Out of Armstrong, Wheeler and Eastmond, Wheeler looks the best full back prospect.

I would say Eastmond.

Jason Robinson was a halfback in his youth and ended up as one of the best wingers in the world, Wellens was a half back and ended up as a leading fullback - so there is no reason why Wheeler and Eastmond shouldnt play in a few different positions to figure out which is thier best.

That's true, but neither Robinson nor Wellens were [igood[/i halfbacks. The indications are that Wheeler and Eastmond are.

I've a feeling Saints will move to bring Myler in to replace Long.

He was the outstanding Salford player v Wigan last Friday. I'd love him at Wigan with Tomkins at 6.

Not sure, Smith or Eastmond will probably fill that role with Eastmond probably more unpredictable to play against of the 2.

Knowing how Wigan operate we'll probably sign Tomkins instead.

You have two chance of that happening, slim and zero.

Warrington have tried to sign Sam three times in the last two years, and been told politely to go away.

There would be more chance of Wigan signing Eastmond who after all is a Wigan supporter.

Still awaiting an answer on this.

It's worth pointing out that Wellens did not become a good player the moment he was given the full back's jersey.

His first couple of seasons in the first team were hardly auspicious. We tried him at seven - nothing doing. Centre - nothing doing. Ditto hooker, stand-off and even loose forward (in his defence, he had no opportunity to settle into any of these positions).

When he was offered the FB spot he was on the verge of being shipped out like many other promising youngsters who fail to live up to their potential. His first few games were notable for the lack of mistakes. He caught pretty much everything and missed very few tackles. At the time we needed solidity rather than attacking options because the team was packed full of players who could create space.

It was only after thirty or forty games - when he had the basics of the role nailed down - that he expanded his attacking repertoire and became the player we see today. And - most importantly - he's still working at his game. A good pro understands that the day you stop learning is the day you should quit.

The above proves the obvious (yet oft-forgotten) point that it takes time to develop a kid in a technically complex position such as full back. Mistakes are to be expected. Indeed, they are essential to the learning process. Bagging a junior because he drops a high ball or misses a tackle - or both - in a position he's yet to make the ten-game mark in is dumb. Unless the lad has the assurance of a robot it will only serve to undermine his confidence, damage his learning, extend the number of games it takes him to bed in or destroy his chance of making it.

Which brings me to the problem: when Wellens was offered the full back role we could afford to give him a lengthy period to settle in. As stated previously - we had plenty of attacking options and our defence was good enough to keep the pressure off him. The league was also a lot easier than it is today. You could pick your matches to take a breather in. The away game at Celtic Crusaders proves this is no longer the case. So - barring us signing a ready made full back from SL or the NRL - the player who gets opportunity is going to have to be a lot faster than Wellens at proving his worth. It's a tough break for the kid. But that's SL as it stands. Our game does not have a competitive reserve grade that links academy level to the first team and shapes youngsters physically and mentally to the intense demands of the latter. For Wheeler, Eastmond or whomever it's not quite sink or swim - but they'd better not be afraid of water.

Skilful player, good in defence, makes ground, creates attacking options. We,ve had quite a few players in the past who have transferred from No 1 to No 13.

Great post Muggers!

Aye, a very good post.