Brett Feres

[2041]

We always have a go at the Australian league media but at least they know the Tigers haven't got enough money to sign anyone for more than the minimum. The English league media obviously hasn't yet removed the Tigers from the random draw options when they need to fill gaps in the sentence "he has been linked with a number of NRL clubs including X, Y and Z". Maybe Rothfield could tip them off that X = Roosters, Y = Titans and Z = Manly in all cases, with the Eels and Raiders also available for novelty's sake.

We are able to re-sign players not on minimum wages, we aren't broke.

It's touching that you believe that.

Soooo nofa and simona are on minimum wages? Gotcha

Ok, I misread your post. You said "re-sign". I said "sign". There you go, happy now?

 

[Milky]

We are able to re-sign players not on minimum wages, we aren't broke.

It's touching that you believe that.

Soooo nofa and simona are on minimum wages? Gotcha

Ok, I misread your post. You said "re-sign". I said "sign". There you go, happy now?

Im not attempting to gain satisfaction out of your mistakes, im asking a legitimate question.

Many of you state that we can not buy any players because we are broke yet we re-sign players on 400-600k..how does that work? Not having a dig

 

[stevetiger]

It's touching that you believe that.

Soooo nofa and simona are on minimum wages? Gotcha

Ok, I misread your post. You said "re-sign". I said "sign". There you go, happy now?

Im not attempting to gain satisfaction out of your mistakes, im asking a legitimate question.

Many of you state that we can not buy any players because we are broke yet we re-sign players on 400-600k..how does that work? Not having a dig

Milky - it doesn't make any sense because the idea that we are broke is simply not true. If we are re-signing players for a significant amount of money it means we have the money. We are though choosing to buy certain players that we currently have on our books rather than attempting to purchase other players from outside the club even though we seemed to purchase a bunch of players this year.

I have no issues with the choices the club have made with regards to recruitment and retention recently. I think we need to be careful with how we spend our money and I think that is what the club has been doing.

 

[2041]

It's touching that you believe that.

Soooo nofa and simona are on minimum wages? Gotcha

Ok, I misread your post. You said "re-sign". I said "sign". There you go, happy now?

Im not attempting to gain satisfaction out of your mistakes, im asking a legitimate question.

Many of you state that we can not buy any players because we are broke yet we re-sign players on 400-600k..how does that work? Not having a dig

The club can afford to get near to or to the salary cap, but it's obviously got no flexibility outside it - TPAs etc. This is why it's still in 'cap trouble' despite having been shedding players for the past four seasons. Clubs with money can work round the cap to bring in new players even when they're close to the limit, by paying players outside the cap or eating contracts they don't want anymore. The Tigers can't afford to do that.

I mean, it should be fairly obvious. When was the last time the Tigers brought in a player from outside who anyone else wanted? Blair? They've got lucky with some scrap heap purchases - Austin, Tapau, Thompson - but as soon as those guys need to get paid the Tigers are out of the running.

The only one of their own players they've retained in the face of a serious effort from elsewhere to sign him was Tedesco, and that was because they got incredibly lucky and he decided to stay for massive unders.

So, sure, the club's not broke in the sense that it can afford to keep most of its mid-range first grade players provided no-one else takes a massive shine to them. And it can attempt to keep future stars by paying them within the cap in advance for things they haven't done yet. But it's just not functionally able to compete with at least 10 teams in the comp when it comes to coveted players from outside.

Maybe this will all change for 2017, but I'm not holding out much hope. And in the meantime any expectation that the Tigers will be competing for free-agent signings is a pipe dream.

 

[weststigers]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Ferres

29 years old…how long has he got left?

 

[balmain boy]

3 years? Plenty of time for us to get value out of him.

 

[happy_tiger]

http://www.msn.com/en-au/sport/rugby-league/english-love-rat-wont-be-joining-roosters/ar-CCmqTD?li=AAgfYrC&ocid=mailsignout