Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

[Spud_Murphy]

Since it’s Sunday and we have lots of time to dream of what could be AND we have billion $s and no existing contracts to honour ….. one step to success!

Get Bellamy

Then you get ….. Ryan Papenhuyzen (still unsigned), Fenucane and Brendan Smith.

Hmmmm …. Back to my movie now.

Nice idea in theory, but I don’t think Bellamy would be stupid enough to come here and ruin his reputation trying to solve all our problems. Judging by way he nearly has an aneurism in the box as coach of a team that wins 99% of its games, I’m pretty sure coaching WT would kill him.

 

[happy_tiger]

They need to implement the rule that a player isn’t aloud to take less money to stay at a club if they get offered more some where els then the current club has to match it this would see a lot more big names go to weaker clubs I no there is some negatives with this rule but something has to give

I don't like that idea. Why should you punish one club because another club can't manage their cap and offer too much.

Yeah it would suck if you were a really good player and had to go from say a roosters to tigers I’m just trying to think of ideas that could help the comp

The only thing that should be helping the WT's is the WT's ..and if they can't mnage that we shouldn't be in the comp

 

[happy_tiger]

Since it’s Sunday and we have lots of time to dream of what could be AND we have billion $s and no existing contracts to honour ….. one step to success!

Get Bellamy

Then you get ….. Ryan Papenhuyzen (still unsigned), Fenucane and Brendan Smith.

Hmmmm …. Back to my movie now.

Nice idea in theory, but I don’t think Bellamy would be stupid enough to come here and ruin his reputation trying to solve all our problems. Judging by way he nearly has an aneurism in the box as coach of a team that wins 99% of its games, I’m pretty sure coaching WT would kill him.

If he didn't come in 2003 ...he ain't coming now

 

[Elderslie_Tiger]

Too many excuses.

**Line speed in defence is an Effort and Attitude thing**.

That's true but in the current game if you don't get a share of possession and a team is clearly more talented fatigue will effect effort and attitude. It's not just a problem for us its been happening regularly across the competition. Even the NRL's premier showpiece was a debacle. Great for the Blues supporters to get a 50 points on QLD - but as a spectacle that is the last thing the NRL wants.

That's what exactly happened in Manlys game Titans had the majority of the ball in the first half got out to a good lead Manly had all the ball in the second half a put 50 on the Titian's (at least WT'S only had 40 put on them) but your right you don't get an even share of possession your going to be up against it.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

They need to implement the rule that a player isn’t aloud to take less money to stay at a club if they get offered more some where els then the current club has to match it this would see a lot more big names go to weaker clubs I no there is some negatives with this rule but something has to give

If a player wishes to take less money because they are happy at a club, power to them. Players that would do this know that they will likely be supplemented by rep honours and the money that comes with that. Some players want to win premierships and will stay at a successful club for less to win one.

What needs to stop is that if a player is unhappy at a club, they cannot seek to make more money out of their contract if released.

If you're seeking a release 1 year into a 4 year deal on $500K a year, you cannot sign on at your next club for more than that until the term of the existing contract lapses. Penalise players for trying to wriggle out of contracts for more money.

 

[tigger19]

Do yourself a favour, don’t listen to Gould

 

[momo_amp_medo]

One of the biggest problems with this side, aside from rediculous team selections, and bench rotation ,is speed, or more importantly our lack of it. We won a title with it.
To my mind it is a basic requirment, their only a very few can excel without it. We have kept buying players without it, eg; Momo, AD, TT, JL, our new winger,and the cup side has a few in the backs as well. How many of these players ever ran more then 15 mtrs in a game? How many top sides carry slow players? Speed and aggresion in the forwards, thats what wins games.

No …. Major problem is LACK OF effective, aggressive, committed DEFENCE.

 

[momo_amp_medo]

Since it’s Sunday and we have lots of time to dream of what could be AND we have billion $s and no existing contracts to honour ….. one step to success!

Get Bellamy

Then you get ….. Ryan Papenhuyzen (still unsigned), Fenucane and Brendan Smith.

Hmmmm …. Back to my movie now.

Nice idea in theory, but I don’t think Bellamy would be stupid enough to come here and ruin his reputation trying to solve all our problems. Judging by way he nearly has an aneurism in the box as coach of a team that wins 99% of its games, I’m pretty sure coaching WT would kill him.

