Board need to go if Dogs fail to sign elite players like David Fifita / Latrell Mitchell

Sleeky

Kennel Enthusiast
Premium Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
2,996
Reaction score
1,031
This place has been on repeat for 4 years... so Boring here now... too many sooks.
Devils advocate here...
The Kennel has never been through this type of ordeal with our club. That ordeal being our junior base in tatters, salary cap being a mess, odd board (in comparison to others), not being in finals for a while, success still a while away just to mention a few.
Yes there are some remarks that are odd and out there, but two sides to every fence
 
Last edited:

Dog Till I Die

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
1,121
Reaction score
429
Bring through our own talent. Let those with big heads and bloated pay demands go elsewhere - if they can find anyone stupid enough to sign them.
Klemmer did. Hit the jackpot and is now making an arsehole of the rest of himself
 

Tassie Devil

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
17,255
Reaction score
15,103
An extra 200-300k for TOP players, 100%. That's the only way to attract them. You don't want to buy stars? You still have to overpay if they aren't an opportunist (Britt, Katoa, Stimson mould) signing or wanted by another club (Ramien, Koroisau mould). We have 3m to spend, we're going to spend it. Whoever we bring in that's DECENT+ is going to be on more then value. The stars aligned to sign DWZ... (mid season signing, we were the only club that could offer him a Fullback position, how much is he on?) we're not going to find 4-5 more players like that before 2021. If 2021 is the target year to be competitive then we'll spend the money.
Mate. It's very hard to read your comments without wanting to punch the computer screen. Honestly. And I'm not even a violent man ... well, I wasn't until your posts.

It's just basic common sense so I don't know if you're trolling or just plain ... yeah ...

You want to throw 200,000+ on the top players. Lets say a top player is worth around 800,000 these days give or take. We need a centre, half, and hooker at a minimum. That's 2.4m + a further 600,000 on top to get them according to you taking us to 3m just for 3 players. More than 30% of our entire salary cap on 3 players.

That's an average of around 250,000 for the remainder of the 30 man squad. The average a NRL player is paid is apparently 330,00 so ... what does that mean for the rest of our squad?

And what about the balance of the team? The rest of the team will have to be on peanuts no? Three 'superstars' but the rest will have to suck it when you're paying 3 players nearly a million each.

What happens when we start playing well? Hell, let's say we even play so well we get into a final? Those lads who're on peanuts, I'm pretty sure they'll be knocking on the door for a raise. Not even the guys on peanuts but some of the fellas who've been around the club for a while. They'll be due some extra dough based on appearances, finals, etc. Hell, look at what's happening to the Raiders and they're smarter than you and not paying 200,000+ overs to attract top talent.

Paying that amount would absolutely sink us in the long-term. I hope to God you don't run or own a business! Hell. I hope that your wife controls the money in your household because Jesus you'd be broke within weeks.
 
Last edited:

Dogtime

Kennel Enthusiast
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
2,013
Reaction score
2,191
I realize from my involvement in the game on the salary cap side that many on here think that we could somehow sign another 2 x $1m per season players from 2021 because unfortunately, Hill has created that impression. Without significant 3rd party contributions though, this just isnt feasible. If we did then we wouldnt be able to upgrade players like Wakeham, Okunbor, JMK, Lewis or Smith that will all be due upgrades. We'd stand the chance of losing most of these players.

With almost the lowest share of 3rd parties in the NRL, the Dogs are heavily reliant going forward, on continually looking at bargain guys simply because of the neglect of our juniors and the inability of Hasler and Cleal to spot talent...Mitchell and Lichaa, T Rex and Woods classic examples. Their neglect to bring through future players means we must look elsewhere for talent for a few years yet. Then with 9 teams in Sydney and Gary Johnston choosing to take a step back its nigh impossible to get 3rd parties across the line.

So we have $9.5m to be spread across 30 players. Lets say we keep Foran at say $850Kpa and we got 2 x $1m players, that would leave $6.65m to be spread across 27 players or $246k each. Your not going to hang onto players like DWZ, CHN, Jackson, Napa, RFM, Tolman, Stimson etc etc paying them $246k. The ONLY way to build a competitive roster is WITHIN. Concentrate on spotting and developing juniors who while under your control are cheap. Exactly what our Board is focussing on. Exactly what Roosters, Souths, Sharks, Manly and Broncos are doing.

