Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

[Nelson]

Cust off to Wigan

Would you have taken Cust over Hastings

https://www.msn.com/en-au/sport/news/tough-sea-eagles-half-granted-release-to-join-new-club/ar-AAQDNNS?ocid=ientp

No, but I would have been happy to have Cust as depth. Maybe try him out as a centre in reggies because I think he’d be rock solid there. Good footy brain and fast enough.

 

[upthetigers]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

 

[clontarfkid]

Lot of moving parts with Hodgson recruitment..
We wish to pay only $500k for a player Raiders have on their books for $900k,plus we'd like them to take Liddle for full ask of $300k
On top of that,Raiders are awaiting the january outcome of their court case for their sole alternative at 9...
As each month goes by,the maths get friendlier for WTs as Hodgson is being paid $75k monthly by Raiders from Nov1,whereas we we pay Liddle $24k or so...

If you don't mind, could you please post Tigers official word that they want to Canberra to take Liddle for full freight or that they want Canberra to take him at all. Has Liddle agreed to terminate his 2 year contract with the Tigers? Has Liddle agreed that he wants to leave and go to Canberra?

Sounds like it is made up to me.

Everything is made up Russell..maybe including you???
None of us actually know anything of course,except the logical course of action that awaits us with simple logic played out
Bewildering??Me too!!

 

[Littlebittipsy]

Sheens second week in Australia starts tomorrow. Will there be news this week? At least an upgrade to Stef or laurie would b a start

Hodgson will get sorted one way or another early next week.

Did you get some mail on that?

 

[Tiger5150]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Genuine third party agreements (separate from the club) are already unrestricted, and rightly so.

 

[Eyeofthetiger 0]

Sheens second week in Australia starts tomorrow. Will there be news this week? At least an upgrade to Stef or laurie would b a start

Hodgson will get sorted one way or another early next week.

Did you get some mail on that?

@THE_POM Posted about it a couple of days ago

 

[cochise]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

 

[hsvjones]

Sheens second week in Australia starts tomorrow. Will there be news this week? At least an upgrade to Stef or laurie would b a start

Yes I am surprised we have not atleast extended Stefo or Laurie by now... Cannot afford to lose guys like this when your whole structure of rebuilding this club is based on youth.. I understand they have 2 years left and not available to others but you can bet your last dollar they are talking to Stefo and the guys in SOO camp will be in his ear.
Every day the WestsTigers get me excited when they advise yet another signing but its always corp partners signings.. We need the marketing sales team to close deals for us as the actual recruitment team are sh#t house at it. :grin: :grin:

 

[upthetigers]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

 

[Geo]

Wait a second our halves and pack received terrible service from dummy half..

 

[diedpretty]

As suggested before, all players should be on a points system. The more valuable a player is the higher the points.

I'll say this every time, and it's not a slight against you, but can anyone please show me a professional league of any sport globally that has a centrally-assigned points cap system in place? Can't work, won't work.

I see no reason why it couldn’t work, but it won’t happen because the people with the power ($) don’t want it.

I don't think it would work, too many variables.


I submitted a paper (upgrades to the current 100 point system) to the Sydney Rugby Union on this a few months ago. I agree it is terribly difficult and will never work unless it is administered appropriately. For fun I used the same method on the Tigers and the Roosters. Very interesting results

What would you base your point allocations on?


Did they play junior football for the club - reduces points
Did they play 1st grade for another club - increases points
Did they play their first grade game at another club - small points increase
Did they play State of Origin - increases points
Did they play for Australia or another tier 1 country - increases points
Did they play play for a 2nd Tier country - increases points
How many games/years have they played for the club - gradually reduces points
Did father or siblings play for the club - reduces points
A marquee allowance for 1-2 players - reduces points
Did they come from another senior sport (rugby/atletics etc) - no point increase
There were others but I can't remember off the top of my head

Thats a few starting ideas - I know there are many issues with this but it was just an attempt to find a workable solution

When I did the comparison between the Tigers and Rooster, the Roosters points were @ double of the Tigers

I like the idea of a points system - when you say the rorters doubled the tigers points what was your starting point. For example what is the baseline points per player. Do you start at a given points number for all players then add and subtract points according to all your examples above. How many points would each team be allowed - would it just be the baseline times 30 or would that be too low/high.
Another tweak could be that teams that finish in the bottom 4 each year get additional points for the next season.


Hey Diedpretty - Yes the last point was part of my submission the bottom 4 had more points. I started off with 2 points as a basis for each player, then 5 points for SOO and 10 points for International, 4 points for tier 2 internationals, 3 points for 1st grade imports, 1 point reduction for every year a player has been with the team. Min points is 2 points. A SOO and International would only get the the highest points (SOO would be 0 if they played for Australia). Marquee would only attract 1/2 the allotted points. Father Son or sibling scenarios would the same as a base player 2 points.

