Wests Tigers Coaches

Earl

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
10,139
Clubs must spend at least 95% of the salary cap.

There will always be highly paid players in a team regardless of whether they are juniors or recruited from outside...

I don't really understand where you're coming from.

I'll try and explain my perspective. When you recruit a player you typically pay them more than their existing contract and sometimes you even offer them an extra year or two.

So you sign someone like IP or Blair. You sign them on top dollar for 3 years. If they kill it no problems. Let's say they don't though. You have a player on your books for good dollars and it limits your ability to move in the market place over the course of their contract.

Worst case you bring in a gun junior or even a couple of them and you can't retain them.
 

Merlot

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2021
Messages
4,331
I'll try and explain my perspective. When you recruit a player you typically pay them more than their existing contract and sometimes you even offer them an extra year or two.

So you sign someone like IP or Blair. You sign them on top dollar for 3 years. If they kill it no problems. Let's say they don't though. You have a player on your books for good dollars and it limits your ability to move in the market place over the course of their contract.

Worst case you bring in a gun junior or even a couple of them and you can't retain them.
and thats the problem with having to spend 95% of cap or be fined,paying overs for fringe players,but who is frugal when the cap is a hand out from the NRL.
 

weststigers

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
2,425
I'll try and explain my perspective. When you recruit a player you typically pay them more than their existing contract and sometimes you even offer them an extra year or two.

So you sign someone like IP or Blair. You sign them on top dollar for 3 years. If they kill it no problems. Let's say they don't though. You have a player on your books for good dollars and it limits your ability to move in the market place over the course of their contract.

Worst case you bring in a gun junior or even a couple of them and you can't retain them.

I'm still not sure of your logic.

We have a salary cap of around 9.5 million that must be spent to build a competetive squad each year.

Whether you choose to spend that 9.5 million on cheap juniors that aren't ready for NRL or established first graders is up to each team....BUT...the same amount of money is spent either way.

There will always be a portion of your cap that doesn't perform and the spotlight is always on the highest paid players.

My initial point was that our juniors aren't ready and recruitment will be critical until they are.

You can't throw kids in before they're ready...it's a good way to kill their careers before they've even begun.
 

batboy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
5,968
Whether you choose to spend that 9.5 million on cheap juniors that aren't ready for NRL or established first graders is up to each team....BUT...the same amount of money is spent either way.

And there's the Problem....
We pay cheap juniors established NRL players money to keep them.

- Leaving no money (Or Room) for quality established players
 

Merlot

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2021
Messages
4,331
the whole,AS A CLUB,salary cap should all be under the same umbrella,spend 250 on keeping an 18 year old at your peril.may just spread some talent and give development clubs some space to breathe
 

Jedi_Tiger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
8,165
I hope that each player will be given their individual KPIs!
The obvious ones are:
- Nofoaluma's defence - I could be like "an improved positional game, reading of the attack etc."
- Brooks - short and long kicks, short passes, run break assists, try assists ;
- Forwards - line speed, tackling effectiveness, meters run, offloads etc.
- Backs - number of line breaks etc.
and douhie actually making some tackles ...
 

Earl

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
10,139
I'm still not sure of your logic.
Okay - do you understand my points that when you recruit typically it means you are paying more than the club the player is currently playing for ?

Do you understand that typically you also provide longer term contracts ?

We have a salary cap of around 9.5 million that must be spent to build a competetive squad each year.

Whether you choose to spend that 9.5 million on cheap juniors that aren't ready for NRL or established first graders is up to each team....BUT...the same amount of money is spent either way.

I understand this point.

There will always be a portion of your cap that doesn't perform and the spotlight is always on the highest paid players.

Agreed.
My initial point was that our juniors aren't ready and recruitment will be critical until they are.

You can't throw kids in before they're ready...it's a good way to kill their careers before they've even begun.

This is subjective. I disagree with the point about throwing them in before they are ready. I mean of course this is true but who says you will kill their careers. I think if they don't have the talent they won't make it anyway. I also think it's not so cut and dry in relation to determining when they are ready.