For what its worth we can fit 1 marque player on $1m+...and Id be going for David Fifita or Haas. Failing to secure either 1 Id be going hard for Manu, Staggs then Xerri all of who would be much cheaper. Dont forget weve been considering Mitchell already and the Trebovovich's and I cant knock the Manly bros. wish to stay together on the Nth beaches. You cant knock our Board for that. We are building nicely. Hard years make you appreciate the good years more. The salary cap over a long period of time does work to spread the talent out. Some clubs still backend key deals...and 1 or 2 backended deals can work as long as you have a bunch of promising kids coming through in the later years, but under Hasler, we were honestly f##ked by how many backenders we did. We are still paying the price for those deals next year.
 

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,924
Reaction score
19,191
Mate. It's very hard to read your comments without wanting to punch the computer screen. Honestly. And I'm not even a violent man ... well, I wasn't until your posts.

It's just basic common sense so I don't know if you're trolling or just plain ... yeah ...

You want to throw 200,000+ on the top players. Lets say a top player is worth around 800,000 these days give or take. We need a centre, half, and hooker at a minimum. That's 2.4m + a further 600,000 on top to get them according to you taking us to 3m just for 3 players. More than 30% of our entire salary cap on 3 players.

That's an average of around 250,000 for the remainder of the 30 man squad. The average a NRL player is paid is apparently 330,00 so ... what does that mean for the rest of our squad?

And what about the balance of the team? The rest of the team will have to be on peanuts no? Three 'superstars' but the rest will have to suck it when you're paying 3 players nearly a million each.

What happens when we start playing well? Hell, let's say we even play so well we get into a final? Those lads who're on peanuts, I'm pretty sure they'll be knocking on the door for a raise. Not even the guys on peanuts but some of the fellas who've been around the club for a while. They'll be due some extra dough based on appearances, finals, etc. Hell, look at what's happening to the Raiders and they're smarter than you and not paying 200,000+ overs to attract top talent.

Paying that amount would absolutely sink us in the long-term. I hope to God you don't run or own a business! Hell. I hope that your wife controls the money in your household because Jesus you'd be broke within weeks.
The only way to attract top players is to offer them 200-300k more. Every other decent player is going to want at least 100k more. Everything else you say is irrelevant. I don't want it to be like this but that's what happens and the situation we're in. We can retain the majority of our squad and add 3m worth of talent into it. However the board/recruitment team do it is up to them but all I know is we're not getting decent+ players for value. Why would any player leave their current club or sign with us over another club in our current situation for the same amount? (basic commonsense right?) We will only be able to sign reject players that no other club wants or can fit in. I also wouldn't buy four players for 1m, I'd buy 1-2 and a few decent players (which we're going to have to pay extra for).
 
Last edited:

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,924
Reaction score
19,191
I realize from my involvement in the game on the salary cap side that many on here think that we could somehow sign another 2 x $1m per season players from 2021 because unfortunately, Hill has created that impression. Without significant 3rd party contributions though, this just isnt feasible. If we did then we wouldnt be able to upgrade players like Wakeham, Okunbor, JMK, Lewis or Smith that will all be due upgrades. We'd stand the chance of losing most of these players.

With almost the lowest share of 3rd parties in the NRL, the Dogs are heavily reliant going forward, on continually looking at bargain guys simply because of the neglect of our juniors and the inability of Hasler and Cleal to spot talent...Mitchell and Lichaa, T Rex and Woods classic examples. Their neglect to bring through future players means we must look elsewhere for talent for a few years yet. Then with 9 teams in Sydney and Gary Johnston choosing to take a step back its nigh impossible to get 3rd parties across the line.

So we have $9.5m to be spread across 30 players. Lets say we keep Foran at say $850Kpa and we got 2 x $1m players, that would leave $6.65m to be spread across 27 players or $246k each. Your not going to hang onto players like DWZ, CHN, Jackson, Napa, RFM, Tolman, Stimson etc etc paying them $246k. The ONLY way to build a competitive roster is WITHIN. Concentrate on spotting and developing juniors who while under your control are cheap. Exactly what our Board is focussing on. Exactly what Roosters, Souths, Sharks, Manly and Broncos are doing.