It was a JOKE ….. you know …. Ya got to take it with pinch of salt tips statement.

 

[hsvjones]

Not sure why we are trying to reinvent the wheel.

We haven't missed out on finals for 10 years because the roosters,storm,eels are holding us back, or because the REF's favour the top teams or the NRL is rigged.

It is because our organisation is/has been a joke {may be sorting themselves out now}.

Love or hate Phil Gould this a tweet that sounds spot on to me. Responding to why struggling teams still struggle

"Short term thinking. They all want a long term plan, but they want to win something first. Committing to a long term plan IS the win. The success is the journey, not the destination."

Gus is normally spot on with his comments and has the experience to back it up.
I agree with this one and I do believe this is the direction the club is taking.
We have spent a lot of money and resources on junior development and hiring the right people to bring it along E.g. Brett K, Timana T , Farah, Sheens etc...
We have a new COE on its way and believe once we get though this development phase and these young guys get experience we will start getting the rewards.
It's us fans that are wanting trophies NOW and not prepared to wait and that's fair enough as its been 10 years.
But deep down we just need to battle through these tough times as the foundations have been set for the long term success. We are not the only team to lose by 50 and we won't be the last with this stupid 6 again rule that needs to be scraped IMO.

But as everyone knows we LACK leadership on the field and by all reports Funicane is the guy everyone talks about as been a leader.. I say we need to bite the bullet and get this guy and you will be surprised as others will follow.

 

[jrtiger]

Not sure why we are trying to reinvent the wheel.

We haven't missed out on finals for 10 years because the roosters,storm,eels are holding us back, or because the REF's favour the top teams or the NRL is rigged.

It is because our organisation is/has been a joke {may be sorting themselves out now}.

Love or hate Phil Gould this a tweet that sounds spot on to me. Responding to why struggling teams still struggle

"Short term thinking. They all want a long term plan, but they want to win something first. Committing to a long term plan IS the win. The success is the journey, not the destination."

Gus is normally spot on with his comments and has the experience to back it up.
I agree with this one and I do believe this is the direction the club is taking.
We have spent a lot of money and resources on junior development and hiring the right people to bring it along E.g. Brett K, Timana T , Farah, Sheens etc...
We have a new COE on its way and believe once we get though this development phase and these young guys get experience we will start getting the rewards.
It's us fans that are wanting trophies NOW and not prepared to wait and that's fair enough as its been 10 years.
But deep down we just need to battle through these tough times as the foundations have been set for the long term success. We are not the only team to lose by 50 and we won't be the last with this stupid 6 again rule that needs to be scraped IMO.

But as everyone knows we LACK leadership on the field and by all reports Funicane is the guy everyone talks about as been a leader.. I say we need to bite the bullet and get this guy and you will be surprised as others will follow.

the club is in a good place, the first grade side is not. we're not going to fix it overnight, but players like Finucane will go a long way towards helping us. that said, I think he stays at Melbourne.

 

[tigerballs]

One of the biggest problems with this side, aside from rediculous team selections, and bench rotation ,is speed, or more importantly our lack of it. We won a title with it.
To my mind it is a basic requirment, their only a very few can excel without it. We have kept buying players without it, eg; Momo, AD, TT, JL, our new winger,and the cup side has a few in the backs as well. How many of these players ever ran more then 15 mtrs in a game? How many top sides carry slow players? Speed and aggresion in the forwards, thats what wins games.


But we have the Jet and Fitzgibbon

neither of them are first graders. I love Jimmy but he's a shadow of his former self, and we cannot rush Fitzgibbon. any word on Smith-Shields?

Sorry, I was being sarcastic. Speed ain’t everything.
And no updates on Smith-Shields. Fingers crossed though.

 

[Cairnstigers]

Why would anyone want to sign here ? Genuine question.

To play first grade and win the comp. It can be turned around pretty easily with quality players. If I was a quality player it'd be really easy for me to sign up to the Tigers. If my son was a quality player I'd push him to sign with the Tigers.

Really? What would draw you to us?

Pretty simple - playing first grade and winning the comp. What is wrong with that ? Honestly I don't see any valid counter argument.

