Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

[Russell]

Im going to put forward an unpopular opinion. I think Brandon Smith would be bad for the Tigers.

He is a great footballer, but as a hooker, I dont seem him as a technician, he is kind of like the Josh Reynolds (except with ability and talent) of hookers in that everthing is about effort and energy, pace. IMO at our stage of play we need a technician at 9. Good service, fast service, run when needed, get players where they need to be.

As a lock/middle forward, again all he has is effort. He is small and will never be elite in this position.

And he would cost us a lot of $$$$

Love the bloke, great player. Not for us IMO.

He would be our best player or close to it. We had an energetic hooker in Grant and he absolutely carved up. It will all depend on how are halves are doing anyway, if they aren’t smashing it then having a hooker who can create opportunities and do a lot of work will improve us greatly. If they’re going well then smith is still a fantastic hooker who’s a great defender can run the ball well and is 100% energy, don’t see how that’s a downside at all. He would improve our team no matter what I feel

He’d be our best player.

People forget how good a hooker he is because he’s been playing as a forward and because Harry is so good as well. He’s got great service, strong defender strong runner of the ball and he’s a ball of energy, only thing I haven’t seen is a kicking game but that’s fine.

He’s a great character he’s someone players want to play with and he’s the perfect fit for us. We’ve got money to spend so money isn’t an issue he just ticks all the boxes

I haven't forgotten how good a hooker he is - I just don't think he is that good a hooker. Someone suggested that he was a Reynolds with more energy and talent - I think that is a good summation.

He is not a great hooker, certainly not in the class of Cam Smith, Grant, Hodgson or Koroisau. He is not a great lock, certainly not in the class of Murray, Radley, Trbojevic, Taumalolo, Tarpine, Finucane, Yeo or Brown.

So a lot of money to pay for a player that is "just a ball of energy" - do we really want another Reynolds - we just got rid of him. we have the best two young hookers in the NRL - that people want to replace.

For the money he expects and demands to play hooker - I would want a much better DH, one that can organise the attack (not sure he can do that) and has a really good kicking game.

I don't think he ticks all the boxes by a long shot.

How can you genuinely say he’s not a good hooker? In his time at Melbourne I’d be surprised if he’s played more than 10 games at the position. Of course he’s not as good as those players mentioned as he’s been stuck behind the best player to ever play that position. If I’m not mistaken, every game he’s played hooker under madge, he’s been man of the match. There’s been no legitimate fees mentioned yet, all speculation.

Plus you are deluded if you think we have the 2 best young hookers in the comp. Liddle has more games out injured than he has completed passes and even when he’s on the field he’s looked average at best. While I do have high hopes for simpkin he’s played one nsw cup game and that’s it. To say that we’re okay in the hooker position is an absolute joke

Mate, with your attitude - I wouldn't even bother to answer your post.

NB: If you want to comment on Liddle - maybe you should watch him first, you quite obviously haven't. See ya.

Are you Jacob Liddle’s dad by any chance Russ?

No relation Spud - but I do like to see a player that has been unlucky and has the talent get a fair go.

 

[weststigerman]

Some crazy claims on both sides around Nofa's ability in this thread. Fact is he is rated at least the 2nd best winger based only on this year's performances. He was also the Tigers best performer according to his team mates. That is also a fact.

No matter how you shape the argument to push an agenda, he is worth a lot to us, and it will be a big coup if we re-sign him long term.

Some crazy claims on both sides around Nofa's ability in this thread. Fact is he is rated at least the 2nd best winger based only on this year's performances. He was also the TigersYo best performer according to his team mates. That is also a fact.

No matter how you shape the argument to push an agenda, he is worth a lot to us, and it will be a big coup if we re-sign him long term.




The NSW SOO squad included 3 wingers. There was also Trbojevic who is injured and Papenhuyzen who could fill in if required. Why is it his value is so overstated at WTs? The squad included 27 players so he was not rated in basically two teams worth of players in NSW. Qld have their own wingers.


There is no getting around the fact better skillets are required in rep football and NSW selectors have spo ken.

Don’t care about SOO, it’s all politics. Moylan used to get picked ahead of Tedesco, and Ennis ahead of Farah.

Here are the best players in each position in 2020: http://coupler.foxsports.com.au/api/v1/article/amp/nrl/nrl-premiership/dally-m/team-of-the-year-live-there-are-13-reasons-this-dally-m-night-is-different-from-any-in-history/news-story/7f2168a8fec8027058cfd9e2a35

I can't see politics having anything to do with JAC, Tupou or Cotric being selected. I'll also include Trbojevic as he would have been there too had it not been for injury. All deserved selection ahead of Nofoaluma.

