Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

GNR4LIFE said:
Retaining 18 and 19 year olds should be a lay up for clubs. 99% of players at those ages will usually re-sign. It’s the contract after that they are more likely to change clubs. For us these days, re-signing these kids is a struggle. That ain’t good.
Click to expand...
It's a struggling clubs issue.

We saw the same thing with Parramatta falling apart and losing their (perceived) best young talent in Talagi to the Premiers. Like us losing Galvin to the Bulldogs.

The NRL is, and becoming increasingly so, a league of haves and have-nots.

As always, the bottom clubs are there for a reason and they need to be better. But that is only half the story.

The NRL need to decide if having young talents leave smaller, weaker clubs for larger, more successful teams under the guise of 'development' is good for the game, its parity and the product in general, long term.

It certainly doesn't affect the EPL's (for eg) money-making ability to run a league that fosters that type of mindset, but how can anyone then think that middle and lower-tiered teams will be viable into the future from a fanbase perspective.

So it's entirely possible that the NRL doesn't give two hoots as long as they're making money hand over fist, which they seem to be.
 
GNR4LIFE said:
I’m one of those who scoffs. But not because he will have been in jail. He will have paid his debt, so good luck to him. I’d just like to think we could do better than sign a guy who’s been in jail for 6 or 7 years. Are there are no current first graders we could atttract?
Click to expand...
There may be.

But Manase might still be better than anything available.

Maybe he won't. Maybe he has no interest in returning.

But maybe, given how little football his body has had to endure during his 20s, he returns to Cup somewhere and goes on with the quality he showed coming through.
 
Kelce68 said:
It's a struggling clubs issue.

We saw the same thing with Parramatta falling apart and losing their (perceived) best young talent in Talagi to the Premiers. Like us losing Galvin to the Bulldogs.

The NRL is, and becoming increasingly so, a league of haves and have-nots.

As always, the bottom clubs are there for a reason and they need to be better. But that is only half the story.

The NRL need to decide if having young talents leave smaller, weaker clubs for larger, more successful teams under the guise of 'development' is good for the game, its parity and the product in general, long term.

It certainly doesn't affect the EPL's (for eg) money-making ability to run a league that fosters that type of mindset, but how can anyone then think that middle and lower-tiered teams will be viable into the future from a fanbase perspective.

So it's entirely possible that the NRL doesn't give two hoots as long as they're making money hand over fist, which they seem to be.
Click to expand...

There are teams in all Leagues I can think of that spend considerable time at or near the bottom ….one i regularly point to are the New York Jets who lurch from one crisis to another and haven’t got near a Championship in over 50 years …and this is in a League with a draft, transparent player wages and an enforced salary cap …the problem is that they have poor owners ( sound familiar ?) ..
 
Tom Shines said:
There are teams in all Leagues I can think of that spend considerable time at or near the bottom ….one i regularly point to are the New York Jets who lurch from one crisis to another and haven’t got near a Championship in over 50 years …and this is in a League with a draft, transparent player wages and an enforced salary cap …the problem is that they have poor owners ( sound familiar ?) ..
Click to expand...
Yep, very average clubs will continue to exist in all leagues.

You could argue that the NBA, NFL and AFL do better than most in turning over success, or at least giving them the opportunity to, because they do have a draft in place.

The EPL though, should be a model for what NOT to do in my opinion.

Ignoring the fact that soccer is a hilarious sport, being a fan of a middling or lower-level team must be completely demoralising as they have a legitimate risk of never winning a title in someone's entire life, while the likes of Chelsea, Man U, Man City, Liverpool, etc, just bounce titles between them.

And yes, I know there are outliers, Spurs this year with their recent win, Leicester City a couple of years back, etc. But they're the exception, not the rule.
 
Kelce68 said:
Yep, very average clubs will continue to exist in all leagues.

You could argue that the NBA, NFL and AFL do better than most in turning over success, or at least giving them the opportunity to, because they do have a draft in place.

The EPL though, should be a model for what NOT to do in my opinion.

Ignoring the fact that soccer is a hilarious sport, being a fan of a middling or lower-level team must be completely demoralising as they have a legitimate risk of never winning a title in someone's entire life, while the likes of Chelsea, Man U, Man City, Liverpool, etc, just bounce titles between them.

And yes, I know there are outliers, Spurs this year with their recent win, Leicester City a couple of years back, etc. But they're the exception, not the rule.
Click to expand...

