That's a massive issue imo especially if we don't want to pay overs. We could lose a few players that are in our plans to resign. I don't think a player will flip flop (sign somewhere similar - success wise, for the same money) but if they get offers from top clubs we could be in trouble. I think a club like Newcastle could really use someone like Jackson. They have no leaders and Jackson is a warrior. If they were to offer him 900k-1m he'll be gone.Seriously nonsense...
Why is no one talking about the 17 of our current top 30 that can negotiate with other. Clubs from 1 November 2019!
Are we chasing pipe dreams instead?
Or do non of them want to resign?
$600k is ridiculous, at 19 he is the worlds best prop and he re-signs for so little in comparison to what he could get anywhere else. You only have to compare him to Jai arrow who is commanding in excess of $850k a season.Haas on 600k is a steal. I can see him getting ~200k pay rise (contract renegotiated) just to keep him happy at the Broncos (when they've sorted out their cap a bit, in a couple of years).
Clubs actually get so cucked. Players and their managers run the market. If a player feels like they're underpaid they usually get their own way (the player and club meeting in the middle somewhere) or are moved on, whereas if they're on too much the club has to pay a part of their contract to move them on and the player still gets all of his money or just stays at the club.
Just because the Knights want to offer Jacko $900k+ doesn't mean we should. I love the guy but if it's one final payday he is after which he thoroughly deserves then so be it I'd be ok to lose him. An ageing Jacko $900k OR a young Fifita who is yet to hit his prime $900k?That's a massive issue imo especially if we don't want to pay overs. We could lose a few players that are in our plans to resign. I don't think a player will flip flop (sign somewhere similar - success wise, for the same money) but if they get offers from top clubs we could be in trouble. I think a club like Newcastle could really use someone like Jackson. They have no leaders and Jackson is a warrior. If they were to offer him 900k-1m he'll be gone.
That's what I'm saying. It'd take offers like that for us to lose Jackson.Just because the Knights want to offer Jacko $900k+ doesn't mean we should. I love the guy but if it's one final payday he is after which he thoroughly deserves then so be it I'd be ok to lose him. An ageing Jacko $900k OR a young Fifita who is yet to hit his prime $900k?
Brother, it's a business and IF Jacko did what Brett Morris did and go to an elite team to win a premiership I wouldn't blame him and couldn't hold it against him. Just like I was ecstatic for Ennis when he won a premiership with the peptide Sharks. They have both served us well and well forever recieve the accolades they deserve.That's what I'm saying. It'd take offers like that for us to lose Jackson. I'd be offering Jackson 700k with little to no wiggle room on that (I only see clubs like the Knights and Titans offering that money). I guess if he wants to win the competition before retiring he could sign with a top club (e.g. Roosters) for the same price but he'll cop a lot of shit. I don't think he'd do that but you never know.
Yeah I understand it but you could just imagine what these forums would be like.Brother, it's a business and IF Jacko did what Brett Morris did and go to an elite team to win a premiership I wouldn't blame him and couldn't hold it against him. Just like I was ecstatic for Ennis when he won a premiership with the peptide Sharks. They have both served us well and well forever recieve the accolades they deserve.
LOL bro even with the best of news you wouldn't be able to please the majority on here.Yeah I understand it but you could just imagine what these forums would be like.
I think there's $200 grand a year for players who've been in a clubs top 30 for 8 years or more, so I'd give Jacko most or all of that to end up on $750 - 800 grand a year. Fuck he's been getting unders compared to just about every other player and is our captain and a great clubman. Tolman's given good service but I get pissed when I hear him talked about, in the same breath as Jacko,as being the 'heart and soul of the team'. It's bullshit - Jackos the only one that deserves that praise in the last few years, apart from maybe DWZ for half a season.That's what I'm saying. It'd take offers like that for us to lose Jackson.
I'd be offering Jackson 700k with little to no wiggle room on that (I only see clubs like the Knights and Titans offering that money - ~900k). I guess if he wants to win the competition before retiring he could sign with a top club (e.g. Roosters) for the same price but he'll cop a lot of shit. I don't think he'd do that but you never know.
800k for Jackson? 650k absolute max, even then that's stretching it.I think there's $200 grand a year for players who've been in a clubs top 30 for 8 years or more, so I'd give Jacko most or all of that to end up on $750 - 800 grand a year. Fuck he's been getting unders compared to just about every other player and is our captain and a great clubman. Tolman's given good service but I get pissed when I hear him talked about, in the same breath as Jacko,as being the 'heart and soul of the team'. It's bullshit - Jackos the only one that deserves that praise in the last few years, apart from maybe DWZ for half a season.
I know he needs to earn his pay like every player, but for me he's really growing into the captains role, and finding much better form again. His inevitable move into the middle will only add to his value IMO and we just need to keep him.
Not comparing mate - the past is just that.Please stop comparing back ended contracts and misjudging the salary cap growth to recruitment now. Yes we shouldn't do that again. No one has said we should. That's the risk you take when you give players big contracts. In theory we could give Jake Trbojevic 1.3m and he could be a massive flop.
Anyone we sign can backfire. Regardless of price tag. At least we're signing proven NRL players (possibly best in their position).Not comparing mate - the past is just that.
My point was - big contracts for alleged superstars both $ and length can backfire (and have) - and you agree.
So wouldn’t it be better to sign a larger portion of more promising players coming through the system (not necessarily all Dogs juniors) and once they show they’re worth it, upgrade and extend them then? Yes it might take us a little longer to win a comp but we’ll have rebuilt the club that was nearly destroyed in recent years. Longevity is the game and I sense that’s what Pay and the executives are trying to do.
Apart from the $ tag and risk attached with some alleged superstars - I want players at the Dogs who want to be there, not just for $. Sure, some won’t come and that’s fine, but plenty will want to be there and can earn top coin as they come through with our cap back in good order.
Actually a credible source or dribble?Mitchell Done deal he would b with the dogs 2021 ...it’s 110%
110% he would b a bulldog ..done u would hear about it very soon ..Actually a credible source or dribble?
Once again whats your source?110% he would b a bulldog ..done u would hear about it very soon ..
BBQ and garlic please.Once again whats your source?
Love how they go quiet when you ask if its a credible source lolBBQ and garlic please.
Piss take lol110% he would b a bulldog ..done u would hear about it very soon ..