You might not see it, but as someone said already, that team lost against the worst QLD side in 20 years. Enough said.

There is not one winger or player who could play wing in that squad that Nofoaluma should displace.

I disagree.

 

[Magpieger]

Tiger5150
Choc Watmough was a small 2nd-rower, but he killed it in his day.
If Cheese was elligible for the Blues, I'd have had him over the Parra pretender on the bench any day.

 

[WT2K]

Go get the cheese.

 

[yeahcaz]

Im going to put forward an unpopular opinion. I think Brandon Smith would be bad for the Tigers.

He is a great footballer, but as a hooker, I dont seem him as a technician, he is kind of like the Josh Reynolds (except with ability and talent) of hookers in that everthing is about effort and energy, pace. IMO at our stage of play we need a technician at 9. Good service, fast service, run when needed, get players where they need to be.

As a lock/middle forward, again all he has is effort. He is small and will never be elite in this position.

And he would cost us a lot of $$$$

Love the bloke, great player. Not for us IMO.

He would be our best player or close to it. We had an energetic hooker in Grant and he absolutely carved up. It will all depend on how are halves are doing anyway, if they aren’t smashing it then having a hooker who can create opportunities and do a lot of work will improve us greatly. If they’re going well then smith is still a fantastic hooker who’s a great defender can run the ball well and is 100% energy, don’t see how that’s a downside at all. He would improve our team no matter what I feel

He’d be our best player.

People forget how good a hooker he is because he’s been playing as a forward and because Harry is so good as well. He’s got great service, strong defender strong runner of the ball and he’s a ball of energy, only thing I haven’t seen is a kicking game but that’s fine.

He’s a great character he’s someone players want to play with and he’s the perfect fit for us. We’ve got money to spend so money isn’t an issue he just ticks all the boxes

I haven't forgotten how good a hooker he is - I just don't think he is that good a hooker. Someone suggested that he was a Reynolds with more energy and talent - I think that is a good summation.

He is not a great hooker, certainly not in the class of Cam Smith, Grant, Hodgson or Koroisau. He is not a great lock, certainly not in the class of Murray, Radley, Trbojevic, Taumalolo, Tarpine, Finucane, Yeo or Brown.

So a lot of money to pay for a player that is "just a ball of energy" - do we really want another Reynolds - we just got rid of him. we have the best two young hookers in the NRL - that people want to replace.

For the money he expects and demands to play hooker - I would want a much better DH, one that can organise the attack (not sure he can do that) and has a really good kicking game.

I don't think he ticks all the boxes by a long shot.

How can you genuinely say he’s not a good hooker? In his time at Melbourne I’d be surprised if he’s played more than 10 games at the position. Of course he’s not as good as those players mentioned as he’s been stuck behind the best player to ever play that position. If I’m not mistaken, every game he’s played hooker under madge, he’s been man of the match. There’s been no legitimate fees mentioned yet, all speculation.

Plus you are deluded if you think we have the 2 best young hookers in the comp. Liddle has more games out injured than he has completed passes and even when he’s on the field he’s looked average at best. While I do have high hopes for simpkin he’s played one nsw cup game and that’s it. To say that we’re okay in the hooker position is an absolute joke

Mate, with your attitude - I wouldn't even bother to answer your post.

NB: If you want to comment on Liddle - maybe you should watch him first, you quite obviously haven't. See ya.

Well here you are answering so you’re off to a great start. Seen enough of him to know he’s bang average. We conceded close to 40 points a game with him in the team. You must be related to be this passionate about a guy who’s played less than Bryce Cartwright in the last 2 years but hey you probably rate Cartwright too

 

[avocadoontoast]

Im going to put forward an unpopular opinion. I think Brandon Smith would be bad for the Tigers.

He is a great footballer, but as a hooker, I dont seem him as a technician, he is kind of like the Josh Reynolds (except with ability and talent) of hookers in that everthing is about effort and energy, pace. IMO at our stage of play we need a technician at 9. Good service, fast service, run when needed, get players where they need to be.

As a lock/middle forward, again all he has is effort. He is small and will never be elite in this position.

And he would cost us a lot of $$$$

Love the bloke, great player. Not for us IMO.

He would be our best player or close to it. We had an energetic hooker in Grant and he absolutely carved up. It will all depend on how are halves are doing anyway, if they aren’t smashing it then having a hooker who can create opportunities and do a lot of work will improve us greatly. If they’re going well then smith is still a fantastic hooker who’s a great defender can run the ball well and is 100% energy, don’t see how that’s a downside at all. He would improve our team no matter what I feel

He’d be our best player.