But if other clubs want you aswell? I can see players come here if it's their only choice but that's no choice at all.

agree, its not just an issue for our club but competition wide.
Why are the Storm, Roosters consistently at the top? They get the choice of the elite young talent because those young players know they are walking straight into a strong team. They then also then get their pick of the talent who have been around a while but never won anything as they want to go to a strong team for a shot at a title. Finally, they can generally keep their top players because they have been successful at that club they feel a sense of belonging there.

The lower teams however need to pay massive overs to attract talent. But they are then instantly disadvantaged as their salary cap is now disproportional and can not sign enough elite talent to field a strong team. So they continue to underperform and remain a lower team.

Been saying it for years, the salary cap disadvantages the lower teams because they have to pay overs so the get less bang for their cap

got any solutions?

I have but I have been down this track a million times on this forum and others…basically every club is given 1000 points and every player no matter what you pay them is graded by some means..ie Australian rep,SOO rep, 200 gamer,first year rookie. So all your 30 players are given a grade by the NRL and have to fit within the 1000 points. That ensures you have a level playing field, because at present the playing field is not flat. It would stop teams getting advantages out of TPAs. Anyway not worth debating, because it will not happen. The NRL is controlled by people with self interests

100% correct. I'd expand on that by making it a dollar value and the market would set the rate, so if one club offers x, another can't offer y and use the old "they want to come here to win a comp so they took less".
I'd also make the initial rookie contract at a club the value of that player until that player decides to go elsewhere, so, for example, Alex Seyfarth would always be valued on the WT cap as say $250k, no matter what WT are actually paying him, but if he chose to leave he would be valued at his new club at market rate. That would encourage clubs to either develop their juniors or scout them very early, rather than just buy the guts out of poorer clubs.
I know this means a club with plenty of good juniors would be actually paying way over the agreed value of their roster, or the salary cap, but the better roster should also attract better sponsorship and TPA's.

I can't agree with that either, players deserve a say in where they play and if they want to take less to play for a team I wouldn't want to prevent that.

I do believe there should be salary cap concessions for long term and developed players larger than there is now but keeping them at their rookie levels goes too far the other way.

Yep, sorry, I'll clarify:
Players can choose to take less but they should be allocated a true market value as their cost to the clubs cap, otherwise the Roosters still end up with everyone.
I know the rookie contract bit is a bit of a reach, but you get my drift on rewarding junior development and discouraging raiding. Maybe a maximum value of 500k?
If Teddy was going to be a salary cap cost of, say $800k to the Roosters, along with Luke Keary at $800k, JWH at $500, Cooper Cronk $1m, Angus Chricton $800, there's 40% of their cap gone on 5 players. They've got to start pulling their heads in rather than chasing someone else's gun edge to replace Boyd Cordner.

Why can't it be looked at like this
Use a rating system for the top players in each position across all clubs
Eg the 16 starting fullbacks get rated by there peers and get a ranking from 1 to 16
Tedesco gets a 1 Trbojevic a 2 Papenhuyzen a 3 and so on
In the end when you add up all the scores your players receive your team is given a score
If you had the best 13 players in each position you would have a score of 16
If you have the worst players in each position you would have a score of 208
If every team had an even distribution of quality players the average score per team would be around 104 points
That is what the league should be trying to achieve
It takes the $ out of the equation so it doesn't matter if a team tries to cheat the cap
It won't work
The points a player receives is purely based on their peers and maybe some statistical or expert opinions
You would find it hard to argue against that system although some teams may not like it
If you exceed your points then you should be made to release a player or two to get it back in line with and acceptable average plus or minus 5%
Now in saying all of that, if a team was in excess of the average points score, they should not be allowed to sign a player that increases their average score
So someone like Brandon Smith would not be allowed to go to someone like the Roosters unless they were in the points position to do so

This system would eventually even the playing field
It should also not deprive a player from his earnings

Also players who play all their junior football at the one club and get developed by that club could receive some kind of points relief while at the same club

You could also have another points system for the next best 13 players at each club to stop the stock piling
This would force the talent to spread across all clubs

So when would these evaluations of players occur?

It would occur at the end of each season
The club would then have 12 months to shed enough players / Points
People will always come up with excuses as to why it shouldn't happen but that's just what they are, excuses
If teams can manage their cap
Then they can manage a points system like this

So they may have to drop players mid contract that they turned into better players?

