Yeah I agree Sam Tomkins should get the full back gig ahead of Phelps and Brown, but not Roberts or Richards. He's definitely fast enough that he'd shut down all but the very paciest backs if his positioning is right but I'm not sure he's quite good enough a tackler, I think if a big second rower busts through 30 metres out Sam would get slapped aside whereas Roberts or Richards would make the tackle.

I can't believe so many posters would be willing to chop and change positions are current players are playing in, just to accommodate Kevin Brown. Reading the Giants CEO's comments it won't be happening any way, and thank god in my opinion, Brown is not someone we need, his style and choice of position's are not for us.

We have two of the best half backs in super league. Why would we sign Kevin Brown.

To provide quality cover for a few positions maybe? Considering the fact that in the backs; Phelps, Pryce, Deacon and Carmont are all off contract at the end of the year.

Well from what i can gather Brown wants out if thats true and i dont know for sure, I do know the hot money is on Mathers to go to Huddersfield next year maybe they want him as a stand off.
Its something to do with Nathan Brown leaving.

I think that would be a bit of a luxury because he'd likely command a decent wedge, especially if he gets international honours, and with the way the salary cap is it wouldn't be wise to have a sizeable chunk of our allotted cash turning out for the under 20's every week waiting for someone to get injured.

Personally I'm in the camp that would not like to see our current personnel and system change drastically just to accomodate a player who wouldn't necessarily make us any better.

i agree why shuffle the team around to accomodate brown. leave him where he is.

I would have him if Pryce and Deacon didn't get new deals, surely he wouldn't demand more than the amount of their combined wage??

Deacon is on the coaching staff not the playing staff next year

Exactly, this is a guy who won't get anywhere near an England shirt unless someone gets injured. The only way I could see it working is Brown + Tomkins in the halves with Leuluai + Riddell as the two hookers but even then I think we'd lack a bit of direction from the halves and weaken the team a bit by having Leuluai on less.