Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

[Glenji95]

For the life of me, I don't understand how many times We see players like Zac Lomax do what he does, totally destroy us pretty much on his own.
Yet we new he was up for sale and we could not even make the effort to make him an offer.
And Parramatta get him for a supposed 4 years for $200,000 a year less than he was getting at St George,

Hence I give up.

We desperately need a game breaker like Zac,
But when one is up for grabs we don't even try.

So we must be out of money,
If we can't even try.

3 reasons why I think we didn’t try for him (if we didn’t)

1. The rumours of him going around now I don’t know if they are true or not but it could’ve been a factor.

2. His salary would’ve been a concern. If we paid him what Eels offered we’d be paying him more than Olam is currently getting. Would’ve taken a chunk out of the cap.

3. Personally believe this is why we didn’t, signing him would have resulted losing some of our juniors. He would’ve blocked their path and the club is focusing on development moving forward.

 

[twentyforty]

Stef’s contract clause is an interesting one? He signs on with a club heading for a spoon and has a get out clause pending the clubs success. My guess is someone tried too hard to get his signature 😂
and he called them out on it.

 

[Glenji95]

Now this is disappointing. We should have been offering him 400k to join us.

Some clubs just have the right idea with recruitment. Snap good players as quickly as they can. We've been lamenting our pathetic outside backs and yet whenever a decent one is available we're nowhere to be seen. We may have made him an offer and been rejected, but geez it's frustrating when we repeatedly sign small and slow players while other clubs sign the big strong fast types. And we wonder why we lose nearly all of our matches...

He was an absolutely perfect fit for us. And we still missed out. Newie have now snapped up Thomas Jenkins and Schiller, while we're messing around with Faatape and Lobb.

As good as Schiller is and would’ve loved to had him, signing him blocks other kids coming through the development system. Richo is keen on being a development club now so unless it was a position that we are sorely lacking through the juniors, or an older player to fill the void till the young ones are ready, I don’t see us making many external signings moving forward.

 

[Vicious]

3 reasons why I think we didn’t try for him (if we didn’t)

1. The rumours of him going around now I don’t know if they are true or not but it could’ve been a factor.

2. His salary would’ve been a concern. If we paid him what Eels offered we’d be paying him more than Olam is currently getting. Would’ve taken a chunk out of the cap.

3. Personally believe this is why we didn’t, signing him would have resulted losing some of our juniors. He would’ve blocked their path and the club is focusing on development moving forward.

It’s been reported the Eels got him for $650k per season, surely he would have been worth $700-$750k per season to us ?
By not having a red hot crack at him it’s basically saying we are happy with our right centre options of Naden and To’a. They can both good players when switched on, inconsistency is their problem.
We do not have any emerging genuine right centres as Faatape, Feledy, Saukuru and Makasini are all predominantly left centres. Sure one of them can hopefully move to the right and excel, but it’s not as as easy to change as some may think.
You could argue Zac Lomax could have been a better fullback option than Bula.

 

[upthetigers]

It’s been reported the Eels got him for $650k per season, surely he’s worth $700-$750 k per season to us ?
By not having a red hot crack at him it’s basically saying we are happy with our right centre options in Naden or To’a. They can both play very well when they are switched on, inconsistency is their problem.
We do not have any genuine right centres emerging as Faatape, Feledy, Saukuru and Makasini are all predominantly left centres.
You could argue Zac Lomax could have been a better fullback option than Bula.

Inconsistency has been a problem for Lomax too. He always plays well against us. Think he's a tad overrated.

 

[Glenji95]

It’s been reported the Eels got him for $650k per season, surely he’s worth $700-$750 k per season to us ?
By not having a red hot crack at him it’s basically saying we are happy with our right centre options in Naden or To’a. They can both play very well when they are switched on, inconsistency is their problem.
We do not have any genuine right centres emerging as Faatape, Feledy, Saukuru and Makasini are all predominantly left centres.
You could argue Zac Lomax could have been a better fullback option than Bula.

Don’t think many clubs would’ve given Lomax the fullback role full time unless they were desperate. And I don’t think it’ll be too hard for any of the young ones coming through to play on the other side as long as they have a good half and backrower next to them. But the main key here is development. Signing Lomax would have resulted in losing majority of these players. Obviously you can’t keep everyone but we definitely lose more with Lomax joining.

 

[Vicious]

Don’t think many clubs would’ve given Lomax the fullback role full time unless they were desperate. And I don’t think it’ll be too hard for any of the young ones coming through to play on the other side as long as they have a good half and backrower next to them. But the main key here is development. Signing Lomax would have resulted in losing majority of these players. Obviously you can’t keep everyone but we definitely lose more with Lomax joining.

If we had someone with similar attributes emerging I would understand, but we simply do not have anyone like him that is big, strong, fast, skilful, great under the high ball and a very good goal kicker.

 

[Glenji95]

If we had someone with similar attributes emerging I would understand, but we simply do not have anyone like him that is big, strong, fast, skilful, great under the high ball and a very good goal kicker.