Those things would have to be worked out
But every year a number of players come off contract
Say you have 7 players coming off contract and their points tally was 50
You may need to fill those 7 positions with say 70 points otherwise you won't fit within the allocated points system
The better the player the lower the point they carry

It's really not to different from players being forced out of a club because of cap constraints due to a club being successful

These things happen
So look at Penrith for example
They have had to release Hetherington, Tetevano, Tamou, Laurie, Mansour, Dean Whare all last year because of cap constraints
Adding a points system to your players would even up the competition
If it doesn't happen we may as well give up because the competition will never be even
We will continue to have lop sided scores
No of us want that
How many people are turning off early or walking out of games early
Something is wrong with the way this is all working out at the moment


Horse racing has weight handicaps is that fair ?
Golf can have handicaps
Drag racing has time handicaps
All these things don't seem fair, but they work to even up the competition

 

[Cairnstigers]

Why would anyone want to sign here ? Genuine question.

To play first grade and win the comp. It can be turned around pretty easily with quality players. If I was a quality player it'd be really easy for me to sign up to the Tigers. If my son was a quality player I'd push him to sign with the Tigers.

Really? What would draw you to us?

Pretty simple - playing first grade and winning the comp. What is wrong with that ? Honestly I don't see any valid counter argument.

But if other clubs want you aswell? I can see players come here if it's their only choice but that's no choice at all.

agree, its not just an issue for our club but competition wide.
Why are the Storm, Roosters consistently at the top? They get the choice of the elite young talent because those young players know they are walking straight into a strong team. They then also then get their pick of the talent who have been around a while but never won anything as they want to go to a strong team for a shot at a title. Finally, they can generally keep their top players because they have been successful at that club they feel a sense of belonging there.

The lower teams however need to pay massive overs to attract talent. But they are then instantly disadvantaged as their salary cap is now disproportional and can not sign enough elite talent to field a strong team. So they continue to underperform and remain a lower team.

Been saying it for years, the salary cap disadvantages the lower teams because they have to pay overs so the get less bang for their cap

got any solutions?

I have but I have been down this track a million times on this forum and others…basically every club is given 1000 points and every player no matter what you pay them is graded by some means..ie Australian rep,SOO rep, 200 gamer,first year rookie. So all your 30 players are given a grade by the NRL and have to fit within the 1000 points. That ensures you have a level playing field, because at present the playing field is not flat. It would stop teams getting advantages out of TPAs. Anyway not worth debating, because it will not happen. The NRL is controlled by people with self interests

100% correct. I'd expand on that by making it a dollar value and the market would set the rate, so if one club offers x, another can't offer y and use the old "they want to come here to win a comp so they took less".
I'd also make the initial rookie contract at a club the value of that player until that player decides to go elsewhere, so, for example, Alex Seyfarth would always be valued on the WT cap as say $250k, no matter what WT are actually paying him, but if he chose to leave he would be valued at his new club at market rate. That would encourage clubs to either develop their juniors or scout them very early, rather than just buy the guts out of poorer clubs.
I know this means a club with plenty of good juniors would be actually paying way over the agreed value of their roster, or the salary cap, but the better roster should also attract better sponsorship and TPA's.

I can't agree with that either, players deserve a say in where they play and if they want to take less to play for a team I wouldn't want to prevent that.

I do believe there should be salary cap concessions for long term and developed players larger than there is now but keeping them at their rookie levels goes too far the other way.

Yep, sorry, I'll clarify:
Players can choose to take less but they should be allocated a true market value as their cost to the clubs cap, otherwise the Roosters still end up with everyone.
I know the rookie contract bit is a bit of a reach, but you get my drift on rewarding junior development and discouraging raiding. Maybe a maximum value of 500k?
If Teddy was going to be a salary cap cost of, say $800k to the Roosters, along with Luke Keary at $800k, JWH at $500, Cooper Cronk $1m, Angus Chricton $800, there's 40% of their cap gone on 5 players. They've got to start pulling their heads in rather than chasing someone else's gun edge to replace Boyd Cordner.