Off the top of my head I think that is how is did it

**BTW Died Pretty was one of my all time fave bands**

they still do a few shows now and then. Ron Peno and the Superstitions are doing a tour early next year

 

[happy_tiger]

Wait a second our halves and pack received terrible service from dummy half..

And from their internet provider as well ......

 

[tony soprano]

Reported in the Telecrap today that Oliver Gildart was spotted in Cronulla for a catch up and a feed of fish and chips with Luke Thompson may be WT'S are still a chance of snaring Thompson??????

Their good mates

 

[Harvey]

Surely there is an aged, past it front rower that can be chased?

With Tamou, Hodgson & this signing we could look at winning a seniors comp.

God our recruitment is terrible

 

[Balmainian]

Im continually confused how people believe that Simpkins' performance was better than Liddles this year. Liddle may not have been great but Simpkin was way out of his depth.

Its just, Liddle lacks in the main fundamental of a hooker, passing. Its atrocious. So the frustration over the season builds up, otherwise I don't see much of an issue in his game, but this one issue, is pretty damning.

Didn’t Luciano Leilua got into a push and shove with Liddle last offseason because of his service from dummy half?

Correct, seemingly it was justified

And there were games that Liddle’s service from dummy half was horrible he can run but his passing is average while Simpkin at this stage can pass the ball better but not as effective at running yet but honestly if I had to pick one of them two I’m going with Simpkin

Liddle has no kicking game either which is really important from 9 these days

A lot of 9 don't have decent kicking games

Go through all the 9 at NRL clubs ..many can't kick

The best hookers have an all round repertoire of talent including kicking, service, the draw an pass and defense, anything less and your behind schedule.
The Hodgson deal would be very valuable at this point in time in our development of the 9s we have coming through.
There will never be a player everyone on this forum agrees with signing, even if we landed The Cheese there would be a hater.

 

[240z]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

Well Salary Caps and TPAs are not providing that at the present time.

There is no way player payments can be controlled from clubs or 3rd pay entities. Who knows, players could be receiving payments or gratuities 20 years from now, they could have trusts setup or off shore accounts - who knows

At present there are NO even playing fields

 

[Champ]

As suggested before, all players should be on a points system. The more valuable a player is the higher the points.

I'll say this every time, and it's not a slight against you, but can anyone please show me a professional league of any sport globally that has a centrally-assigned points cap system in place? Can't work, won't work.

100% this. The whole idea is a complete non-starter. All it does is distort player cost, not "fix" it. Depending on how the points are assigned, it would likely be a disaster for solid first graders who happen to have played a game or two of rep football and are now given rep-level points, while wildly overvaluing unproven talent. Instead of allowing clubs to keep the players they have developed, it would force them into Joseph Suaalii style bidding wars over "next big thing" talent that has a very low points score.

Every time I get into a conversation with a points system advicate they have to tweak the system in response to every problem.

What about players who get international caps for second tier nations - would they carry the same points weighting as Australia internationals? *Oh no, it would be half.* So teams would be incentivised to sign Tongan and Kiwi players rather than Australians - how would that go down? *Oh no, Tonga and NZ are good now, so they would have full weighting.* So some guy who plays a couple of games off the bench for Tonga has the same weighting as an Australian international? *It could be based on number of games played.* But some international teams play more than others.

And so it goes on, until they end up saying actually there would just be a panel of judges who decide how many points to assign everyone. Which basically turns roster construction into "are you a better judge of talent than Gorden Tallis, Neil Henry and Braith Anasta". There's no way any system that relies on external judgement of talent is going to work.

I understand some of the concerns. As many of our fellow Tigers fans have mentioned it wouldnt be easy & I dont profess to have all the answers. But what about a "price" points system that the market decides. Let me illustrate.
Lets take Suaali for example. Souths are willing to pay 300k for him so he is worth 30 points. But the Rorters come along & say we will pay him 500k , so his point score goes up to 50 points. However Souths get him for a 50% points discount (ie 25 points because he was developed by them). So Souths now say we will offer you 600k knowing that it will only cost them 30 points . As all NRL sides have the same points, sides like the Rorters would be hesitant using a large amount of points on an unproven players.
This same principle applies to all players. The "price" points system is very similar to how the salary cap works now but actually acts as a transparent public salary cap, rather than the "one payment on the books plus paperbags" with the existing salary cap.
For example , The Warriors offer Manu 950k but he signed with the Rorters for supposedly 750k ( with paperbags) , it will still cost the Rorters 95 points because that was the highest offer.

All contracts & offers have to be lodged with NRL & once lodged are binding on the club if the player decides to accept them so that would stop clubs trying to intentionally inflate the points price of players by submitting bogus offers. If a club does withdraw the offer after it has been accepted they would have to subsidize the difference of what they offered & what the player actually signed for at another club. On top of this , they would lose the difference of the price points between the 2 offers off their salary cap points for the lentgh of the contract they offered.

Any thoughts?

