(Archived) THE RUMOUR MILL - Player Movement

[bort]

Guess it's only a tick over two months away so not that long to wait. I'm sure Dogs will be nervous, I do wonder how much they can afford to throw at him with all their recent signings.

With Allan, Flanju, Jackson & Thompson currently off (based on ZT numbers) that opens up 2.35m
Three of those players start for them though so even with replacements from within they will use up a bit of that money.

Not 'back ended' necessarily but wouldn't surprise me if Kikau and Reed were on a little more for later years than in their first year to help afford transitioning them into the team.
You'd think it's not possible for them to make a play for a Hunt or Munster unless they shook off TPJ without paying much towards him.

They have built up a pretty decent side for next year, but they still have two spine weaknesses and you really don't want more than 1
and bench is a bit weak... and a few positions appear to get shallow very fast

Averillo
JAC
Schoupp
Burns/Alamoti
Kiraz
Burton
Flanju
Thompson
Mahoney
TPJ/King
Kikau
Jackson
Sutton/RFM

King/TPJ
RFM/Sutton
Seumanufagai/Patolo
Topine*/Waddell

Left edge of JAC, centre, Kikau, Burton should be strong

 

[HaroldBishop]

Guess it's only a tick over two months away so not that long to wait. I'm sure Dogs will be nervous, I do wonder how much they can afford to throw at him with all their recent signings.

You probably wouldn't be overly happy if you were the Dogs though, shopping himself around after one year.

 

[Proud Shark]

You probably wouldn't be overly happy if you were the Dogs though, shopping himself around after one year.

Of course not, but that's the game right? Especially under the current rules. If want to lock someone away they need a longer deal. If it was Nicho we'd be spewing, but hoping the club at least fronted up a good contract to extend. The current club always has the advantage in being able to upgrade their current deal.

 

[HaroldBishop]

Of course not, but that's the game right? Especially under the current rules. If want to lock someone away they need a longer deal. If it was Nicho we'd be spewing, but hoping the club at least fronted up a good contract to extend. The current club always has the advantage in being able to upgrade their current deal.

Yeah I know, it's just how it is. Really not a fan of players being able to sign so far out from the end of their contract.

 

[Proud Shark]

Yeah I know, it's just how it is. Really not a fan of players being able to sign so far out from the end of their contract.

I agree to an extent, but I also respect the fact that they have a short window to make a dollar, and one major injury can put a huge holt on their earning potential.

Personally I'd love a transfer window, if for no other reason than taking away half the **** articles these 'journos' push out each week about someone maybe moving somewhere. Have one in June, and one at the end of the season.

 

[bort]

Yeah I know, it's just how it is. Really not a fan of players being able to sign so far out from the end of their contract.

Yeah ideally it'd be like halfway through last season of contract but from round 1 of it would also sit fine with me.

I totally understand from player (and unfortunately manager) perspective it is best to do it at least as far out as it is.
Not just for player themselves but need to relocate, kids to new schools etc

 

[HaroldBishop]

I agree to an extent, but I also respect the fact that they have a short window to make a dollar, and one major injury can put a huge holt on their earning potential.

Personally I'd love a transfer window, if for no other reason than taking away half the **** articles these 'journos' push out each week about someone maybe moving somewhere. Have one in June, and one at the end of the season.

Yeah ideally it'd be like halfway through last season of contract but from round 1 of it would also sit fine with me.

I totally understand from player (and unfortunately manager) perspective it is best to do it at least as far out as it is.
Not just for player themselves but need to relocate, kids to new schools etc

PS, yes they do have a short period in the game but that's the case with plenty of other sports, apart from NRL I can't think of any other codes where you can sign with another team so far in advance.

Bort, not sure why it can't be done post season like in the AFL. I don't buy the "we need time to relocate" thing. Happens at short notice all the time in the business world and other sports.

 

[bort]

PS, yes they do have a short period in the game but that's the case with plenty of other sports, apart from NRL I can't think of any other codes where you can sign with another team so far in advance.

Bort, not sure why it can't be done post season like in the AFL. I don't buy the "we need time to relocate" thing. Happens at short notice all the time in the business world and other sports.

November is post season, so I guess you mean literally after their entire contract has expired and they have like 1-2 months to sort something before pre-season starts?

Where it happens in other sports just says they have worse player associations to me. 'The business world' is pretty different to the professional sports world.

Just because you don't buy the "we need time to relocate" thing doesn't mean it is an unreasonable thing for the players to want.
If someone were going to relocate to another state and need to get somewhere to live and sort school for kids etc on average I think most would rather 9 months notice than 1 months notice.

 

[HaroldBishop]

November is post season, so I guess you mean literally after their entire contract has expired and they have like 1-2 months to sort something before pre-season starts?

Where it happens in other sports just says they have worse player associations to me. 'The business world' is pretty different to the professional sports world.

Just because you don't buy the "we need time to relocate" thing doesn't mean it is an unreasonable thing for the players to want.
If someone were going to relocate to another state and need to get somewhere to live and sort school for kids etc on average I think most would rather 9 months notice than 1 months notice.

Why is the business world different?

I don't see why the NRL is different to literally every other code.

 

[bort]

Why is the business world different?

The NRL is substantially different to the average 'business world' (which has many substantially different structures within it which are not required to match either)

When was the last time a banker did a preseason where he just practice banked for like 3-4 months of every year?
What percentage of other jobs is there not just a cap on franchises but each franchise has an exact number of employees they need to have with a strict wage structure? You even have to get that number of employees if you don't want some and have no need for them.