Why can't it be looked at like this
Use a rating system for the top players in each position across all clubs
Eg the 16 starting fullbacks get rated by there peers and get a ranking from 1 to 16
Tedesco gets a 1 Trbojevic a 2 Papenhuyzen a 3 and so on
In the end when you add up all the scores your players receive your team is given a score
If you had the best 13 players in each position you would have a score of 16
If you have the worst players in each position you would have a score of 208
If every team had an even distribution of quality players the average score per team would be around 104 points
That is what the league should be trying to achieve
It takes the $ out of the equation so it doesn't matter if a team tries to cheat the cap
It won't work
The points a player receives is purely based on their peers and maybe some statistical or expert opinions
You would find it hard to argue against that system although some teams may not like it
If you exceed your points then you should be made to release a player or two to get it back in line with and acceptable average plus or minus 5%
Now in saying all of that, if a team was in excess of the average points score, they should not be allowed to sign a player that increases their average score
So someone like Brandon Smith would not be allowed to go to someone like the Roosters unless they were in the points position to do so

This system would eventually even the playing field
It should also not deprive a player from his earnings

Also players who play all their junior football at the one club and get developed by that club could receive some kind of points relief while at the same club

You could also have another points system for the next best 13 players at each club to stop the stock piling
This would force the talent to spread across all clubs

So when would these evaluations of players occur?

It would occur at the end of each season
The club would then have 12 months to shed enough players / Points
People will always come up with excuses as to why it shouldn't happen but that's just what they are, excuses
If teams can manage their cap
Then they can manage a points system like this

Do you can stockpile players for a season. What about when a player does an ACL and misses a year they wouldn’t be one on the 16 from the pry year so zero points

Yes I agree
No play no points
The club and player already have a disadvantage

 

[Newtown]

Too many excuses.

**Line speed in defence is an Effort and Attitude thing**.

That's true but in the current game if you don't get a share of possession and a team is clearly more talented fatigue will effect effort and attitude. It's not just a problem for us its been happening regularly across the competition. Even the NRL's premier showpiece was a debacle. Great for the Blues supporters to get a 50 points on QLD - but as a spectacle that is the last thing the NRL wants.

That's what exactly happened in Manlys game Titans had the majority of the ball in the first half got out to a good lead Manly had all the ball in the second half a put 50 on the Titian's (at least WT'S only had 40 put on them) but your right you don't get an even share os had to kick offf possession your going to be up against it.

Titans must have been with possession for at least 51 to 20 minute consecutive minutes. Each time Manly scored Titans had to kick off from halfway back to Manly. No wonder Titans wilted very badky in the second half, Sorry but I no longer see NRL as an exciting fair format,

 

[cochise]

Why would anyone want to sign here ? Genuine question.

To play first grade and win the comp. It can be turned around pretty easily with quality players. If I was a quality player it'd be really easy for me to sign up to the Tigers. If my son was a quality player I'd push him to sign with the Tigers.

Really? What would draw you to us?

Pretty simple - playing first grade and winning the comp. What is wrong with that ? Honestly I don't see any valid counter argument.

But if other clubs want you aswell? I can see players come here if it's their only choice but that's no choice at all.

agree, its not just an issue for our club but competition wide.
Why are the Storm, Roosters consistently at the top? They get the choice of the elite young talent because those young players know they are walking straight into a strong team. They then also then get their pick of the talent who have been around a while but never won anything as they want to go to a strong team for a shot at a title. Finally, they can generally keep their top players because they have been successful at that club they feel a sense of belonging there.

The lower teams however need to pay massive overs to attract talent. But they are then instantly disadvantaged as their salary cap is now disproportional and can not sign enough elite talent to field a strong team. So they continue to underperform and remain a lower team.

Been saying it for years, the salary cap disadvantages the lower teams because they have to pay overs so the get less bang for their cap

got any solutions?

I have but I have been down this track a million times on this forum and others…basically every club is given 1000 points and every player no matter what you pay them is graded by some means..ie Australian rep,SOO rep, 200 gamer,first year rookie. So all your 30 players are given a grade by the NRL and have to fit within the 1000 points. That ensures you have a level playing field, because at present the playing field is not flat. It would stop teams getting advantages out of TPAs. Anyway not worth debating, because it will not happen. The NRL is controlled by people with self interests

100% correct. I'd expand on that by making it a dollar value and the market would set the rate, so if one club offers x, another can't offer y and use the old "they want to come here to win a comp so they took less".
I'd also make the initial rookie contract at a club the value of that player until that player decides to go elsewhere, so, for example, Alex Seyfarth would always be valued on the WT cap as say $250k, no matter what WT are actually paying him, but if he chose to leave he would be valued at his new club at market rate. That would encourage clubs to either develop their juniors or scout them very early, rather than just buy the guts out of poorer clubs.
I know this means a club with plenty of good juniors would be actually paying way over the agreed value of their roster, or the salary cap, but the better roster should also attract better sponsorship and TPA's.

