Our Squad - Tree left

[Nasheed]

Nasheed here,

It looks like the squads will be 26 next year.
Oh boy.

If this is the case, how do we play it?

We have signed 23.

this means 3 more spots.

For me, we sign Aaron Schoupp to the 30. Guy will be 20 next year so why arent we blooding him?

We then sign a hooker.

The last one i have an issue with.

My gut feel says hard nut forward like pangai but he's off limits.

Foran? Benji?

Can we sign benji and offer Green a coaching role?

i think we are going to be short of forwards next season so think we are going to need someone there.

WHAT A DILEMMA!

 

[oldpuppy]

It's dilemma for sure but think also that 4 players from the other 15lubs will be cut.
That's am additional 60 which I'm sure the club is monitoring to see if they can strengthen our squad where required.
Perhaps why our recruitment news is currently quiet.

 

[Nasheed]

Some teams are already up to 24/25.

Makes me think that because its this late in the season, 28 will be the magic number.

if not, maybe seeing what shakes from the tree elsewhere might be our answer.

because all of a sudden i could see Storm not want 3 premium hookers on their books.

 

[oldpuppy]

Good headline lol
Thought our squad might have done some backburning and left a tree.

 

[jof]

Thoughts on Bunty Ofoa? Warriors are looking to offload him. He did an ACL in preseason this year. Might be a decent buy if we could get him cheap.

 

[Nasheed]

No more ACL guys

 

[Alan79]

The NRL is honestly up shit creek if they go ahead with cutting squad sizes further. They can't keep trimming the fat by cutting squad sizes and staff budgets for clubs. There is definitely money being generated by the game. It's pure greed by the owners and admin driving these decisions. News corp has been hemorrhaging money with the advent of a number of competitors that have operated under a smarter business model based around the spread of faster internet connection as opposed to wireless satellite technology. So news corp will try to keep up their profit margins by taking more money out of the game.

At the end of the day we as fans face the prospect of seeing the quality of the game go slowly downhill.

This greed from the administration isn't a new thing. The Super league wars started because the ARL didn't give a fair share of profit to the club's and players that made the game what it was. It's actually a sad reflection of how imbalanced things are that most clubs operate at a loss without grants from the governing body. As a bare minimum, clubs should be able to survive without having to seek loans to stay afloat. But it seems clear to me that the future will see clubs increasingly expected to operate on decreasing budgets to ensure that a billionaire who doesn't give a shit about the game keeps growing his already substantial wealth.

 

[Nasheed]

The NRL is honestly up shit creek if they go ahead with cutting squad sizes further. They can't keep trimming the fat by cutting squad sizes and staff budgets for clubs. There is definitely money being generated by the game. It's pure greed by the owners and admin driving these decisions. News corp has been hemorrhaging money with the advent of a number of competitors that have operated under a smarter business model based around the spread of faster internet connection as opposed to wireless satellite technology. So news corp will try to keep up their profit margins by taking more money out of the game.

At the end of the day we as fans face the prospect of seeing the quality of the game go slowly downhill.

This greed from the administration isn't a new thing. The Super league wars started because the ARL didn't give a fair share of profit to the club's and players that made the game what it was. It's actually a sad reflection of how imbalanced things are that most clubs operate at a loss without grants from the governing body. As a bare minimum, clubs should be able to survive without having to seek loans to stay afloat. But it seems clear to me that the future will see clubs increasingly expected to operate on decreasing budgets to ensure that a billionaire who doesn't give a shit about the game keeps growing his already substantial wealth.

You've merged two issues u related here and kinda contradicted yourself.
As you say, many clubs struggle to stay afloat on they own. So cutting squad sizes (which you're against) actually helps. There may be other issues, but you'll save 550 minimum by doing that

 

[Alan79]

You've merged two issues u related here and kinda contradicted yourself.
As you say, many clubs struggle to stay afloat on they own. So cutting squad sizes (which you're against) actually helps. There may be other issues, but you'll save 550 minimum by doing that

I've simply pointed towards the fact that the underlying reason that the game isn't in a good financial position is because the governing body skims too large a portion of the profit.

Trimming more money from players and clubs won't help the quality of the competition in any way shape or form. It'll just allow for more profit to be directed out of the game.

 

[bullanth]

The NRL is honestly up shit creek if they go ahead with cutting squad sizes further. They can't keep trimming the fat by cutting squad sizes and staff budgets for clubs. There is definitely money being generated by the game. It's pure greed by the owners and admin driving these decisions. News corp has been hemorrhaging money with the advent of a number of competitors that have operated under a smarter business model based around the spread of faster internet connection as opposed to wireless satellite technology. So news corp will try to keep up their profit margins by taking more money out of the game.

