InBenjiWeTrust
Well-known member
If the question is: swap Stewart for Curtis and Sauaso my answer is no.
Glenn stewart may leave manly because of salary cap
- Thread starter Mina
- Start date
Black_n_White
New member
@bigsiro said:
Seriously, even if Jesus Christ himself was a star half-back, able to cure injuries on the field, and turn gatorade into beer for post match celebrations, wanted to come to us on a $5 per year contract, yet had done his whole career as a proud outspoken Manly germ, I would pass on him too.
But honestly, we have invested in our spine and locked in a few other key players, one or two left to re-sign, a bit of dead weight and a few lame ducks to cut. We dont need to pay big bucks into an already declining, consistantly injured, ageing 2nd rower. We will be better served spreading his kind of coin over a few prospects to fit our new system.
Far from over rated….the guy is a **_footballer_**, with a lot of footy nous between the ears
bigsiro
Well-known member
@Black'n'White said:
So you'd pass on Cliff Lyons, Steve Menzies, Michael O'Connor, Hasler, Toovey, Eadie, Fulton?
Good call mate.
Black_n_White
New member
@bigsiro said:
Yes they are all too old, just like Stewart.
clontarfkid
Well-known member
Think Fifitas contract at $850k has changed eexpectations for forwards generally…& Stewart a year or two back was one of the best going around,& maybe cld have commanded that sort of $$$.Then again ,maybe not...think Fifita will be the dogs' Blair long term
Nowadays Stewart can barely get on the paddock,cant train with the team,& cant stay sufficiently injury free to play SOO........ when he does make the field is a shadow of the player he once was.
We dodged a major bullet with Benji ,& have taken the odd flesh wound with other signings of "experience"that havent been overly successful,so why stump up the $500k minimum that Stewart wld want ..?
Theres no way a smart opertaor like Potter wld do that
Nowadays Stewart can barely get on the paddock,cant train with the team,& cant stay sufficiently injury free to play SOO........ when he does make the field is a shadow of the player he once was.
We dodged a major bullet with Benji ,& have taken the odd flesh wound with other signings of "experience"that havent been overly successful,so why stump up the $500k minimum that Stewart wld want ..?
Theres no way a smart opertaor like Potter wld do that
jirskyr
Well-known member
@clontarfkid said:
I know, he's struggled to put back to back matches together the past 2 years.
People have been so critical of signing Braith Anasta, I don't want another backrower in the twilight of his career. Certainly still a decent quality footballer and previously in the elite rep class, but if we were to release a Jesse Sue, Siro or BMM to sign G Stewart, I'd be flabbergasted.
MightyTiger
New member
The difference between Inglis, SBW and Folau is they are current rep players that are aged 27, 28 and 24 years of age respectively. Big difference to Stewart who is 30 years old, WAS a rep player and injury prone has been coming to the end of his career. The tigers would need their head read if they signed him instead of siro, sue and co.
stevetiger
New member
@alex said:
Yep.
the question is not whether g. stewart is good, bad, overated or underated. It is whether he will actually be ON the field more the majority of games and whether he will be worth the excessive price tag required to lure him from manly and other buyers.
For me, i'd say no. There will be other players that can offer us more in terms of injury security and a longer playing career. Obviously, we should keep trying to retain our own players before buying others so that has to be taken into account.
With the teddy situation, people might think that the fact it was/is a close call of whether he'll sign means we are close to our cap. I think it's more about mayer wanting to pay market price (not overs) for him so we have more money in the future. Also, teddy's form could dip dramatically through injury or something so we don't want a very expensive injured player on our hands.
For me, i'd say no. There will be other players that can offer us more in terms of injury security and a longer playing career. Obviously, we should keep trying to retain our own players before buying others so that has to be taken into account.
With the teddy situation, people might think that the fact it was/is a close call of whether he'll sign means we are close to our cap. I think it's more about mayer wanting to pay market price (not overs) for him so we have more money in the future. Also, teddy's form could dip dramatically through injury or something so we don't want a very expensive injured player on our hands.
bigsiro
Well-known member
@MightyTiger said:
That's what everyone said about Groat too, that he is a priority to re-sign.
Anyway, when did this become a trade-off? Why is everyone talking like if we sign stewart then we cant sign siro and sue? No-one knows about the finances of the club so Im guessing this "equation" is simply because they may play similar styles. But where is Fulton in that equation? Stewart is easily better than Fulton. And Patterson? Is he no longer in the team?
Anyway according to that kind of logic, we don't need fullbacks, wingers, centres, halves, hooker, backrow or front row cos it means we have to give up someone with potential.
It is just this mentality that ensures that certain teams always stay at the bottom of the ladder and other teams will always thrive.
I can assure you that Chelsea, Miami Heat, Roosters, Sydney Swans or any other winning team NEVER have this mentality. They go for the big guns all the time.
Yes winning comes at a cost sometimes. We can't have cake and eat it too. I wish we could.
I really think that we are like Swansea FC and Richmond Tigers; teams with potential that are far from realizing it because of always wearing of rose coloured glasses about their own future players and therefore won't invest in class players. I hate to admit it cos I am a massive fan of siro and co, but it really is delusional. Look at Groat.
happy_tiger
Well-known member
Anyway if Manly really want him , they will find a way to keep him
This could be the new way of actually advertising for TPA.s
This could be the new way of actually advertising for TPA.s
@happy tiger said:
great point! exactly what i was thinking while reading it, if i were a manly fan with a lot of money, or a relatively successful company i'd consider throwing in 100k as a 3rd party deal. He can sponsor my product away from the NRL without it being in the cap right?
happy_tiger
Well-known member
@pHyR3 said:
Unfortunately No pHyR3
They are basically a silent partner , if you do it , it is because of your love of the player or club
Black_n_White
New member
@happy tiger said:
Thats not right Happy, as long as they dont reference the teams or nrl's intellectual properties they can appear in television/billboard or even magazine ads ie. the person is recognisable enough to be a commodity themselves not having to use the team or nrl logos and such. Then its still a third party outside the cap.