I think all of this is though missing the point. You need a balance of recruitment and junior development.

Clubs like Melbourne and Penrith basically just recruit at the junior or development player level.

Clubs like the Roosters recruit the best talent from wherever they can get them.

I don't think we can compete recruiting like the Roosters and we can't let our cap get out of balance via thinking we can simply recruit the best possible team.

Lastly we've tried this approach for a while now and it's failed dismally.

I think we need good juniors coming through and we need to be able to retain the ones that show they can perform. This means to me we need more focus on developing quality juniors rather than established players but the key point is that you need to have some flexibility in the cap to retain those players.

Mbye, Reynolds and Packer have been the worst value for money players we've had and they were all our best recruits in relation to getting established players. They stuffed out cap for years.
 

batboy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
5,968
Okay - do you understand my points that when you recruit typically it means you are paying more than the club the player is currently playing for ?

Do you understand that typically you also provide longer term contracts ?



I understand this point.



Agreed.


This is subjective. I disagree with the point about throwing them in before they are ready. I mean of course this is true but who says you will kill their careers. I think if they don't have the talent they won't make it anyway. I also think it's not so cut and dry in relation to determining when they are ready.

I think all of this is though missing the point. You need a balance of recruitment and junior development.

Clubs like Melbourne and Penrith basically just recruit at the junior or development player level.

Clubs like the Roosters recruit the best talent from wherever they can get them.

I don't think we can compete recruiting like the Roosters and we can't let our cap get out of balance via thinking we can simply recruit the best possible team.

Lastly we've tried this approach for a while now and it's failed dismally.

I think we need good juniors coming through and we need to be able to retain the ones that show they can perform. This means to me we need more focus on developing quality juniors rather than established players but the key point is that you need to have some flexibility in the cap to retain those players.

Mbye, Reynolds and Packer have been the worst value for money players we've had and they were all our best recruits in relation to getting established players. They stuffed out cap for years.

You're missing the point we we have to overpay them to keep them....
Which means we can't afford decent quality proven players to surround them with
Which means we're not consistent
Which means we struggle to be appealing to quality players
Which means we keep overpaying juniors.

We all wanna keep our best kids - But until we're successful and can get them to stay for less money, We're stuck in a wheel of trying to keep them all and overpaying.

Even now, We're the wooden spoon team
- And I'd almost bet we're going into 2023 with the least NRL games across the whole squad.
How's a team of Kids, With stuff all experienced players coming through with them expected to improve....

Be Mr Brightside all you like - Ignoring the obvious doesn't make it less obvious, Or any less a reality.
 

Earl

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
10,139
We all wanna keep our best kids - But until we're successful and can get them to stay for less money, We're stuck in a wheel of trying to keep them all and overpaying.

It's hard to retain players for all clubs. Melbourne lose players all the time and they lose quality.

So somehow the club has to create a squad that has the ability to win games but we also need juniors coming through and we need to be able to upgrade those juniors.

Sure we can't pay overs but it's easier to get players to stay for a little less if they have come through your system. It's even easier if the club is performing.

I'm not ignoring anything or trying to avoid reality. You are being completely pessimistic and nothing will ever work for you. That is why you keep banging on about IP not being here despite him having a registered contract. This attitude is completely and utterly delusional.

If you get a donut you'd see the hole.

It's cool but there is no point discussing anything with you because no matter what I state you will look for the potential negative.
 

Merlot

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2021
Messages
4,331
It's hard to retain players for all clubs. Melbourne lose players all the time and they lose quality.

So somehow the club has to create a squad that has the ability to win games but we also need juniors coming through and we need to be able to upgrade those juniors.

Sure we can't pay overs but it's easier to get players to stay for a little less if they have come through your system. It's even easier if the club is performing.

I'm not ignoring anything or trying to avoid reality. You are being completely pessimistic and nothing will ever work for you. That is why you keep banging on about IP not being here despite him having a registered contract. This attitude is completely and utterly delusional.

If you get a donut you'd see the hole.