I can't agree with that either, players deserve a say in where they play and if they want to take less to play for a team I wouldn't want to prevent that.

I do believe there should be salary cap concessions for long term and developed players larger than there is now but keeping them at their rookie levels goes too far the other way.

Yep, sorry, I'll clarify:
Players can choose to take less but they should be allocated a true market value as their cost to the clubs cap, otherwise the Roosters still end up with everyone.
I know the rookie contract bit is a bit of a reach, but you get my drift on rewarding junior development and discouraging raiding. Maybe a maximum value of 500k?
If Teddy was going to be a salary cap cost of, say $800k to the Roosters, along with Luke Keary at $800k, JWH at $500, Cooper Cronk $1m, Angus Chricton $800, there's 40% of their cap gone on 5 players. They've got to start pulling their heads in rather than chasing someone else's gun edge to replace Boyd Cordner.

Why can't it be looked at like this
Use a rating system for the top players in each position across all clubs
Eg the 16 starting fullbacks get rated by there peers and get a ranking from 1 to 16
Tedesco gets a 1 Trbojevic a 2 Papenhuyzen a 3 and so on
In the end when you add up all the scores your players receive your team is given a score
If you had the best 13 players in each position you would have a score of 16
If you have the worst players in each position you would have a score of 208
If every team had an even distribution of quality players the average score per team would be around 104 points
That is what the league should be trying to achieve
It takes the $ out of the equation so it doesn't matter if a team tries to cheat the cap
It won't work
The points a player receives is purely based on their peers and maybe some statistical or expert opinions
You would find it hard to argue against that system although some teams may not like it
If you exceed your points then you should be made to release a player or two to get it back in line with and acceptable average plus or minus 5%
Now in saying all of that, if a team was in excess of the average points score, they should not be allowed to sign a player that increases their average score
So someone like Brandon Smith would not be allowed to go to someone like the Roosters unless they were in the points position to do so

This system would eventually even the playing field
It should also not deprive a player from his earnings

Also players who play all their junior football at the one club and get developed by that club could receive some kind of points relief while at the same club

You could also have another points system for the next best 13 players at each club to stop the stock piling
This would force the talent to spread across all clubs

So when would these evaluations of players occur?

It would occur at the end of each season
The club would then have 12 months to shed enough players / Points
People will always come up with excuses as to why it shouldn't happen but that's just what they are, excuses
If teams can manage their cap
Then they can manage a points system like this

So they may have to drop players mid contract that they turned into better players?

Those things would have to be worked out
But every year a number of players come off contract
Say you have 7 players coming off contract and their points tally was 50
You may need to fill those 7 positions with say 70 points otherwise you won't fit within the allocated points system
The better the player the lower the point they carry

It's really not to different from players being forced out of a club because of cap constraints due to a club being successful

These things happen
So look at Penrith for example
They have had to release Hetherington, Tetevano, Tamou, Laurie, Mansour, Dean Whare all last year because of cap constraints
Adding a points system to your players would even up the competition
If it doesn't happen we may as well give up because the competition will never be even
We will continue to have lop sided scores
No of us want that
How many people are turning off early or walking out of games early
Something is wrong with the way this is all working out at the moment


Horse racing has weight handicaps is that fair ?
Golf can have handicaps
Drag racing has time handicaps
All these things don't seem fair, but they work to even up the competition

Its completely different as their valuation could completely change mid contract.

 

[weststigerman]

DWZ officially to the Warriors.

 

[hsvjones]

DWZ officially to the Warriors.

for 3.5 years.... I think we have learnt from the past and played hard ball and not offered this long. I personally think we got a better player in Ben M moving forward and would of been cheaper.

 

[BAGNF05]

Not sure why we are trying to reinvent the wheel.