For what its worth we can fit 1 marque player on $1m+...and Id be going for David Fifita or Haas. Failing to secure either 1 Id be going hard for Manu, Staggs then Xerri all of who would be much cheaper. Dont forget weve been considering Mitchell already and the Trebovovich's and I cant knock the Manly bros. wish to stay together on the Nth beaches. You cant knock our Board for that. We are building nicely. Hard years make you appreciate the good years more. The salary cap over a long period of time does work to spread the talent out. Some clubs still backend key deals...and 1 or 2 backended deals can work as long as you have a bunch of promising kids coming through in the later years, but under Hasler, we were honestly f##ked by how many backenders we did. We are still paying the price for those deals next year.
Everyone else is going to have their own opinion on what they think players are worth, but I think we can retain DWZ, Reimis, Hopoate, Foran, Lewis, Tolman, CHN (on contract), Jackson, Elliott, JMK (on contract), Napa (on contract), RFM, Stimson (on contract) for 5.7m. The salary cap is going to be 9.9m* in 2021. Lets say we signed Latrell 1m, Harry Grant 400k, Thomson 400k, Vunivalu 600k. We'd be up to 8.1m. 18-30 would be on an average 140k each. So we have more like 2.5m to spend, not 3m. If we signed Latrell and Fifita we could only sign one of Thompson or Vunivalu (or maybe we wouldn't sign anyone else). That would be the sacrifice. I'm just using these players as examples. You can replace them with whatever Centre, Hooker, Prop and Winger that you like or even different positions. Also Foran is not getting 850k a year. We'll be moving him on if that's what he demands (he will need to get other offers from other clubs, considering no one picked him up when we were trying to offload him I doubt he's getting those offers) and we'll be running with Cogger.
 

Tassie Devil

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
17,255
Reaction score
15,103
Everyone else is going to have their own opinion on what they think players are worth, but I think we can retain DWZ, Reimis, Hopoate, Foran, Lewis, Tolman, CHN (on contract), Jackson, Elliott, JMK (on contract), Napa (on contract), RFM, Stimson (on contract) for 5.7m. The salary cap is going to be 9.9m* in 2021. Lets say we signed Latrell 1m, Harry Grant 400k, Thomson 400k, Vunivalu 600k. We'd be up to 8.1m. 18-30 would be on an average 140k each. So we have more like 2.5m to spend, not 3m. If we signed Latrell and Fifita we could only sign one of Thompson or Vunivalu (or maybe we wouldn't sign anyone else). That would be the sacrifice. I'm just using these players as examples. You can replace them with whatever Centre, Hooker, Prop and Winger that you like or even different positions. Also Foran is not getting 850k a year. We'll be moving him on if that's what he demands (he will need to get other offers from other clubs, considering no one picked him up when we were trying to offload him I doubt he's getting those offers) and we'll be running with Cogger.
Have thought it over and you're right.

Let's go put the 2.5m or whatever amount on only 2 players. It's not like we've been burnt in the past by paying a player massive overs. It's a surefire plan my friend. All aboard the crazy Bradyk train!
 

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,924
Reaction score
19,191
Have thought it over and you're right.

Let's go put the 2.5m or whatever amount on only 2 players. It's not like we've been burnt in the past by paying a player massive overs. It's a surefire plan my friend. All aboard the crazy Bradyk train!
We paid overs on back ended deals. You do know we misjudged the salary cap growth right? It isn't even the same as now. All I'm saying is we're going to have to pay above value for everyone (unless we're the only club that want them or that can fit them in). The higher they're valued the more we have to pay on top. It's just commonsense. I'd really like to now hear your alternative (also please don't say to keep signing opportunist players or developing our younger players as that's something you can do on the side at the same time).
 
Last edited:

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,471
Reaction score
19,748
We paid overs on back ended deals. You do know we misjudged the salary cap growth right? It isn't even the same as now. All I'm saying is we're going to have to pay above value for everyone (unless we're the only club that want them or that can fit them in). The higher they're valued the more we have to pay on top. It's just commonsense. I'd really like to now hear your alternative (also please don't say to keep signing opportunist players or developing our younger players as that's something you can do on the side at the same time).
The part where you said you wanted to hear Steve's alternative is an absolute lie. You've reworded the same post 400 times. You just want to hear everybody agree with you. You should have a talk with latrell Mi chel and David fafita about becoming their manager. Maybe an NFL team would throw them exorbitant wages.