It's cool but there is no point discussing anything with you because no matter what I state you will look for the potential negative.
im looking forward to the day when our up n comers are house hold names,telling the next batch to shut up listen,demountables is part of the Culture
 

weststigers

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
2,425
Okay - do you understand my points that when you recruit typically it means you are paying more than the club the player is currently playing for ?

Do you understand that typically you also provide longer term contracts ?



I understand this point.



Agreed.


This is subjective. I disagree with the point about throwing them in before they are ready. I mean of course this is true but who says you will kill their careers.
Some of the best coaches going around say it can kill a kids career. The best development coaches bring kids in slowly over a few seasons. Yes...there are exceptions to every rule where you get that one in a million talent, but we aren't basing this discussion on outliers are we?

I think if they don't have the talent they won't make it anyway. I also think it's not so cut and dry in relation to determining when they are ready.
I don't think being ready is subjective at all. You train, you learn and you get tested to standards that emulate the conditions you'll be playing in. Then your physical and emotional characteristics play a part. The list goes on...

I think all of this is though missing the point. You need a balance of recruitment and junior development.
There is already. Take a look at our current squad - I can count 13 players that would be on the minimum $120k per season or very close to. How many more are you looking to include before you look to recruit from outside?

Clubs like Melbourne and Penrith basically just recruit at the junior or development player level.

You can't compare Penrith's junior pathways, which has been nurtured for 10-15 years to get to this point with ours that has been neglected over the same period and is only now a major focus. Things don't happen overnight.

Melbourne are not stacked with rookies playing NRL week in, week out.


Clubs like the Roosters recruit the best talent from wherever they can get them.
I don't think we can compete recruiting like the Roosters and we can't let our cap get out of balance via thinking we can simply recruit the best possible team.

Lastly we've tried this approach for a while now and it's failed dismally.

Who said anything about recruiting like the Roosters? I'm talking about plugging holes in the positions that we have no talent in and judiciously buying quality. Not recruiting a team of superstars at whatever cost.

I think we need good juniors coming through and we need to be able to retain the ones that show they can perform. This means to me we need more focus on developing quality juniors rather than established players but the key point is that you need to have some flexibility in the cap to retain those players.

We ARE focusing on junior development. The ones that were talented enough to get a game or two were promoted already (Dias, Matamua, Kautoga, Pole, Freebairn).

One of them showed more promise than the others by far (Pole). Next season, those same juniors except for Pole will be in and out of first grade to cover for injuries while they serve their apprenticeship. It will be 1-2 years before they are playing regular first grade let alone being first picked. Most probably won't even make it as regular first graders.

We already have 13 players I can count on around minimum wage...we don't need MORE cheapies...we need to get rid of deadwood and invest that cap money in better players while our junior pathways have time to build.


Mbye, Reynolds and Packer have been the worst value for money players we've had and they were all our best recruits in relation to getting established players. They stuffed out cap for years.
Yes. These guys were bad...Don't forget Matulino.

Ivan was a muppet...he was looking for quick wins and killed us in the process. How those players got the money they did is beyond most in rugby league.

It seems the club is being more conservative in their recruitment approach now. I mean we got IP for $600K and AK for $700K - good deals if you ask me and in positions where we need it most. More astute purchases like this and paying overs for a few key players and it all balances out anyway.

Maybe we just see the world differently...
 

tony soprano

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2019
Messages
10,496
Some of the best coaches going around say it can kill a kids career. The best development coaches bring kids in slowly over a few seasons. Yes...there are exceptions to every rule where you get that one in a million talent, but we aren't basing this discussion on outliers are we?


I don't think being ready is subjective at all. You train, you learn and you get tested to standards that emulate the conditions you'll be playing in. Then your physical and emotional characteristics play a part. The list goes on...


There is already. Take a look at our current squad - I can count 13 players that would be on the minimum $120k per season or very close to. How many more are you looking to include before you look to recruit from outside?



You can't compare Penrith's junior pathways, which has been nurtured for 10-15 years to get to this point with ours that has been neglected over the same period and is only now a major focus. Things don't happen overnight.

