Player fire sale just weeks away

@ said:
Branko Lee is no better than what we already have for next year. I think Graham is starting to slow down, so his signing doesn't interest me as much as it once did. Klemmer would be a good pick up. I think our club would prioritise keeping Woods though. And i think the Dogs would rather lose Woods too, as losing an existing player runs the risk of upsetting their playing roster and supporters and causing even more instability. Plus it won't do Woods any favours. Its already going to be hard enough going there with the plight they are in, he doesn't want to go there feeling alienated by being the guy that forced someone else out. The fans will hate him. I still don't understand why if he doesn't want to go he just doesn't make it known. If he did, the Dogs would have no choice but to allow him to renege as no club forces players to honour contracts anymore. Maybe Woods isn't smart enough to know that, and his manager doesn't want to remind him of it because it will cut his commission in half. Idk, as hard as i have been on Woods, he's a simpleton, he's not very intelligent and is probably very easily lead and influenced. His manager has milked these traits for all they are worth. James Hooper is another idiot who hasn't gotten half of what he deserves either. Whose to say the bile he was spewing earlier in the year didn't get inside Woods head.
Click to expand...

Or maybe Woods simply wants to honour the contract that he signed.
 
@ said:
@ said:
Branko Lee is no better than what we already have for next year. I think Graham is starting to slow down, so his signing doesn't interest me as much as it once did. Klemmer would be a good pick up. I think our club would prioritise keeping Woods though. And i think the Dogs would rather lose Woods too, as losing an existing player runs the risk of upsetting their playing roster and supporters and causing even more instability. Plus it won't do Woods any favours. Its already going to be hard enough going there with the plight they are in, he doesn't want to go there feeling alienated by being the guy that forced someone else out. The fans will hate him. I still don't understand why if he doesn't want to go he just doesn't make it known. If he did, the Dogs would have no choice but to allow him to renege as no club forces players to honour contracts anymore. Maybe Woods isn't smart enough to know that, and his manager doesn't want to remind him of it because it will cut his commission in half. Idk, as hard as i have been on Woods, he's a simpleton, he's not very intelligent and is probably very easily lead and influenced. His manager has milked these traits for all they are worth. James Hooper is another idiot who hasn't gotten half of what he deserves either. Whose to say the bile he was spewing earlier in the year didn't get inside Woods head.

Or maybe Woods simply wants to honour the contract that he signed.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Possibly. But if there's the slightest chance he could avoid that rubble, he'd be an idiot not too.
 
It seems to me the Dogs fans are happy to get rid of the the lot of them Dib ,Hasler, and their under performimg roster bar- Klemmer and Jackson.
The general consensus seems they need a complete cleanout and their aging roster and backended contracts are part of that. The two new recruits are probably the last two they would want to let go. Not suggesting that they are the answer but what is clear that they need an injection of something different and that means - Graham, the Morris brothers Eastwood Mbye Tolman , need to be let go which should resolve their cap problems. It just depends if their are any takers for them and what they are prepared to offer.
 
Aren't the NRL suppose to sign off on any new contacts?
If so, how did they sign Foran and Woods if they were over the cap?
Was it just a case of taking them to a nice Chinese meal and ordering a king lobster.

I'd like the Fire Sale to held in a cattle yard. And the Bulldogs players ( along with any other club that has cheated the cap) are weighed correctly and lead around a pen while Go and Pasco trying out bid other clubs that are under the cap .
 
Aren't the NRL suppose to sign off on any new contacts?
If so, how did they sign Foran and Woods if they were over the cap?
Was it just a case of taking them to a nice Chinese meal and ordering a king lobster.

I'd like the Fire Sale to held in a cattle yard. And the Bulldogs players ( along with any other club that has cheated the cap) are weighed correctly and lead around a pen while Go and Pasco trying out bid other clubs that are under the cap .
 
