Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

6 brothers. Not 3. Remember the Mortimer's and the Hughes? How did they go when they be playing for Canterbury. Apologies. Dont know all their first names. Im still paying alimony for all the kids names i can't remember. Tyrone. Yes. Tyrone. Apologies RHS.
 
bptiger 0 said:
If it means we get the three brothers and it makes us a solid team ,thus getting Galvin to sign a contract before November, I for one think it’s a small move , Tyrone may not be a gun but he is a solid player
Click to expand...
Good point, if you consider the Fainu’s we didn’t necessarily sign all on big money contracts so they could be together. Sione has spent the past couple of years on 2nd tier contracts until earning his stripes. (Very similar to how May started off at the Roosters mind you).
That said, Tyonne added into the team as a depth player isn’t a bad shout. He would have made an exceptional lock if he didn’t have one Issah Yeo blocking his way.
 
batboy said:
Was first suggested no one would do it, Once it was shown they have before
Then the argument changed to value for money.
You're not just buying the 80 mins on the Park.

Knights have a 800k Half playing Ressies this week, And Bud Sullivan is on 500k a year.
1.0+ isn't that far a stretch - For your clubs Future.

What I can guarantee anyone (with half a brain)
Is that Galvin is sticking solid on 250k a year for the next 2 years, to sign a
600k a year Contract at the end of it.
He'd get one of those tomorrow.
Click to expand...
I’d sign the kid tomorrow if I was Richo. Back end it with representative bonuses so he’s incentivised to reach the heights he needs to get to to earn the big dollars.

Attitude, ability, size, fitness. He looks to be the complete package.

It would probably cost you the Fainu family too, that’s the only downside.
 
batboy said:
Was first suggested no one would do it, Once it was shown they have before
Then the argument changed to value for money.
You're not just buying the 80 mins on the Park.

Knights have a 800k Half playing Ressies this week, And Bud Sullivan is on 500k a year.
1.0+ isn't that far a stretch - For your clubs Future.

What I can guarantee anyone (with half a brain)
Is that Galvin is sticking solid on 250k a year for the next 2 years, to sign a
600k a year Contract at the end of it.
He'd get one of those tomorrow.
Click to expand...
I assume you are referring to yesterdays discussion. Firstly, try to deal in good faith. It was pretty clear what was said and the point being made. Further, the name calling is unnecessary. It doesn't affect me, rather, it gets in the way of a reasonable discussion. I have not insulted you....ever. At least extend the same courtesy.

As it stands, today, as in 5 March 2025, no club would part with a million after 20 games. Has it been done before? Yes. Once with Ash Taylor. Many years ago. Not that many other examples to lean on. They are outliers and they were disasters by desperate clubs. I am specifically talking rookies. Far more examples of awesome rookie talent NOT getting a million a season after 20 games. You included examples of a bunch of overpriced established first graders which was not my argument.

You shift to 3 years down the track which I have plainly said is when he would get his payday on way more than 600k - provided his performances warrant that sort of money.
 
Something to note, in TMays vlog @ Fox studio Api, Lachie and Jarome wore #9, #6 and #7 (only 3 I noticed with a number) however Jahream didn’t have a number on his jersey along with others. Could mean competition in spot or I’m over reading
 
weststigers said:
I assume you are referring to yesterdays discussion. Firstly, try to deal in good faith. It was pretty clear what was said and the point being made. Further, the name calling is unnecessary. It doesn't affect me, rather, it gets in the way of a reasonable discussion. I have not insulted you....ever. At least extend the same courtesy.

As it stands, today, as in 5 March 2025, no club would part with a million after 20 games. Has it been done before? Yes. Once with Ash Taylor. Many years ago. Not that many other examples to lean on. They are outliers and they were disasters by desperate clubs. I am specifically talking rookies. Far more examples of awesome rookie talent NOT getting a million a season after 20 games. You included examples of a bunch of overpriced established first graders which was not my argument.

You shift to 3 years down the track which I have plainly said is when he would get his payday on way more than 600k - provided his performances warrant that sort of money.
Click to expand...

As you said - You Assume.
You're also speaking on behalf of 16 NRL Clubs, Which is nice...
Truth is, You'll never no - Because no will or can offer LG anything while he's on 20 NRL Games.

I'll ask you (In good faith) If he builds on last year, And gets to 40 NRL games (Double) by Seasons end
What's his offer (In your opinion) then?
Does doubling his games, Double your money?
Because I can promise you - He's getting FORMAL OFFERS in 8 months - And more than a few.
And if your offer increases (Doubles even), I'll ask again 'in good faith' whats the difference between making that same offer at 20 Games, than 40 Games - With the difference being the 20 Games you're dismissing now.

FTR
Wasn't Leon Bott was offered over 300k in his first season by the Roosters?
(Maybe even before he Debuted at the Broncos)

I don't know what that would be in todays Market / Cap / Money
- But I'd be guessing around 600k
He was nothing but a Winger, Not a Franchise Player, Local Junior or a Half.
And - the cap was about 1/4 of what it is now.
Deflect it all you like, It happens....

Overpaying for a kid with all the promise in the world or an old hack with nothing left, There's little difference. They're all stupid deals - And Clubs make them all day, every day - Even the good ones.

And it's not 3 years down the Track, It's in November - this year.
 
batboy said:
As you said - You Assume.
You're also speaking on behalf of 16 NRL Clubs, Which is nice...
Truth is, You'll never no - Because no will or can offer LG anything while he's on 20 NRL Games.

I'll ask you (In good faith) If he builds on last year, And gets to 40 NRL games (Double) by Seasons end
What's his offer (In your opinion) then?
Does doubling his games, Double your money?
Because I can promise you - He's getting FORMAL OFFERS in 8 months - And more than a few.
And if your offer increases (Doubles even), I'll ask again 'in good faith' whats the difference between making that same offer at 20 Games, than 40 Games - With the difference being the 20 Games you're dismissing now.

FTR
Wasn't Leon Bott was offered over 300k in his first season by the Roosters?
(Maybe even before he Debuted at the Broncos)

I don't know what that would be in todays Market / Cap / Money
- But I'd be guessing around 600k
He was nothing but a Winger, Not a Franchise Player, Local Junior or a Half.
And - the cap was about 1/4 of what it is now.
Deflect it all you like, It happens....

Overpaying for a kid with all the promise in the world or an old hack with nothing left, There's little difference. They're all stupid deals - And Clubs make them all day, every day - Even the good ones.

And it's not 3 years down the Track, It's in November - this year.
Click to expand...
My original post was this:

Here's the real question.

Would one pay any player $1 million a season after a handful of NRL games?

That is, in a nutshell, what we are dealing with and frankly it's madness to invest so much, so early, when Galvin needs to answer a lot more questions about whether or not he'll reach his potential.

2027 could be a big payday for him depending on how he goes between now and then. A million bucks now?...it's way too risky.

I pose a question and say that is the question that needs to be asked.

I make the point that a million bucks is madness so early in his career. As an example, Reece Walsh signed a million dollar contract after 74 games, 30+ tries and 50+ try assists at 22. To sign Galvin now on a million would be giving him the money before the results...it's based on hope and a gamble...therefore I have labelled it risky. That's all....risky. not that it would never happen. Just risky.

You turned it into whether or not it does or doesn't happen sometimes in the NRL. I have never made that argument. Only that it is risky given the sample size of his performances is small.

I agree with you. Clubs have signed dumb contracts before, but it's not the point I was making.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 1,798 (members: 48, guests: 1,750)
Back
Top