Melbourne are not stacked with rookies playing NRL week in, week out.




Who said anything about recruiting like the Roosters? I'm talking about plugging holes in the positions that we have no talent in and judiciously buying quality. Not recruiting a team of superstars at whatever cost.



We ARE focusing on junior development. The ones that were talented enough to get a game or two were promoted already (Dias, Matamua, Kautoga, Pole, Freebairn).

One of them showed more promise than the others by far (Pole). Next season, those same juniors except for Pole will be in and out of first grade to cover for injuries while they serve their apprenticeship. It will be 1-2 years before they are playing regular first grade let alone being first picked. Most probably won't even make it as regular first graders.

We already have 13 players I can count on around minimum wage...we don't need MORE cheapies...we need to get rid of deadwood and invest that cap money in better players while our junior pathways have time to build.


Yes. These guys were bad...Don't forget Matulino.

Ivan was a muppet...he was looking for quick wins and killed us in the process. How those players got the money they did is beyond most in rugby league.

It seems the club is being more conservative in their recruitment approach now. I mean we got IP for $600K and AK for $700K - good deals if you ask me and in positions where we need it most. More astute purchases like this and paying overs for a few key players and it all balances out anyway.

Maybe we just see the world differently...

U r very bold
 

gregjm87

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2019
Messages
371
Our biggest problem has been a dud attack. I'm an optimist and delusional most of the time. I think there is a possibility our attack will improve.

I also think our forwards and outside backs bar injuries can do the job. My big concern is the spine excluding API.

Our forward depth though is terrible.

I'm praying some more juniors come through and kill it.
Attack has not been our problem at all. Our biggest problem has been our defence (though this year it was both).
The previous 3 years we have been ranked 9th/8th/9th in attack and 15th/12th/11th in defence.
Given poor defence not only results in points conceded but also less attacking opportunity I think it would be fair to say we've had a top 8 quality attack the last few years. Unfortunately our defence was not up to standard.
 

InBenjiWeTrust

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
4,891
Okay - do you understand my points that when you recruit typically it means you are paying more than the club the player is currently playing for ?

Do you understand that typically you also provide longer term contracts ?



I understand this point.



Agreed.


This is subjective. I disagree with the point about throwing them in before they are ready. I mean of course this is true but who says you will kill their careers. I think if they don't have the talent they won't make it anyway. I also think it's not so cut and dry in relation to determining when they are ready.

I think all of this is though missing the point. You need a balance of recruitment and junior development.

Clubs like Melbourne and Penrith basically just recruit at the junior or development player level.

Clubs like the Roosters recruit the best talent from wherever they can get them.

I don't think we can compete recruiting like the Roosters and we can't let our cap get out of balance via thinking we can simply recruit the best possible team.

Lastly we've tried this approach for a while now and it's failed dismally.

I think we need good juniors coming through and we need to be able to retain the ones that show they can perform. This means to me we need more focus on developing quality juniors rather than established players but the key point is that you need to have some flexibility in the cap to retain those players.

Mbye, Reynolds and Packer have been the worst value for money players we've had and they were all our best recruits in relation to getting established players. They stuffed out cap for years.
I would add Ballin to that list
 

Red88_Tiger

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2017
Messages
1,113
Attack has not been our problem at all. Our biggest problem has been our defence (though this year it was both).
The previous 3 years we have been ranked 9th/8th/9th in attack and 15th/12th/11th in defence.
Given poor defence not only results in points conceded but also less attacking opportunity I think it would be fair to say we've had a top 8 quality attack the last few years. Unfortunately our defence was not up to standard.
Attack under pressure when needing points was/is very ordinary. Other than that I agree
 

Telltails

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
8,260
A and D has been rubbish, that’s why we’re last.
Yet in the games we did win we beat much more fancied teams and rose to the occasion. The games we played well we had some leadership on the field. We had games against Warriors and Titans that were there for the taking and just couldn't ice them. Definitely a bottom eight side but the spoon could have been avoided.
 
Top