I'd be incredibly surprised if our management team got the club out of the salary cap mess we've been in and turn around and dive into the same patch of concrete by paying HUGE overs for players that aren't exactly in positions that should command the type of money you'd splash on them.

Moving a lazy and seemingly unmotivated player like Mitchell into a position requiring a huge work ethic like fullback would be a massive gamble. And despite not having seen much of fafita, I would balk at paying $200k over what other clubs offer for a second rower. The difference between an elite forward and a very good forward isn't going to impact our ability as much as picking up a great 1, 6, 7 or 9.

Now moving back to reality. The club has apparently said Mitchell isn't coming because he's asking for too much. The club probably have plans to improve the quality of a number of positions over the next 2 seasons. If they blow the budget on two players that aren't in key positions we're going to suffer longer term. So let that sink in before repeating the same post you've made 400 times already.
 

Tassie Devil

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
17,255
Reaction score
15,103
We paid overs on back ended deals. You do know we misjudged the salary cap growth right? It isn't even the same as now. All I'm saying is we're going to have to pay above value for everyone (unless we're the only club that want them or that can fit them in). The higher they're valued the more we have to pay on top. It's just commonsense. I'd really like to now hear your alternative (also please don't say to keep signing opportunist players or developing our younger players as that's something you can do on the side at the same time).
It wears me down coming on here and reading the same stuff again and again. You have done nothing but repeat we need to pay X amount over to get top players but have given no examples of it actually working. I bring up the past. You say it was different. I can point to other clubs, e.g. Newcastle, that spent big on players like Klemmer coming over and it doing nothing. Broncos also.

You make out that signing the best is what winnings all about. It simply isn't. Any person can see that.

Alternative?

I believe what the club is doing is the right thing to do. Sign the right players at the right price. Api was done. He wanted more. We said no. Could've offered more to Ramien. Didn't. He went elsewhere. Same with Mitchell. The club has done its research into players and what they can bring the club and evaluated how much to spend on them.

We're setting the bar for future negotiations also because not giving into managers. Not stupidly paying 200,000 over for each player. What this does is say we're going to pay the correct rate. No doubt it's a little more to make it attractive but 200-300,000?

It's been brought up here countless times talking about bringing juniors through. Growing from within. This being our future. Would that be an alternative for you?

At the end of the day it doesn't really matter as you want your voice heard and that's it. OK. I've heard you. Don't agree with you, but I've heard you.

Now, if you've got nothing more to say other than 'sign players like Mitchell and Fifta' then please leave it ...
 

Sleeky

Kennel Enthusiast
Premium Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
2,996
Reaction score
1,031
With almost the lowest share of 3rd parties in the NRL, the Dogs are heavily reliant going forward, on continually looking at bargain guys simply because of the neglect of our juniors and the inability of Hasler and Cleal to spot talent...Mitchell and Lichaa, T Rex and Woods classic examples. Their neglect to bring through future players means we must look elsewhere for talent for a few years yet. Then with 9 teams in Sydney and Gary Johnston choosing to take a step back its nigh impossible to get 3rd parties across the line.
Just a question. So it’s because there is 9 teams in Sydney that TPAs are few and far between?
I look at the Roosters and see Politis possy and the cash they have to “sponsor” a player outside the salary cap (TPA apparently). Good on them, savvy businessmen. Was Gary Johnstone (who I’m assuming you’re referring to JayCar Director) bringing in other TPAs, something OUR board should be focusing on as well as the football department?

I get what you’re saying, and yes, unfortunately that’s the only path we can take right now but we need a mix of football AND business heads on that board. I can see the football side of things going in the right direction (albeit slowly) but the latter, not so much
 

Natboy

Banned
Premium Member
SC H2H Champion
SC Top Scorer
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Messages
8,945
Reaction score
11,608
The only way to attract top players is to offer them 200-300k more. Every other decent player is going to want at least 100k more. Everything else you say is irrelevant. I don't want it to be like this but that's what happens and the situation we're in. We can retain the majority of our squad and add 3m worth of talent into it. However the board/recruitment team do it is up to them but all I know is we're not getting decent+ players for value. Why would any player leave their current club or sign with us over another club in our current situation for the same amount? (basic commonsense right?) We will only be able to sign reject players that no other club wants or can fit in. I also wouldn't buy four players for 1m, I'd buy 1-2 and a few decent players (which we're going to have to pay extra for).
You are just guessing though mate. You act like our club has absolutely nothing to offer but money. Look at Manly. They may win a comp in the next couple of years if they stay reasonably injury free.
They have fuck all depth and came last in reserve grade & under 20’s but have a good first grade squad.
They are going to have DCE & the turbo bros taking up over a third of their cap. That’s all well and good if they win a quick comp but look at them in 5 years. I know you mean well but let’s just say I’m glad the club are in charge of our cap and recruitment and not you
 

