It seems that some Warrington fans out there have some 'inside knowledge' on a small matter of a swap deal involving Kallum Watkins and Sam Burgess, instigated by The Leeds Club apparently.........

It's actually Bath who want to swap Eastmond for Watkins. No ta

Complete nonsense. Burgess will stay for at least 2 more seasons unless an Aussie club went to Bath with huge money. Watkins in my opinion will always be a league player, hopefully at Leeds. Maybe he will try NRL but not for another 2 or 3 seasons.

The same Warrington fans who were saying Baldwinson wouldn't be returning to Leeds?

Bath ' we will will buy out Watkins contract' Leeds' we will buy out Burgess contract in a straight swap' in other words go take a hike Bath

If there's a player out there that could turn our heads and make us think that parting with Kallum Watkins could be worthwhile then it's Sam Burgess.

Problem is, would you rather try keep Watkins for another 4/5+ years or get Burgess for a single season until he inevitably wanted to go back to Australia.

Agreed much as I admire Sam Burgess he does remind me of Sonny Bill Williams and that's not The much vaunted Leeds culture that has been built up and envied .

Can't argue with your logic gents. Having considered the wider picture I wouldn't see a trade in against the 'Leeds culture' just to pursue an impossible signing and I do love seeing Kallum in a bit of space.

Unless Watkins made it clear to Leeds that he wanted off (and we couldn't change his mind) then I wouldn't do it. If we could convince him to stay here and sign for even longer then that's a better long term bit of business, even though I'd love a cheeky one season stint from Burgess.

Watkins has won everything in SL now, you have to wonder at what point he will want a new challenge.

Perhaps, or perhaps he should take a look at the following three men and seen how the last few months have turned out for them

- Kevin Sinfield
- Sam Tomkins
- Sam Burgess

He's got one ready-made: to emulate the old guard. He'll be up for it, I reckon.

Would be a great bit of business for Leeds. No guarantee how long Watkins will stay as he could well be tempted by big financial deal and new challenge sometime soon anyway. Not sure we could afford the additional fee though.

Much rather we kept Watkins than gaining Sam Burgess - no matter for how long.

IF we do lose him then I guess Handley can step up to being a regular, but then where is the cover for the threequarters?

Watkins would be a HUGE loss..... maybe a swap of Sam Burgess [uAND[/u Eastmond would soften the loss, but even for these two I still think I'd prefer to keep Watkins - one of the most exciting players to watch in my whole life of watching RL.

That was exactly my reaction

Swapping one quality player for another doesn't improve the squad, it just creates a hole in a different place.

Some clubs might operate like this but I don't think it's how Gary wants to conduct business.

If Watkins does want to leave we should be targeting a quality like-for-like replacement.

So signing arguably the best rl player in the world would somehow weaken our quad?

I'm not saying it would, but the idea that it could is not

it would depend on many factors, for instance who if anyone we had to lose in a trade or to make room on the cap. Or alternatively, paying one player far more than the rest of the squad could disrupt the harmony and cohesiveness of the squad, created in part by our long standing salary structure.

Adding a player in a position we don't have a need for, while losing one in a position we don't have any realistic cover for.

Yes, that would weaken the squad. Unless you think Leeds could get by with 25 games a season from Keinhorst or Tom Briscoe at centre instead of Watkins without there being any drop off in performance?

Adding a player of the class and statue of Sam Burgess would strengthen any SL side including Leeds. IMO he would be involved in play far more than Watkins and bring that important on field leadership and motivation that we have come to reply on from JP. His go forward and tough tackling would put us on the front foot so often that out backs would not just "get by" but see more ball going forward.

As I said it is quite likely that Watkins will be poached at some stage anyway so to turn up a chance to sign big Sam would be a big mistake. That said it is pure speculation and I doubt we could afford the transfer fee anyway.

A statue of Sam Burgess, is about all we could afford if we want to keep a balanced squad. He is a great player but I would rather keep a balance of talent across the piece than the odd superstar in 1 position and a weakened squad as a result.

Burgess will either stay in RU for the long haul (a big mistake for him personally IMO but he has an enormous ego which will find it very hard to walk away as a 'failure' at RU) or go back to Souths. Anything else would be a stop-gap for him. I wouldn't be interested in Eastmond either, as if he wanted to go back to RL he will also have shown a propensity to move at the drop of a hat.

Hopefully with Watkins as with some others the club culture is as important as money. Playing with your friends and having a chance to experience big wins is a lot. Not everyone want to experience the 'challenge' of moving away from home and trying a different sport, no matter what the rewards.

There seems to be a lot of assumption that Watkins will want to leave yet he's already signed a long term deal also JC Burgess hasn't been the best RL player in the World or even in the top 3 for at LEAST 12 MONTHS!

Indeed but I have not seen any other players improve enough to have taken his place. Who are you suggesting would be better if he were to return to RL?