I don’t really follow it beyond a very high level …but the AFL is probably the closest where ALL teams seem to have some success over say a 20 yr period … they have a draft, and seem to do their junior development a different way to us though …I don’t think that is happening in our game …kids in the NRL don’t like where they get drafted ..they will just go and play Union somewhere
 
Tom Shines said:
I don’t really follow it beyond a very high level …but the AFL is probably the closest where ALL teams seem to have some success over say a 20 yr period … they have a draft, and seem to do their junior development a different way to us though …I don’t think that is happening in our game …kids in the NRL don’t like where
Click to expand...
Yep, the AFL do parity quite well.

People ask why the Stawell Gift is a handicap race.

It's simple. Having runners rated with an appropriate handicap makes for a better spectacle.

And ultimately, 'fairness' aside, I think that the better the NRL spectacle, the better the product, and important to head office, the better the revenue.
 
Canadian Club said:
What makes you say Haywood is the one? Genuinely curious.

From what I saw/have seen, Tallyn was by far the best 9 in his SG Ball season and was playing in the NRL that year. He had something like 9 tries in 10 games playing hooker.

Haywood was probably the 3rd-4th best hooker in SG Ball this year and doesn't look close to NRL ready yet. Jaxson Allen, Lachlan Coinakis and Zaidas Muagututia are all ahead of him in his own age group.
Click to expand...
Mate who do you rate as the best young forwards at the Tigers that other clubs would actually want to sign
 
Tom Shines said:
We’ll find out this week how we stack up against them …

Remind me…Are Penrith on a streak of premierships or wooden spoons like us?
Click to expand...
Point is- both clubs lose a stack of talent to other clubs.

People tend to overlook the stack of talent we take from other clubs as well.

Junior development is vital. But, realistically, it's a mechanism to give you great young talent for a certain period of time & good value.

The throw away statement "you can't keep them all" should be a mantra.

You can't. And shouldn't. Particularly when you have their replacement in the wings.

For someone like TDS right now- if he was BETTER than Api, no question. If it was close, but he was significantly better VALUE, very few questions.

But, he's not better. It's not THAT close. And unless TDS is signing for sub $500k a season (when the offers come in elsewhere, prices rise) is he significantly better value? Much less likely.

Someone used Farah as an example earlier. Thing was- Farah WAS better than the incumbant #9 & was therefore better for the team to keep.

Of all the great young talent we are developing, outside of Bula, I don't think any are 'vital'. Maybe Latu if he meets his potential. And Sam. But I think the rest, depending on other young players coming through, are all replaceable parts. This will change over time. Some players take great strides in development over short periods of time. Makasini, Lualili'i, To'a, Pole, Sukkar...they could all prove to be high priority maintain players. (others as well- just an example).

But if we lost them, it's not dooming the club's future. Not at this stage.

What we are losing in TDS is so far apart from the Tedesco/Moses/Woods loss. They were vital maintaining players as they were already important to the team's success.
 
The Chad said:
Point is- both clubs lose a stack of talent to other clubs.

People tend to overlook the stack of talent we take from other clubs as well.

Junior development is vital. But, realistically, it's a mechanism to give you great young talent for a certain period of time & good value.

The throw away statement "you can't keep them all" should be a mantra.

You can't. And shouldn't. Particularly when you have their replacement in the wings.

For someone like TDS right now- if he was BETTER than Api, no question. If it was close, but he was significantly better VALUE, very few questions.

But, he's not better. It's not THAT close. And unless TDS is signing for sub $500k a season (when the offers come in elsewhere, prices rise) is he significantly better value? Much less likely.

Someone used Farah as an example earlier. Thing was- Farah WAS better than the incumbant #9 & was therefore better for the team to keep.

Of all the great young talent we are developing, outside of Bula, I don't think any are 'vital'. Maybe Latu if he meets his potential. And Sam. But I think the rest, depending on other young players coming through, are all replaceable parts. This will change over time. Some players take great strides in development over short periods of time. Makasini, Lualili'i, To'a, Pole, Sukkar...they could all prove to be high priority maintain players. (others as well- just an example).

But if we lost them, it's not dooming the club's future. Not at this stage.

What we are losing in TDS is so far apart from the Tedesco/Moses/Woods loss. They were vital maintaining players as they were already important to the team's success.
Click to expand...
makasini was an absolute must. club knew that that’s why he’s locked down to 2027.
 