doggieaaron

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
15,663
Reaction score
11,345
You are just guessing though mate. You act like our club has absolutely nothing to offer but money. Look at Manly. They may win a comp in the next couple of years if they stay reasonably injury free.
They have fuck all depth and came last in reserve grade & under 20’s but have a good first grade squad.
They are going to have DCE & the turbo bros taking up over a third of their cap. That’s all well and good if they win a quick comp but look at them in 5 years. I know you mean well but let’s just say I’m glad the club are in charge of our cap and recruitment and not you
I agree i think alot on here are stupidly negative and will be surprised with the club in the next few years we are certainly building the foundations to be successful for the long term and recruitment the right players that are good players as well as culture
 

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,924
Reaction score
19,191
It wears me down coming on here and reading the same stuff again and again. You have done nothing but repeat we need to pay X amount over to get top players but have given no examples of it actually working. I bring up the past. You say it was different. I can point to other clubs, e.g. Newcastle, that spent big on players like Klemmer coming over and it doing nothing. Broncos also.

You make out that signing the best is what winnings all about. It simply isn't. Any person can see that.

Alternative?

I believe what the club is doing is the right thing to do. Sign the right players at the right price. Api was done. He wanted more. We said no. Could've offered more to Ramien. Didn't. He went elsewhere. Same with Mitchell. The club has done its research into players and what they can bring the club and evaluated how much to spend on them.

We're setting the bar for future negotiations also because not giving into managers. Not stupidly paying 200,000 over for each player. What this does is say we're going to pay the correct rate. No doubt it's a little more to make it attractive but 200-300,000?

It's been brought up here countless times talking about bringing juniors through. Growing from within. This being our future. Would that be an alternative for you?

At the end of the day it doesn't really matter as you want your voice heard and that's it. OK. I've heard you. Don't agree with you, but I've heard you.

Now, if you've got nothing more to say other than 'sign players like Mitchell and Fifta' then please leave it ...
Yeah so you're confused (inept). 200-300k for top players, e.g. Latrell, Fifita. If we want to sign them that's how how we're going to have to pay on top. That's isn't debatable (if we don't pay it, we don't get them, simple, I'm just saying it how it is). When you talk about decent players, e.g. Koroisau, Ramien, other players around that level we're going to have to pay at least 100k more (I've clearly said the higher the player is valued the more we're going have to pay to lure them... please don't blanket 200-300k for EVERY player, it makes you like like an idiot) if they're wanted by other clubs (or a club is wanting to retain them). You do realise recruiting for 2021 starts in 9 days right? The club has been doing the method you've said for 2 years already. If we want to be competitive in 2021/sign players (that're going to be a difference...) we're going to have to pay that extra to attract talent. The reason why I ask for an alternative is people like you argue with me or say I'm wrong but don't tell me how we're going to recruit ~3m worth of talent before 2021. "Now, if you've got nothing more to say other than 'sign players like Mitchell and Fifta' then please leave it ..." This is moronic and I've said multiple times even decent players we're going to have to pay more to get. I've even said my recruits right now, best case scenario, would be Latrell, Harry Grant, Thompson and Vunivalu. You aren't getting any of them (or anyone else) for value. We will literally sign no one if we don't pay extra. Only 1 of those players is a 1m player and I personally think he's a must signing. That's he situation we're in, open your eyes. If anything the examples you've given e.g. Newcastle, Ramien, Koroisau strengthen what I'm saying (how to recruit - regardless if it worked out or not, we have a stronger base then Newcastle and not coming from 16th position multiple years in a row..., why players didn't join, etc) and besides that you've pretty much changed what I've said and taken bits and pieces to suit your agenda.
 
Last edited:

speedy2460

Kennel Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
5,204
Reaction score
4,611
I believe its time to give up on the fantasy. Mitchell and Fifita are not coming here.
There could very well be a few others though.
 