At first glance, it's a better idea than others I've heard. I'm thinking aloud here but the first questions I'd want answered are:
- Is it fair to make one team pay, even in points, for another club's stupid contract offer? I guess this happens anyway - the whole buyer's remorse thing. But if the Roosters genuinely have built a team culture players want to be a part of, even at a discount, should they be penalised because no hopers like the Warriors can only throw money at the situation?
- How would the system account for length of contract? I guess average annual value, but players often prefer to take smaller deals with the certainty of longer duration. Again, if some dumb club has to offer stupid contract years to attract talent is it fair effectively to make smart ones match it or be penalised?
- What happens when clubs are negotiating with multiple players at the same time? You'd have to assume the Tigers would be at least interested in more or less any player on the market now, and could in theory make offers to several players knowing they aren't likely to get all of them (and if they absolutely had to could withdraw an offer). If the whole transfer system became a chain, where club A can't offer player Y a contract until player X has made a decision, it would get horribly snarled up.

As I say, just thinking aloud. It's an interesting idea.

1- It would stop the Rorters for example signing someone on a 500 k contract ( and a paper bag for further 400k) when every one knows that player is worth 900k. If they really want that player, the question is are they willing to spend those points? Once again if you are a stupid club offering stupid deals , you put yourself in a bad position if the player accepts that deal. Not dissimilar to how the salary cap works now , except this is harder to rort.
The player can sign anywhere he wants (eg for culture reasons or likes the coach) however it would them come down to if the club valued that player enough to pay the points.

2-A club would be penalised for the length of the contract they offered or the length of the contract that was signed by the player , whichever was the lesser. Remember , that would only happen if the club withdrew the contract **after** it was accepted by the player. This would stop clubs offering bogus contracts to inflate a price points to screw another club over. Also would promote responsible salary cap management by the clubs.

3-Just like now, clubs offer multiple deals to different players.And just like now, once they spend their cap they withdraw the remaining offers with no penalty before the rest of the offers are excepted. The price points would only be held against a club that signed a player for under market value while the other offer was still valid ( ie not withdrawn. )

Example- Rorters offer Manu 500k ( plus paper bag) . Tigers offer 900k. Manu signs with Rorters it cost the Rorters 90 points because Tigers offer was not withdrawn.

Example 2-- Rorters offer Manu 500k ( plus paper bag) . Tigers offer 900k. Souths offer 750k .
before Manu signs anywhere , Tigers withdraw offer(with no penalty) cause they have signed another centre. Manu signs with Rorters & it now only cost the Rorters 75 points because Souths offer was still current (750k) when Manu signed with the Rorters.

As I said , dont have all the answers & appreciate any feedback suggestions & potential issues.
Putting it simply, it would be a more effective transparent way of policing the salary cap, would encourage clubs to develop their own juniors, (because of the discount in points) , & the paperbags dont matter as you cant spend over your maximum points anyway.

I like the idea of having a price points system however take the case of Papali'i based on Chammas report. Eels want to pay him 425k or 42.5 points tigers offer 600k or 60 points so eels may up offer to 500 k and get him but it costs them 60 points instead of 50. Here is the sticking point under what you originally put forward - the Warriors who developed him get a 50% discount so come in with an offer of 800k that blows both the eels and tiges out of the water but they only have to carry 40 points. I suppose you could get around that by decreasing the development discount for every year the player has been away from his development club. There would need to be a lot of tweaking done but it does seem a fairer system than present.

Yep , certainly. I just said 50% as a suggestion but like you say , with tweaking by someone smarter than me,Ii seriously cant see how this wouldn't work. It would be so transparent & the Rorters for example couldn't stockpile premium talent with paper bags.

 

[cochise]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

 

[Geo]

Anthony Minichello gets Latte's for life..

 

[happy_tiger]

Im continually confused how people believe that Simpkins' performance was better than Liddles this year. Liddle may not have been great but Simpkin was way out of his depth.

Its just, Liddle lacks in the main fundamental of a hooker, passing. Its atrocious. So the frustration over the season builds up, otherwise I don't see much of an issue in his game, but this one issue, is pretty damning.

Didn’t Luciano Leilua got into a push and shove with Liddle last offseason because of his service from dummy half?

Correct, seemingly it was justified

And there were games that Liddle’s service from dummy half was horrible he can run but his passing is average while Simpkin at this stage can pass the ball better but not as effective at running yet but honestly if I had to pick one of them two I’m going with Simpkin

Liddle has no kicking game either which is really important from 9 these days

A lot of 9 don't have decent kicking games

Go through all the 9 at NRL clubs ..many can't kick

The best hookers have an all round repertoire of talent including kicking, service, the draw an pass and defense, anything less and your behind schedule.
The Hodgson deal would be very valuable at this point in time in our development of the 9s we have coming through.
There will never be a player everyone on this forum agrees with signing, even if we landed The Cheese there would be a hater.

Seriously though

Go through the Top hooker from every side and tell me who has an all round kicking that is remotely quality ...doesn't have to be Cam Smith quality ...but at least average ....

Few and far between ......