Lomax for me is hit and miss, on his day he can be brilliant and I agree is a good goal kicker, but he doesn’t do that every week playing Centre. Him playing on the wing this year has been the best he’s looked in his career but obviously wants to play Centre, which is why he’s leaving for Eels as he will take Harper’s place. But like I said signing him would have resulted in the young ones leaving, which is IMO the main reason we didn’t get make an offer or at least go hard for him. Richo said himself and it’s in the strategic plan moving forward, “we are a development club”. I don’t think we will be making many external signings moving forward unless it’s an older player to fill the void until the young ones are ready like Oates and Gagai for example, or it’s a position we’re sorely lacking in.

 

[innsaneink]

Exactly. Again, makes absolutely no sense. Media spin rubbish in hope of some traction.

Kid is under contract, has expressed a desire to stay long term. How could Penrith even consider him?

Contract...whats that?

Ask JFH

 

[innsaneink]

Trey Mooney would be a huge get if it's true we are after him. He'd be an instant upgrade on Seyfarth on the bench & then would contend to replace Klemmer as a starter when his contract runs out.

Jeez, settle down, hes played 8 games

 

[batboy]

Most mutual options allow either party to take it up but at different price points - for example if club takes it up they pay 200k, if player takes it up but club doesent then it's 150k

You'll argue this until you're blue in the face round here Boon...
I got the same thing from a recruitment guy at another club - Twice.

It's easy to assume a Mutual Option is for both parties to agree, It's not
- It's either party can agree.
Both Parties agreeing is called a contract extension.

Even the NRL wording old mate referenced above....
Club option is black and white,
Player Option is Black and White
Mutual Option is 'Discussed by both parties' (Grey at best)...

I heard one of the Journos on 360 even reference it the other night,
"It's a mutual option, So it depends if one of the Parties take it up"

 

[Tucker]

View attachment 11518

That side would make the 8.
Amazing club, very much like Melbourne were in terms of next man up being a star.

 

[weststigers]

Most mutual options allow either party to take it up but at different price points - for example if club takes it up they pay 200k, if player takes it up but club doesent then it's 150k

Mate that is the NRL website I've quoted. You'd better get onto them and tell them their definition of mutual option is wrong.

Where does your info come from out of interest? Can you point to a mutual option that was exercised like you describe?

 

[Macca0806]

They saw how happy $1.1m made Brooks….hes on a lot less and much happier st Manly…it would be naive of us to think .this is not lost on the WT players weighing up their future

 

[Tucker]

You'll argue this until you're blue in the face round here Boon...
I got the same thing from a recruitment guy at another club - Twice.

It's easy to assume a Mutual Option is for both parties to agree, It's not
- It's either party can agree.
Both Parties agreeing is called a contract extension.

Even the NRL wording old mate referenced above....
Club option is black and white,
Player Option is Black and White
Mutual Option is 'Discussed by both parties' (Grey at best)...

I heard one of the Journos on 360 even reference it the other night,
"It's a mutual option, So it depends if one of the Parties take it up"

It’s in the name…Mutual.
They BOTH have to agree. If one party says no, the deal is off.

 

[twentyforty]

For the life of me, I don't understand how many times We see players like Zac Lomax do what he does, totally destroy us pretty much on his own.
Yet we new he was up for sale and we could not even make the effort to make him an offer.
And Parramatta get him for a supposed 4 years for $200,000 a year less than he was getting at St George,

Hence I give up.

We desperately need a game breaker like Zac,
But when one is up for grabs we don't even try.

So we must be out of money,
If we can't even try.

I think it’s more likely that we’re enquiring on many players like Lomax. Possibly not reaching MSM, due to third party approaches. There would be many players who don’t see their future at Tigers. We’ve won the last 2 spoons, have a rookie coach and our halves situation isn’t cemented.
Lomax’s game depends a lot on his combination with his half, so my guess is, that’s why he would prefer Eels over a Tigers team.

 

[Tiger Stripes]

If we had someone with similar attributes emerging I would understand, but we simply do not have anyone like him that is big, strong, fast, skilful, great under the high ball and a very good goal kicker.

Makasini fits that description, but 2-3 years away

 

[BZN]

That's a massive coup for the Warriors.

I thought I heard he was allowed to leave at the end of the year on compassionate grounds and go home to New Zealand.

 

[BZN]

I hope you are right.
The only logical reason why we didn’t at least attempt to sign Zac Lomax has to be due to Salary Cap constraints, otherwise why are we doing nothing about strengthening up our weak backline when a big, strong, fast and skilful player who is also one of the best goal kickers in the competition becomes available?
Not to mention he’s previously mentioned he would be interested in playing for Wets Tigers the team he followed growing up.

Another reason could be that I read an article on outlook this morning that he is not very popular amongst his teammates due to him being a bit strange.

 

[gallagher]

Another reason could be that I read an article on outlook this morning that he is not very popular amongst his teammates due to him being a bit strange.

He seems like a total dickhead. He ticks all the boxes for a Parra recruit