There is going to be some players definitely go from the Dogs,which lot I don't know,how could this develop into the huge mess that it is if we are supposed to have an auditor monitoring the cap…
Obviously some other clubs will be effected by the new cap limit but you would think that there would have been much more thought put into this process so that this type of mess would not have happened..Im not familiar with the cap process,however,if an organisation such as the NRL cant get it right for an increase in the cap at this point in time how the hell will they in future undertakings to make this game a far better and level playing field..
Obviously backended deals are the scourge of the cap,and now the Dogs are suffering because of them,as I said I'm not familiar with the cap process but you would think the NRL is...
 
The NRL provisionally registered the contracts subject to the Dogs being under the cap round one. They then backended Montoya, Elliot, Hopoate. Woods is also backended 700k year 1 and 1m for the remaining seasons.
They counted on Tigers taking Eastwood and Newcastle taking Graham. Their form has tanked and their are no takers.
 
@ said:
Aren't the NRL suppose to sign off on any new contacts?
If so, how did they sign Foran and Woods if they were over the cap?
Was it just a case of taking them to a nice Chinese meal and ordering a king lobster.

I'd like the Fire Sale to held in a cattle yard. And the Bulldogs players ( along with any other club that has cheated the cap) are weighed correctly and lead around a pen while Go and Pasco trying out bid other clubs that are under the cap .
Click to expand...

As far as I am aware they (the NRL,) have to register the contract. If the contract is not registered Woods is still entitled to the contract money from Canterbury, I would imagine they have to pay it out from outside the cap and Woods will not be allowed to take the field.

Happy to be corrected of course if this is not the case.
 
@ said:
@ said:
Aren't the NRL suppose to sign off on any new contacts?
If so, how did they sign Foran and Woods if they were over the cap?
Was it just a case of taking them to a nice Chinese meal and ordering a king lobster.

I'd like the Fire Sale to held in a cattle yard. And the Bulldogs players ( along with any other club that has cheated the cap) are weighed correctly and lead around a pen while Go and Pasco trying out bid other clubs that are under the cap .

As far as I am aware they (the NRL,) have to register the contract. If the contract is not registered Woods is still entitled to the contract money from Canterbury, I would imagine they have to pay it out from outside the cap and Woods will not be allowed to take the field.

Happy to be corrected of course if this is not the case.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

That is 100% correct, both Foran and Woods have legally binding contracts with the bulldogs that they have to receive payment for. These contracts have been provisionally registered by the NRL after the bulldogs showed a plan to be cap compliant by round 1 2018\. These contracts will not be fully registered until the dogs are cap compliant, if they are not cap compliant then they will will not be registered and neither player will be allowed to play but will still be entitled to the money promised in the contract.
 
@ said:
Branko Lee is no better than what we already have for next year. I think Graham is starting to slow down, so his signing doesn't interest me as much as it once did. Klemmer would be a good pick up. I think our club would prioritise keeping Woods though. And i think the Dogs would rather lose Woods too, as losing an existing player runs the risk of upsetting their playing roster and supporters and causing even more instability. Plus it won't do Woods any favours. Its already going to be hard enough going there with the plight they are in, he doesn't want to go there feeling alienated by being the guy that forced someone else out. The fans will hate him. I still don't understand why if he doesn't want to go he just doesn't make it known. If he did, the Dogs would have no choice but to allow him to renege as no club forces players to honour contracts anymore. Maybe Woods isn't smart enough to know that, and his manager doesn't want to remind him of it because it will cut his commission in half. Idk, as hard as i have been on Woods, he's a simpleton, he's not very intelligent and is probably very easily lead and influenced. His manager has milked these traits for all they are worth. James Hooper is another idiot who hasn't gotten half of what he deserves either. Whose to say the bile he was spewing earlier in the year didn't get inside Woods head.
Click to expand...

If I was in Woods' spot right now I would be keeping my mouth shut, if he backs out of the contract he saves the bulldogs skin. If the bulldogs backout they have to top up any potential shortfall in what another club pays him next year.

The perfect way for him to play it would be to let the Tigers know privately that he wants to stay (which I believe he has) and for the Tigers and the dogs to negotiate who is paying what in his contract. If the Tigers negotiate hard they could end up keeping him for much less than if he just walks away from his contract.
 