At the end of the day we as fans face the prospect of seeing the quality of the game go slowly downhill.

This greed from the administration isn't a new thing. The Super league wars started because the ARL didn't give a fair share of profit to the club's and players that made the game what it was. It's actually a sad reflection of how imbalanced things are that most clubs operate at a loss without grants from the governing body. As a bare minimum, clubs should be able to survive without having to seek loans to stay afloat. But it seems clear to me that the future will see clubs increasingly expected to operate on decreasing budgets to ensure that a billionaire who doesn't give a shit about the game keeps growing his already substantial wealth.

News limited only owns Brisbane,hence Thursday &Friday night games,secondly y do clubs require multiple trainers and physios,our trainers what have they done over the last 5 years,bugger all,at least one of them runs the bottle,the other one can hardly walk,the days were u earned $1000 a week and spent $1500 are gone,and only the fittest survive.its a fact of real life,time to face reality.

 

[Alan79]

News limited only owns Brisbane,hence Thursday &Friday night games,secondly y do clubs require multiple trainers and physios,our trainers what have they done over the last 5 years,bugger all,at least one of them runs the bottle,the other one can hardly walk,the days were u earned $1000 a week and spent $1500 are gone,and only the fittest survive.its a fact of real life,time to face reality.

We as a club have seen the results of cost cutting measures taking effect over time. For at least 20 years we hired the best talent scouts and juniors coaches and it resulted in us having a very dominant period where our talent pool was huge. We had an admin team here for 6 years that let that drop off. We've faced a situation since then where our juniors were shot for quite a while. Two of the teams who snapped up our discarded scouts and coaches have thrived with them. Look at Penrith and Canberra and the improvement of their juniors in recent years.

The question you have to ask is do you want the quality of the NRL to drop away because the administration feel that saving money by reducing the amount of money for the best staff seems like a good idea.other codes will pick up the best talent in these areas willingly.

I just think that cutting budgets is going to result in a drop in quality. I'd rather have a balanced competition with talent and good depth. I don't think continued cost cutting is the way to get there.

 

[Dogs Of War]

There will be plenty of decent bargains coming up as teams attempt to fix there squad balances. And they need to offload players who are contracted for next season out of the squad. Dogs are in a good position. Hopefully for a change they pay us to take them. I'd think we would need to do similar, though most of ours would be bare min salary type guys.

 

[vegny]

Thats depressing. Considering ppl been talking about the money we will have and we are not going to make any significant changes to the squad. And we are coming last with a team that has been labelled not of first grade standard by many.

 

[Chris Harding]

Thoughts on Bunty Ofoa? Warriors are looking to offload him. He did an ACL in preseason this year. Might be a decent buy if we could get him cheap.

Anyone with an ongoing injury should be in the mix.

 

[bullanth]

We as a club have seen the results of cost cutting measures taking effect over time. For at least 20 years we hired the best talent scouts and juniors coaches and it resulted in us having a very dominant period where our talent pool was huge. We had an admin team here for 6 years that let that drop off. We've faced a situation since then where our juniors were shot for quite a while. Two of the teams who snapped up our discarded scouts and coaches have thrived with them. Look at Penrith and Canberra and the improvement of their juniors in recent years.

The question you have to ask is do you want the quality of the NRL to drop away because the administration feel that saving money by reducing the amount of money for the best staff seems like a good idea.other codes will pick up the best talent in these areas willingly.

I just think that cutting budgets is going to result in a drop in quality. I'd rather have a balanced competition with talent and good depth. I don't think continued cost cutting is the way to get there.

Ill give u another example,the English premier league one of the biggest in the world,manages its affairs annually on 30% of what the nrl spend on its organization,I believe they were spending in excess of 500k a day,jobs for the boys and mismanagement,&who is as u say going to take these excesses rugby union,a league,they are more broke than the nrl,these trainers for instance do u think they are on peanuts,they are on more than the average wage,how is the game going to suffer by having one less trainer,we currently have players acting as ballboys,and running drinks,this will b the norm in our game,the club is paying their wages so y not have players as ball boys and running the drinks,

 

[Trafford10]

There's a Tree?

 

[2144superman]

IF this is the case then the signing of Blake Green is even more perplexing considering he might not be available until round 8-10

 

[youoboys]

Bulldogs fan here: nasheed the weed, you are superfluous!!

 

[Bulldogsteve]

contracted players mean nothing, TB can move on who ever he likes, another stupid thread tree time over

 

[Nasheed]

IF this is the case then the signing of Blake Green is even more perplexing considering he might not be available until round 8-10

remember he dipped his feather in ink on that paper before he hurt heself.