People forget how good a hooker he is because he’s been playing as a forward and because Harry is so good as well. He’s got great service, strong defender strong runner of the ball and he’s a ball of energy, only thing I haven’t seen is a kicking game but that’s fine.

He’s a great character he’s someone players want to play with and he’s the perfect fit for us. We’ve got money to spend so money isn’t an issue he just ticks all the boxes

I haven't forgotten how good a hooker he is - I just don't think he is that good a hooker. Someone suggested that he was a Reynolds with more energy and talent - I think that is a good summation.

He is not a great hooker, certainly not in the class of Cam Smith, Grant, Hodgson or Koroisau. He is not a great lock, certainly not in the class of Murray, Radley, Trbojevic, Taumalolo, Tarpine, Finucane, Yeo or Brown.

So a lot of money to pay for a player that is "just a ball of energy" - do we really want another Reynolds - we just got rid of him. we have the best two young hookers in the NRL - that people want to replace.

For the money he expects and demands to play hooker - I would want a much better DH, one that can organise the attack (not sure he can do that) and has a really good kicking game.

I don't think he ticks all the boxes by a long shot.

How can you genuinely say he’s not a good hooker? In his time at Melbourne I’d be surprised if he’s played more than 10 games at the position. Of course he’s not as good as those players mentioned as he’s been stuck behind the best player to ever play that position. If I’m not mistaken, every game he’s played hooker under madge, he’s been man of the match. There’s been no legitimate fees mentioned yet, all speculation.

Plus you are deluded if you think we have the 2 best young hookers in the comp. Liddle has more games out injured than he has completed passes and even when he’s on the field he’s looked average at best. While I do have high hopes for simpkin he’s played one nsw cup game and that’s it. To say that we’re okay in the hooker position is an absolute joke

Mate, with your attitude - I wouldn't even bother to answer your post.

NB: If you want to comment on Liddle - maybe you should watch him first, you quite obviously haven't. See ya.

Are you Jacob Liddle’s dad by any chance Russ?

Husband

 

[Balmainian]

There is only one solution. Smith has to agree to only play lock except in extenuating circumstances such as injuries or loss of form to our currently signed hookers. Otherwise what's the point of having three first grade hookers in the one side. If Smith doesn't agree - no deal.

If he wanted to play lock he wouldn’t be asking to leave Melbourne

 

[sleeve]

Josh Renolds would have shined in Storm squad and Benjji would have had his ring kissed like Smith.LOL

 

[Magpieger]

Cheese would improve our squad. That I believe. But I'm not prepared to throw the kitchen sink at him.
Either we get him for a reasonable amount or we wait to see how our investment in the younger guys progresses and our patience pays dividends. In either case we miss out coz we know someone, somewhere will cough up.

We're done paying overs.

However, I thought I read somewhere recently bout Cam McInnes testing his value on the open market...
I reckon he's equal 2nd best rake in the comp alongside Cookie, with Harry hot on their heals.
If it's true about Macca sniffing about, there's obviously doubts in his mind about staying with St. Gillawarra...however small, still doubts.
He's the kind of dude we need to go all-in for.
But again, this is all dependent on whether the info is correct.

Found it... https://omny.fm/shows/triple-m-rocks-footy-nrl/mciness-fox-sayaoff-contract-dragons-captain-cam-m

 

[Magpieger]

Im going to put forward an unpopular opinion. I think Brandon Smith would be bad for the Tigers.

He is a great footballer, but as a hooker, I dont seem him as a technician, he is kind of like the Josh Reynolds (except with ability and talent) of hookers in that everthing is about effort and energy, pace. IMO at our stage of play we need a technician at 9. Good service, fast service, run when needed, get players where they need to be.

As a lock/middle forward, again all he has is effort. He is small and will never be elite in this position.

And he would cost us a lot of $$$$

Love the bloke, great player. Not for us IMO.

He would be our best player or close to it. We had an energetic hooker in Grant and he absolutely carved up. It will all depend on how are halves are doing anyway, if they aren’t smashing it then having a hooker who can create opportunities and do a lot of work will improve us greatly. If they’re going well then smith is still a fantastic hooker who’s a great defender can run the ball well and is 100% energy, don’t see how that’s a downside at all. He would improve our team no matter what I feel

He’d be our best player.

