If that's right I honestly think it's a sign of complacency and the precursor of a bit of a fall from grace for the Roosters. There is an absolute world of difference between backing your ability to identify talent three or four years out from first grade and signing the same talent after it has played a year or two of first grade elsewhere. Manu and Lattrell would have been absolute bargains for the Roosters in their first couple of seasons, where none of those other players are or will be any more than decent value.
Obviously the Roosters have certain advantages that will always make them more appealing than the dollars on a contract (Bondi, professional club and coaching setup, prospect of success on the field, connections to the media and other commercial opportunities are the acknowledged ones). But unless they really are getting round the cap to the extent some people insist they are, building a roster by poaching other teams' first graders at the very, very least provides almost no room for error at all - and that applies to the Roosters just as much as it does to the Dogs.
Caveat: the difference is obviously that the Roosters are better at picking the right talent than the Dogs. If you never sign a duff contract you're basically fine however you go about putting a roster together. But it's pretty hard to get it right every time.