We haven't missed out on finals for 10 years because the roosters,storm,eels are holding us back, or because the REF's favour the top teams or the NRL is rigged.

It is because our organisation is/has been a joke {may be sorting themselves out now}.

Love or hate Phil Gould this a tweet that sounds spot on to me. Responding to why struggling teams still struggle

"Short term thinking. They all want a long term plan, but they want to win something first. Committing to a long term plan IS the win. The success is the journey, not the destination."

Gus is normally spot on with his comments and has the experience to back it up.
I agree with this one and I do believe this is the direction the club is taking.
We have spent a lot of money and resources on junior development and hiring the right people to bring it along E.g. Brett K, Timana T , Farah, Sheens etc...
We have a new COE on its way and believe once we get though this development phase and these young guys get experience we will start getting the rewards.
It's us fans that are wanting trophies NOW and not prepared to wait and that's fair enough as its been 10 years.
But deep down we just need to battle through these tough times as the foundations have been set for the long term success. We are not the only team to lose by 50 and we won't be the last with this stupid 6 again rule that needs to be scraped IMO.

But as everyone knows we LACK leadership on the field and by all reports Funicane is the guy everyone talks about as been a leader.. I say we need to bite the bullet and get this guy and you will be surprised as others will follow.

the club is in a good place, the first grade side is not. we're not going to fix it overnight, but players like Finucane will go a long way towards helping us. that said, I think he stays at Melbourne.

Finucane alone won’t do. Along with Tamou and AD, we probably need about 3 more leaders to shift our culture and anyone cancerous needs to be replaced with young kids with ambition.

 

[Tigers79]

Finucane will not come here (unless we pay Mybe and reynolds contract overs) , hes a back end of the his career and would he really want to come to this club and be the key and lone figure in re building this club ??

Tamou should be dropped from first grade for reminder of the year , we didnt buy him for his on field performances , it was more for his leadership similar to what we are still after. He should go back to reserve grade and assist our younger players . having him around the younger players in all capcities ( on filed, training paddock and off field will greatly assist our future stars .
ATM tamou just isn't up to it in first grade in all capabilities !!

 

[weststigers]

Why would anyone want to sign here ? Genuine question.

To play first grade and win the comp. It can be turned around pretty easily with quality players. If I was a quality player it'd be really easy for me to sign up to the Tigers. If my son was a quality player I'd push him to sign with the Tigers.

Really? What would draw you to us?

Pretty simple - playing first grade and winning the comp. What is wrong with that ? Honestly I don't see any valid counter argument.

But if other clubs want you aswell? I can see players come here if it's their only choice but that's no choice at all.

agree, its not just an issue for our club but competition wide.
Why are the Storm, Roosters consistently at the top? They get the choice of the elite young talent because those young players know they are walking straight into a strong team. They then also then get their pick of the talent who have been around a while but never won anything as they want to go to a strong team for a shot at a title. Finally, they can generally keep their top players because they have been successful at that club they feel a sense of belonging there.

The lower teams however need to pay massive overs to attract talent. But they are then instantly disadvantaged as their salary cap is now disproportional and can not sign enough elite talent to field a strong team. So they continue to underperform and remain a lower team.

Been saying it for years, the salary cap disadvantages the lower teams because they have to pay overs so the get less bang for their cap

got any solutions?

I have but I have been down this track a million times on this forum and others…basically every club is given 1000 points and every player no matter what you pay them is graded by some means..ie Australian rep,SOO rep, 200 gamer,first year rookie. So all your 30 players are given a grade by the NRL and have to fit within the 1000 points. That ensures you have a level playing field, because at present the playing field is not flat. It would stop teams getting advantages out of TPAs. Anyway not worth debating, because it will not happen. The NRL is controlled by people with self interests

100% correct. I'd expand on that by making it a dollar value and the market would set the rate, so if one club offers x, another can't offer y and use the old "they want to come here to win a comp so they took less".
I'd also make the initial rookie contract at a club the value of that player until that player decides to go elsewhere, so, for example, Alex Seyfarth would always be valued on the WT cap as say $250k, no matter what WT are actually paying him, but if he chose to leave he would be valued at his new club at market rate. That would encourage clubs to either develop their juniors or scout them very early, rather than just buy the guts out of poorer clubs.
I know this means a club with plenty of good juniors would be actually paying way over the agreed value of their roster, or the salary cap, but the better roster should also attract better sponsorship and TPA's.

