Another Pom
Well-known member
Morgan Smithies has been mentioned a fair bit on here, but he looks set to sign with Canberra
Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion
- Thread starter MacDougall
- Start date
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
So, sometimes the player in the rubbish team is a better option than one in a multi time premiership team. It happens.
You say that like the salary cap doesn't exist. Put it this way: if we signed Luai but were paying him, say, $6m a year I'm sure we'd all agree that would be a terrible idea - it would mean every single other player on the roster would have to be on minimum salary. If we signed Luai for $250,000 a year, by contrast, I'm sure even the biggest doubters would say that was a cracking bit of business.
Agreed? So by definition you also agree that there's some point in the middle of those two numbers where opinions will reasonably be divided. Personally I'd love the Tigers to sign Luai, but I'm very hesitant about the idea of doing so for $1.4m a year.
Here's an example of why: the Broncos signed Adam Reynolds for $800,000 a year. Is Luai $600,000 "better" than Adam Reynolds? I guess you could argue it. But I bet the Broncos were glad they had a bit of wiggle room when Reece Walsh became available a year later...
diedpretty
Well-known member
Robbie's Love Child
Well-known member
I would pursue Olam, we desperately need quality centres and he is 100% one. Remember when Andrew Johns said this about him. "The Papua New Guinea star has had a breakout season leading to recognition from NRL immortal Andrew Johns that he was the “best Centre in the world” earlier this year. He was later invited and awarded the well deserved Dally M Centre of the year award."
Form is temporary, class is permanent.
Form is temporary, class is permanent.
jrtiger
Well-known member
keeping Blore is step one and the most crucial step. providing we do that then we can either offer someone else up to Melbourne or take Olam off their hands. knowing Melbourne they'll be pushing for a swap, and while Nofoaluma would be everyone's preference to leave, I reckon they'd take a good look at Kepaoa.
TigerLove
Well-known member
If we are doing Morgan Harper look a likes... then I have to go with "Tig" from the very awesome show "Sons of Anarchy".
Attachments
I agree that Melbourne might consider Kepaoa as he’s a big unit with good mobility for a man of his size, so Bellamy may get a lot more out of him than what we can.
The Fresh Oil
Well-known member
Seems no matter what you said you were coping a word vomit tsunami. Luckily no one reads his nonsense.
tiger05premier
Well-known member
Apparently Morgan Smithies is going to the raiders
Kelce68
Well-known member
Yes.
You could have. Though, He didn't have the premierships, didn't play in the spine and wasn't in a glaring area of need for the club, so the comparison is ok at best.
Even still, the issue arose once he had arrived and we saw a pattern of poor output. It's at that point that his signing can be, correctly, judged harshly. Very few people were upset with Blair signing prior to him arriving. On paper, he was a fantastic addition. In fact, he was seen by many as the missing ingredient and one of the key reasons we were instilled as premiership favourites at the start of 2012.
If Luai was to sign (I personally don't think he will), and we see a similar poor output from him over the first part of his tenure here, then the fanbase will have every right to be upset with the lack of value for money.
But this is literally the case with every signing.
hank37w
Well-known member
In reality he is Crap man.
innsaneink
Well-known member
Was Blair a case of him not being coached and utilised to his strengths?
jrtiger
Well-known member
different coaching styles is what ruined him, imo.
there was a lot of talk about the fact that WT didn't train as hard as Melbourne and Blair came in and wasn't accustomed to Sheens' methods. chances are when you're not training in a manner that brings out the best in you, you'll probably struggle to play your best.
there's no doubt Blair had some absolutely atrocious games that let the jersey down. that's not what I'm arguing here. his attitude seemed to change on a weekly basis. but I do believe that the lack of a decent 7 (Humble, Miller, Moltzen) and the inability to build combinations also hurt his chances of making good.
hank37w
Well-known member
Sounds a lot like just about everyone who has been in our top 30 since.
I think we are an unknown at best in 2024.