The Chad said:
Point is- both clubs lose a stack of talent to other clubs.

People tend to overlook the stack of talent we take from other clubs as well.

Junior development is vital. But, realistically, it's a mechanism to give you great young talent for a certain period of time & good value.

The throw away statement "you can't keep them all" should be a mantra.

You can't. And shouldn't. Particularly when you have their replacement in the wings.

For someone like TDS right now- if he was BETTER than Api, no question. If it was close, but he was significantly better VALUE, very few questions.

But, he's not better. It's not THAT close. And unless TDS is signing for sub $500k a season (when the offers come in elsewhere, prices rise) is he significantly better value? Much less likely.

Someone used Farah as an example earlier. Thing was- Farah WAS better than the incumbant #9 & was therefore better for the team to keep.

Of all the great young talent we are developing, outside of Bula, I don't think any are 'vital'. Maybe Latu if he meets his potential. And Sam. But I think the rest, depending on other young players coming through, are all replaceable parts. This will change over time. Some players take great strides in development over short periods of time. Makasini, Lualili'i, To'a, Pole, Sukkar...they could all prove to be high priority maintain players. (others as well- just an example).

But if we lost them, it's not dooming the club's future. Not at this stage.

What we are losing in TDS is so far apart from the Tedesco/Moses/Woods loss. They were vital maintaining players as they were already important to the team's success.
Click to expand...

the problem with TDS situation though ,is that they need to decide 18 months in advance whether to keep TDS for 2027 when Api will be 34 with what … two more years left ? I’m not saying its an easy call… but frankly it’s what Richo gets paid big money to get right …

TDS has been part of their system for years now … they should know what he is and what he can be… I’ll leave the call to them … but I’ll tell you … they better be making the call based on what is best for the future, not now… and if they let TDS go, I don’t want to be seeing TDS running around for years playing good footy like Paps.or heaven forbid in a blue jersey
 
My genuine question to the ultra pro tds's out there is what makes you as sure as you are that he is a first grade hooker? Genuine question.

I see the odd flash of decent ball running, but I find his defense very poor in regards to first contact (I know that's a lot of our team) he misses a lot of tackles, and his options in attack aren't there IMO. This doesn't mean he won't be a great player, but in my eyes, he hasn't progressed beyond an apprentice yet. I think he needs a season or two to develop but like a lot of youngsters wants his time now.
 
hodgo said:
My genuine question to the ultra pro tds's out there is what makes you as sure as you are that he is a first grade hooker? Genuine question.

I see the odd flash of decent ball running, but I find his defense very poor in regards to first contact (I know that's a lot of our team) he misses a lot of tackles, and his options in attack aren't there IMO. This doesn't mean he won't be a great player, but in my eyes, he hasn't progressed beyond an apprentice yet. I think he needs a season or two to develop but like a lot of youngsters wants his time now.
Click to expand...

How many tackles did Api miss last week? 7 wasn’t it ? They are small guys and get run at a lot by big forwards
 
Chunk said:
This goes way beyond this individual situation.

What does it say about our club?

It says we have problems, a good, well run club should be able to keep their juniors. players.

Juniors and retention (Toa) are the way we are suppose to get out of trouble. We can't continue to pay overs for players to come to our club, it's not sustainable.

TDS over API for 2027. Api can play a supporting role and be paid accordingly
Click to expand...
It says we have the ability to create quality players and there isn't enough space to keep 3 hookers at our club
 
hodgo said:
My genuine question to the ultra pro tds's out there is what makes you as sure as you are that he is a first grade hooker? Genuine question.

I see the odd flash of decent ball running, but I find his defense very poor in regards to first contact (I know that's a lot of our team) he misses a lot of tackles, and his options in attack aren't there IMO. This doesn't mean he won't be a great player, but in my eyes, he hasn't progressed beyond an apprentice yet. I think he needs a season or two to develop but like a lot of youngsters wants his time now.
Click to expand...
I think TDS misses tackles because he is not physically there yet. A slight build, not battle hardened.
The opposing big boys would tend to run at him to improve their statistics. Tackle breaks, off loads etc.
Having said that, I haven't seen any subtle ball distribution when in the red zone to make him a standout either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 508 (members: 22, guests: 486)
Back
Top