I can't agree with that either, players deserve a say in where they play and if they want to take less to play for a team I wouldn't want to prevent that.

I do believe there should be salary cap concessions for long term and developed players larger than there is now but keeping them at their rookie levels goes too far the other way.

Yep, sorry, I'll clarify:
Players can choose to take less but they should be allocated a true market value as their cost to the clubs cap, otherwise the Roosters still end up with everyone.
I know the rookie contract bit is a bit of a reach, but you get my drift on rewarding junior development and discouraging raiding. Maybe a maximum value of 500k?
If Teddy was going to be a salary cap cost of, say $800k to the Roosters, along with Luke Keary at $800k, JWH at $500, Cooper Cronk $1m, Angus Chricton $800, there's 40% of their cap gone on 5 players. They've got to start pulling their heads in rather than chasing someone else's gun edge to replace Boyd Cordner.

Why can't it be looked at like this
Use a rating system for the top players in each position across all clubs
Eg the 16 starting fullbacks get rated by there peers and get a ranking from 1 to 16
Tedesco gets a 1 Trbojevic a 2 Papenhuyzen a 3 and so on
In the end when you add up all the scores your players receive your team is given a score
If you had the best 13 players in each position you would have a score of 16
If you have the worst players in each position you would have a score of 208
If every team had an even distribution of quality players the average score per team would be around 104 points
That is what the league should be trying to achieve
It takes the $ out of the equation so it doesn't matter if a team tries to cheat the cap
It won't work
The points a player receives is purely based on their peers and maybe some statistical or expert opinions
You would find it hard to argue against that system although some teams may not like it
If you exceed your points then you should be made to release a player or two to get it back in line with and acceptable average plus or minus 5%
Now in saying all of that, if a team was in excess of the average points score, they should not be allowed to sign a player that increases their average score
So someone like Brandon Smith would not be allowed to go to someone like the Roosters unless they were in the points position to do so

This system would eventually even the playing field
It should also not deprive a player from his earnings

Also players who play all their junior football at the one club and get developed by that club could receive some kind of points relief while at the same club

You could also have another points system for the next best 13 players at each club to stop the stock piling
This would force the talent to spread across all clubs

So when would these evaluations of players occur?

It would occur at the end of each season
The club would then have 12 months to shed enough players / Points
People will always come up with excuses as to why it shouldn't happen but that's just what they are, excuses
If teams can manage their cap
Then they can manage a points system like this

So they may have to drop players mid contract that they turned into better players?

Those things would have to be worked out
But every year a number of players come off contract
Say you have 7 players coming off contract and their points tally was 50
You may need to fill those 7 positions with say 70 points otherwise you won't fit within the allocated points system
The better the player the lower the point they carry

It's really not to different from players being forced out of a club because of cap constraints due to a club being successful

These things happen
So look at Penrith for example
They have had to release Hetherington, Tetevano, Tamou, Laurie, Mansour, Dean Whare all last year because of cap constraints
Adding a points system to your players would even up the competition
If it doesn't happen we may as well give up because the competition will never be even
We will continue to have lop sided scores
No of us want that
How many people are turning off early or walking out of games early
Something is wrong with the way this is all working out at the moment


Horse racing has weight handicaps is that fair ?
Golf can have handicaps
Drag racing has time handicaps
All these things don't seem fair, but they work to even up the competition

This is like asking the best salesman at work to share his commissions because he makes more sales than you while never addressing why it is that you're always languishing at the bottom of the leaderboard.

The best are the best for a reason and the worst are the worst for a reason. Plopping the Penrith team into Leichardt at this point may not make the difference you think it will.

As I get older, I realise it's not all about talent...sure, it plays its part, but culture (which is intangible and immeasureable) plays a bigger part. A good culture will have people walking over broken glass for you.

The best teams in the comp have the best cultures and they knock back players that won't fit into that culture, regardless of their talent.

In the NRL, you can't just clear a 30 man roster and re-hire from scratch, otherwise that would be the quickest attempt at a fix...unfortunately, it's very much a case of 2 steps forward and 1 step back...we need to let this play out because I believe the mindset of management is the correct one and the path we are forging is going to be a success.