@ said:
@ said:
Branko Lee is no better than what we already have for next year. I think Graham is starting to slow down, so his signing doesn't interest me as much as it once did. Klemmer would be a good pick up. I think our club would prioritise keeping Woods though. And i think the Dogs would rather lose Woods too, as losing an existing player runs the risk of upsetting their playing roster and supporters and causing even more instability. Plus it won't do Woods any favours. Its already going to be hard enough going there with the plight they are in, he doesn't want to go there feeling alienated by being the guy that forced someone else out. The fans will hate him. I still don't understand why if he doesn't want to go he just doesn't make it known. If he did, the Dogs would have no choice but to allow him to renege as no club forces players to honour contracts anymore. Maybe Woods isn't smart enough to know that, and his manager doesn't want to remind him of it because it will cut his commission in half. Idk, as hard as i have been on Woods, he's a simpleton, he's not very intelligent and is probably very easily lead and influenced. His manager has milked these traits for all they are worth. James Hooper is another idiot who hasn't gotten half of what he deserves either. Whose to say the bile he was spewing earlier in the year didn't get inside Woods head.

If I was in Woods' spot right now I would be keeping my mouth shut, if he backs out of the contract he saves the bulldogs skin. If the bulldogs backout they have to top up any potential shortfall in what another club pays him next year.

The perfect way for him to play it would be to let the Tigers know privately that he wants to stay (which I believe he has) and for the Tigers and the dogs to negotiate who is paying what in his contract. If the Tigers negotiate hard they could end up keeping him for much less than if he just walks away from his contract.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

It seems the club has turned a corner with contract negotiations. They will not be prepared to pay full fare on Woods' contract. He'll have to agree to a more reasonable contract or he'll be playing for the Dogs (or sitting on the sidelines whilst being paid by them.)
 
There is no way Woods will be on the sidelines next year. I dont know where he will be playing but a rep player can not be left without a club because the club he signs with screws up their cap! The NRL/RLPA wiil ensure allowances are made to protect players in this situation even if a club picks him up for way less than he is worth.
 
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
Branko Lee is no better than what we already have for next year. I think Graham is starting to slow down, so his signing doesn't interest me as much as it once did. Klemmer would be a good pick up. I think our club would prioritise keeping Woods though. And i think the Dogs would rather lose Woods too, as losing an existing player runs the risk of upsetting their playing roster and supporters and causing even more instability. Plus it won't do Woods any favours. Its already going to be hard enough going there with the plight they are in, he doesn't want to go there feeling alienated by being the guy that forced someone else out. The fans will hate him. I still don't understand why if he doesn't want to go he just doesn't make it known. If he did, the Dogs would have no choice but to allow him to renege as no club forces players to honour contracts anymore. Maybe Woods isn't smart enough to know that, and his manager doesn't want to remind him of it because it will cut his commission in half. Idk, as hard as i have been on Woods, he's a simpleton, he's not very intelligent and is probably very easily lead and influenced. His manager has milked these traits for all they are worth. James Hooper is another idiot who hasn't gotten half of what he deserves either. Whose to say the bile he was spewing earlier in the year didn't get inside Woods head.

If I was in Woods' spot right now I would be keeping my mouth shut, if he backs out of the contract he saves the bulldogs skin. If the bulldogs backout they have to top up any potential shortfall in what another club pays him next year.

The perfect way for him to play it would be to let the Tigers know privately that he wants to stay (which I believe he has) and for the Tigers and the dogs to negotiate who is paying what in his contract. If the Tigers negotiate hard they could end up keeping him for much less than if he just walks away from his contract.

It seems the club has turned a corner with contract negotiations. They will not be prepared to pay full fare on Woods' contract. He'll have to agree to a more reasonable contract or he'll be playing for the Dogs (or sitting on the sidelines whilst being paid by them.)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

He doesn't necessarily have to agree to a more reasonable contract, the bulldogs may have to pay part due to him having a binding contract with them. How much they are willing to pay will depend on how desperate they are to fix their mess, the longer it carries on the more desperate they may become.