People forget how good a hooker he is because he’s been playing as a forward and because Harry is so good as well. He’s got great service, strong defender strong runner of the ball and he’s a ball of energy, only thing I haven’t seen is a kicking game but that’s fine.

He’s a great character he’s someone players want to play with and he’s the perfect fit for us. We’ve got money to spend so money isn’t an issue he just ticks all the boxes

I haven't forgotten how good a hooker he is - I just don't think he is that good a hooker. Someone suggested that he was a Reynolds with more energy and talent - I think that is a good summation.

He is not a great hooker, certainly not in the class of Cam Smith, Grant, Hodgson or Koroisau. He is not a great lock, certainly not in the class of Murray, Radley, Trbojevic, Taumalolo, Tarpine, Finucane, Yeo or Brown.

So a lot of money to pay for a player that is "just a ball of energy" - do we really want another Reynolds - we just got rid of him. we have the best two young hookers in the NRL - that people want to replace.

For the money he expects and demands to play hooker - I would want a much better DH, one that can organise the attack (not sure he can do that) and has a really good kicking game.

I don't think he ticks all the boxes by a long shot.

How can you genuinely say he’s not a good hooker? In his time at Melbourne I’d be surprised if he’s played more than 10 games at the position. Of course he’s not as good as those players mentioned as he’s been stuck behind the best player to ever play that position. If I’m not mistaken, every game he’s played hooker under madge, he’s been man of the match. There’s been no legitimate fees mentioned yet, all speculation.

Plus you are deluded if you think we have the 2 best young hookers in the comp. Liddle has more games out injured than he has completed passes and even when he’s on the field he’s looked average at best. While I do have high hopes for simpkin he’s played one nsw cup game and that’s it. To say that we’re okay in the hooker position is an absolute joke

Mate, with your attitude - I wouldn't even bother to answer your post.

NB: If you want to comment on Liddle - maybe you should watch him first, you quite obviously haven't. See ya.

Are you Jacob Liddle’s dad by any chance Russ?

Husband

Significant other...

 

[HowDugWT]

There is only one solution. Smith has to agree to only play lock except in extenuating circumstances such as injuries or loss of form to our currently signed hookers. Otherwise what's the point of having three first grade hookers in the one side. If Smith doesn't agree - no deal.

If they play him at lock they don't have to waste a bench spot on another hooker. Cheese to Tigers would be amazing.

 

[Nelson]

There is only one solution. Smith has to agree to only play lock except in extenuating circumstances such as injuries or loss of form to our currently signed hookers. Otherwise what's the point of having three first grade hookers in the one side. If Smith doesn't agree - no deal.

If he wanted to play lock he wouldn’t be asking to leave Melbourne

Well if he wanted to play 80 minutes or close to it at lock he might prefer to be in a team that doesn't have Dale Finucane in it.

 

[sleeve]

Its all just toast and cheese,he will never leave.

 

[westy81]

I’d like to see Brandon Smith at the tigers but not at the expense of Liddle and/or Simpkins

I think Liddle will be a gun hooker it’s just he has had a bad few years with injury just like benji did back in the day

 

[Spud_Murphy]

Its all just toast and cheese,he will never leave.

I think he’ll leave, it just won’t be to us.

 

[Dallas]

I’d like to see Brandon Smith at the tigers but not at the expense of Liddle and/or Simpkins

I think Liddle will be a gun hooker it’s just he has had a bad few years with injury just like benji did back in the day

X2

I would take him as a lock tomorrow if we could get him but as others have said I don’t think he will come to be lock.

 

[mike]

There is only one solution. Smith has to agree to only play lock except in extenuating circumstances such as injuries or loss of form to our currently signed hookers. Otherwise what's the point of having three first grade hookers in the one side. If Smith doesn't agree - no deal.

If they play him at lock they don't have to waste a bench spot on another hooker. Cheese to Tigers would be amazing.

He doesn’t want to play lock, otherwise he’d stay at the Storm. The cheese ? is looking for a no. 9 spot.

 

[mike]

Interesting that Daine Laurie is not on the Panthers player profiles.

 

[tiger05premier]

Interesting that Daine Laurie is not on the Panthers player profiles.

Since when?

Is it because he is a development player?

 

[jirskyr]

I'm curious myself, if Brandon Smith is such a good hooker, why Storm are allowing him to field offers and instead keep Harry Grant.

Does this mean Storm consider Harry a better hooker than Cheese?

I reckon Cheese is one of the better non-prop locks going around, him and Victor Radley. No idea why the bloke is so dead-set on playing FT hooker.