JUNKYARD DOGS

Kennel Addict
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
7,089
Reaction score
3,604
I believe its time to give up on the fantasy. Mitchell and Fifita are not coming here.
There could very well be a few others though.
Fifita I think will stay with Broncs. Expect they already have money set aside. They might sway a few older heads to test the open market.
 

DinkumDog

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
23,012
Reaction score
42,492
Yeah so you're confused (inept). 200-300k for top players, e.g. Latrell, Fifita. If we want to sign them that's how how we're going to have to pay on top. That's isn't debatable (if we don't pay it, we don't get them, simple, I'm just saying it how it is). When you talk about decent players, e.g. Koroisau, Ramien, other players around that level we're going to have to pay at least 100k more (I've clearly said the higher the player is valued the more we're going have to pay to lure them... please don't blanket 200-300k for EVERY player, it makes you like like an idiot) if they're wanted by other clubs (or a club is wanting to retain them). You do realise recruiting for 2021 starts in 9 days right? The club has been doing the method you've said for 2 years already. If we want to be competitive in 2021/sign players (that're going to be a difference...) we're going to have to pay that extra to attract talent. The reason why I ask for an alternative is people like you argue with me or say I'm wrong but don't tell me how we're going to recruit ~3m worth of talent before 2021. "Now, if you've got nothing more to say other than 'sign players like Mitchell and Fifta' then please leave it ..." This is moronic and I've said multiple times even decent players we're going to have to pay more to get. I've even said my recruits right now, best case scenario, would be Latrell, Harry Grant, Thompson and Vunivalu. You aren't getting any of them (or anyone else) for value. We will literally sign no one if we don't pay extra. Only 1 of those players is a 1m player and I personally think he's a must signing. That's he situation we're in, open your eyes. If anything the examples you've given e.g. Newcastle, Ramien, Koroisau strengthen what I'm saying (how to recruit - regardless if it worked out or not, we have a stronger base then Newcastle and not coming from 16th position multiple years in a row..., why players didn't join, etc) and besides that you've pretty much changed what I've said and taken bits and pieces to suit your agenda.
Any chance you can hit the pause button for 9 days?

You (nor I) have no idea what the club has planned for 2021 - and that’s a good thing, I’ll take a Trojan horse over a leaked or bungled strategy any day.

You’re automatically assuming there’s no solid plan in place and the club is destined to continue on some downward spiral. I back the executives and directors to deliver. Naturally money will be spent, that’s what it’s there for when available - but that’s no reason to start splashing it around like a drunken sailor in some totally untested belief that you’ll quickly throw together a premiership winning team. Band-aids like that generally just don’t work.
 

Howard Moon

Kennel Addict
2 x Gilded
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
6,568
Reaction score
3,445
Well I don't know about you guys, but I'm happy with the team that we have for next year... sure we might not win the premiership but we are going to make big moves!!
 

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,924
Reaction score
19,191
Any chance you can hit the pause button for 9 days?

You (nor I) have no idea what the club has planned for 2021 - and that’s a good thing, I’ll take a Trojan horse over a leaked or bungled strategy any day.

You’re automatically assuming there’s no solid plan in place and the club is destined to continue on some downward spiral. I back the executives and directors to deliver. Naturally money will be spent, that’s what it’s there for when available - but that’s no reason to start splashing it around like a drunken sailor in some totally untested belief that you’ll quickly throw together a premiership winning team. Band-aids like that generally just don’t work.
I don't think the club is on a downward spiral, we're just not going to be able to recruit like a top team (will need to use different methods to attract, e.g. money, I also believe CURRENTLY we're the last Sydney club a player would join, yes behind the Dragons and Tigers...). I think we'll finish around the same next year and 2021 will be a really good year for us, assuming we bring players that will make a difference in, but we'll have a few players in the squad worth more then their value so until we can correct that (need success, when their contracts run down, resigning for cheaper or moving them on) down the years/track we're going to be disadvantaged. We're currently a team that's expected to finish just outside the 8 (according to some even lower, I'm personally going to predict us to finish around ~10th based on heart). I think the recruits we make for 2021 will make us an established top 8 side but there will still be a long way to go for top 4. When we're in that position (established top 8 side) then maybe some of the reject signings we're going for will sign for what they're worth but until then I don't see them picking us over another club when they have more success + spending more money then us... (literally the reason why we've missed out on players).
 
Last edited:
Top