As I said Woods' best tactic right now would to be to be quiet, let the clubs see if they can work out a solution. We may end up with a case where the Tigers are paying him $500K and the Bulldogs are paying $300K. Woods get his money, Tigers get him for very good value and the Bulldogs are stuck paying a player for 3 years who never even wore their jersey. Sounds perfect to me.
 
@ said:
There is no way Woods will be on the sidelines next year. I dont know where he will be playing but a rep player can not be left without a club because the club he signs with screws up their cap! The NRL/RLPA wiil ensure allowances are made to protect players in this situation even if a club picks him up for way less than he is worth.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, NRL clubs are still allowed to loan contracted players to the English Superleague while retaining them, and can then discount the contract for that year's cap. We did it for a year of Liam Fulton's contract. It's a possibility that a few Dogs players, not neccesaraly Woods, might find themselves in Yorkshire while still employed by Canturbury.
 
@ said:
@ said:
There is no way Woods will be on the sidelines next year. I dont know where he will be playing but a rep player can not be left without a club because the club he signs with screws up their cap! The NRL/RLPA wiil ensure allowances are made to protect players in this situation even if a club picks him up for way less than he is worth.

As far as I know, NRL clubs are still allowed to loan contracted players to the English Superleague while retaining them, and can then discount the contract for that year's cap. We did it for a year of Liam Fulton's contract. It's a possibility that a few Dogs players, not neccesaraly Woods, might find themselves in Yorkshire while still employed by Canturbury.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

That's not exactly how that work, the Tigers didn't technically loan Liam to the Giants. The Tigers released him from his contract he then signed a short term deal with Huddersfield, when he completed that contract he re-signed with the Tigers. It was all agreed to beforehand but at no point was Liam playing for Huddersfield while contracted to the Tigers.

It is possible that Dogs players could end up in the superleague, but they would no longer be contracted to the Dogs, would have to agree to the move, and any money they are short with their new deal will have to be made up by the Dogs.
 
Big meeting today with three quarters of clubs required to get an increase through. Let's hope we can muster five clubs to resist the attempt. I'd say the NRL have six and a half million reasons for being able to bring the Dragons' onside.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-league/canberra-raiders/canberra-raiders-chairman-admits-concern-about-nrl-salary-cap-20170816-gxxk3l.html
 
@ said:
Big meeting today with three quarters of clubs required to get an increase through. Let's hope we can muster five clubs to resist the attempt.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-league/canberra-raiders/canberra-raiders-chairman-admits-concern-about-nrl-salary-cap-20170816-gxxk3l.html
Click to expand...

Clubs who don't want the increase should threaten to boycott.

The NRL will crap themselves if four sides choose to stand down, possibly four games a week they could lose and that Channel Nine/Fox will be asking compensation for. That would be a far more costly exercise than telling clubs that have over budgeted to GAGF.
 
@ said:
@ said:
Big meeting today with three quarters of clubs required to get an increase through. Let's hope we can muster five clubs to resist the attempt.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-league/canberra-raiders/canberra-raiders-chairman-admits-concern-about-nrl-salary-cap-20170816-gxxk3l.html

Clubs who don't want the increase should threaten to boycott.

The NRL will crap themselves if four sides choose to stand down, possibly four games a week they could lose and that Channel Nine/Fox will be asking compensation for. That would be a far more costly exercise than telling clubs that have over budgeted to GAGF.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Well I'm shocked the Dragons would be involved with their loan from the NRL which apparently has not been repaid?
 
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
Big meeting today with three quarters of clubs required to get an increase through. Let's hope we can muster five clubs to resist the attempt.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-league/canberra-raiders/canberra-raiders-chairman-admits-concern-about-nrl-salary-cap-20170816-gxxk3l.html

Clubs who don't want the increase should threaten to boycott.

The NRL will crap themselves if four sides choose to stand down, possibly four games a week they could lose and that Channel Nine/Fox will be asking compensation for. That would be a far more costly exercise than telling clubs that have over budgeted to GAGF.

Well I'm shocked the Dragons would be involved with their loan from the NRL which apparently has not been repaid?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

So who are the 5 clubs that are going to vote with us. I'd say knights but who else…..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 769 (members: 23, guests: 746)
Back
Top