Rookie coach, entirely new halves pairing, 2nd year fullback, 18 year old back up hooker, 35 year old halfback, 21 year old 5/8. None of these guys have played any footy together.
Strap yourselves in for a wild ride. Think we will see plenty of rocks and diamonds, not too dissimilar to our coaches playing style.
Kelce68
Well-known member
Sorry, @2041 , I meant to hit reply, but it didn't go through. So a good, ol' tag it is...
You say that like the salary cap doesn't exist.
No, I'm not. I'm fully aware of the implications of paying a lot of money for a half. The current structure of our salary cap easily allows us to account for the numbers being spoken about and it is not that far from the going rate for halves in the competition.
if we signed Luai but were paying him, say, $6m a year I'm sure we'd all agree that would be a terrible idea - it would mean every single other player on the roster would have to be on minimum salary. If we signed Luai for $250,000 a year, by contrast, I'm sure even the biggest doubters would say that was a cracking bit of business.
Reductio Ad Absurdum. A textbook logical fallacy.
That is not the situation. Not even close to the situation. You've exaggerated the situation in an attempt to test logical consistency, but this argument is a fallacy because it removes context from the situation and is irrelevant to the outcome being discussed. Luai, if offered a contract, will be offered in the realms of $1.1- 1.4 million dollars a year, so that is the value that should be the for or against.
Here's an example of why: the Broncos signed Adam Reynolds for $800,000 a year. Is Luai $600,000 "better" than Adam Reynolds? I guess you could argue it. But I bet the Broncos were glad they had a bit of wiggle room when Reece Walsh became available a year later...
Unfortunately, it's not that simple due to any number of factors, not least of all; current market, need for position, allure of the club they're signing with, how well their team cap is balanced, etc.
... I get your point, and I don't necessarily disagree, but I think it's irrelevant for the most part. When I made the original post, the subtext for it was that we all generally understand he will come at a significant cost.
If the counter for that is that he will be far too expensive for what he'll bring then so be it; that's a legitimate retort. But it won't be $6 million per year, so let's not muddy up the discussion waters.
You say that like the salary cap doesn't exist.
No, I'm not. I'm fully aware of the implications of paying a lot of money for a half. The current structure of our salary cap easily allows us to account for the numbers being spoken about and it is not that far from the going rate for halves in the competition.
if we signed Luai but were paying him, say, $6m a year I'm sure we'd all agree that would be a terrible idea - it would mean every single other player on the roster would have to be on minimum salary. If we signed Luai for $250,000 a year, by contrast, I'm sure even the biggest doubters would say that was a cracking bit of business.
Reductio Ad Absurdum. A textbook logical fallacy.
That is not the situation. Not even close to the situation. You've exaggerated the situation in an attempt to test logical consistency, but this argument is a fallacy because it removes context from the situation and is irrelevant to the outcome being discussed. Luai, if offered a contract, will be offered in the realms of $1.1- 1.4 million dollars a year, so that is the value that should be the for or against.
Here's an example of why: the Broncos signed Adam Reynolds for $800,000 a year. Is Luai $600,000 "better" than Adam Reynolds? I guess you could argue it. But I bet the Broncos were glad they had a bit of wiggle room when Reece Walsh became available a year later...
Unfortunately, it's not that simple due to any number of factors, not least of all; current market, need for position, allure of the club they're signing with, how well their team cap is balanced, etc.
... I get your point, and I don't necessarily disagree, but I think it's irrelevant for the most part. When I made the original post, the subtext for it was that we all generally understand he will come at a significant cost.
If the counter for that is that he will be far too expensive for what he'll bring then so be it; that's a legitimate retort. But it won't be $6 million per year, so let's not muddy up the discussion waters.
Last edited:
Could be 3x Spoons in a row.
hank37w
Well-known member
Actually looking forward to it but we need some speedy backline signings who have some idea about how to defend if we want to get off the bottom rung of the ladder.
Staff online
-
DempsModerator