Many 'business world' jobs you can just interview for a new job whenever you want and if you get it you hand in a notice and as little as a couple of weeks later you take up a new opportunity. You can't do that in NRL either (unless you cry homesick I guess). Yes in that case you are opting to give yourself not much time, you can opt to do that in NRL too.

There wouldn't be many situations in business world where your contract ends and you aren't allowed to even try and get a new one before that.

The differences are countless, why should one of the 'similarities' be you can only get a new job after your other contract has completely expired.

I don't see why the NRL is different to literally every other code.

Loads of the rules are different from other codes.
I'm not sure literally every other code has a blanket ban on players signing a future contract while they still have one but even if they did doesn't mean NRL has to do it.

 

[Wiz]

With Allan, Flanju, Jackson & Thompson currently off (based on ZT numbers) that opens up 2.35m
Three of those players start for them though so even with replacements from within they will use up a bit of that money.

Not 'back ended' necessarily but wouldn't surprise me if Kikau and Reed were on a little more for later years than in their first year to help afford transitioning them into the team.
You'd think it's not possible for them to make a play for a Hunt or Munster unless they shook off TPJ without paying much towards him.

They have built up a pretty decent side for next year, but they still have two spine weaknesses and you really don't want more than 1
and bench is a bit weak... and a few positions appear to get shallow very fast

Averillo
JAC
Schoupp
Burns/Alamoti
Kiraz
Burton
Flanju
Thompson
Mahoney
TPJ/King
Kikau
Jackson
Sutton/RFM

King/TPJ
RFM/Sutton
Seumanufagai/Patolo
Topine*/Waddell

Left edge of JAC, centre, Kikau, Burton should be strong

That backline is ass

 

[HaroldBishop]

The NRL is

The NRL is substantially different to the average 'business world' (which has many substantially different structures within it which are not required to match either)

When was the last time a banker did a preseason where he just practice banked for like 3-4 months of every year?
What percentage of other jobs is there not just a cap on franchises but each franchise has an exact number of employees they need to have with a strict wage structure? You even have to get that number of employees if you don't want some and have no need for them.

Many 'business world' jobs you can just interview for a new job whenever you want and if you get it you hand in a notice and as little as a couple of weeks later you take up a new opportunity. You can't do that in NRL either (unless you cry homesick I guess). Yes in that case you are opting to give yourself not much time, you can opt to do that in NRL too.

There wouldn't be many situations in business world where your contract ends and you aren't allowed to even try and get a new one before that.

The differences are countless, why should one of the 'similarities' be you can only get a new job after your other contract has completely expired.




Loads of the rules are different from other codes.
I'm not sure literally every other code has a blanket ban on players signing a future contract while they still have one but even if they did doesn't mean NRL has to do it.

Yes fair call on the end of season timeframe but it's not great the way it is now, pretty sure most NRL fans would agree with that. Watching someone play for your team for an entire season knowing they've signed somewhere else stinks. I think the NRL has put it in the 'too hard basket' even though other codes do it differently.

The bold bit is exactly what I'm saying in regards to not needing a huge amount of time to relocate, it's a bullshit excuse.

 

[Gumby]

Ye

That backline is ass

Yep

 

[Sparkles]

PS, yes they do have a short period in the game but that's the case with plenty of other sports, apart from NRL I can't think of any other codes where you can sign with another team so far in advance.

Bort, not sure why it can't be done post season like in the AFL. I don't buy the "we need time to relocate" thing. Happens at short notice all the time in the business world and other sports.

Yeah ideally it'd be like halfway through last season of contract but from round 1 of it would also sit fine with me.

I totally understand from player (and unfortunately manager) perspective it is best to do it at least as far out as it is.
Not just for player themselves but need to relocate, kids to new schools etc

...and the rest...
The problems start when the lines get blurred between the businesss and the product. The business looks after the NRL, players, fans and clubs (probably in that order). The product should look after the fans first. Now we're seeing the business mess with the product in a big way. Players moving clubs all through the season, signing and backflipping, barely disguised favouratism... then you've got the rules changes to protect the business. The judicuary has dissapeared up it's own courtroom and the media push narratives that break players and clubs.

Then the Dolphins... who are a complete contradiction.

There's no consistency, clarity or long term plan (that we are allowed to see at least). And that's super frustrating for everyone, who are just pieces being pushed around the board for the sake of growing and protecting the NRL.

No matter how much the media (with their vested interest) beat up that it's the best footy we've ever seen, there's a growing crowd saying that it's in a poor place and heading in a worse direction.

 

[bort]

...and the rest...
The problems start when the lines get blurred between the businesss and the product. The business looks after the NRL, players, fans and clubs (probably in that order). The product should look after the fans first. Now we're seeing the business mess with the product in a big way. Players moving clubs all through the season, signing and backflipping, barely disguised favouratism... then you've got the rules changes to protect the business. The judicuary has dissapeared up it's own courtroom and the media push narratives that break players and clubs.

Then the Dolphins... who are a complete contradiction.

There's no consistency, clarity or long term plan (that we are allowed to see at least). And that's super frustrating for everyone, who are just pieces being pushed around the board for the sake of growing and protecting the NRL.

No matter how much the media (with their vested interest) beat up that it's the best footy we've ever seen, there's a growing crowd saying that it's in a poor place and heading in a worse direction.

Fair

I guess as the consumer of the product how upset I am that the players may have more rights than some in other sports is up to me. I like that it's the case as the outcome for them, not as the outcome for me though. But I can accept those who are the key to the product being looked after.

As Sharks fans how is our product currently diminished by players being able to sign elsewhere a year out? I don't think it is.
After November there may be some movement but even then to an extent if player keeps playing well for us then it is just future disappointment you know about for longer. Same as we had future excitement of McInnes for longer*.

The examples of contract issues we've had at Sharks that spring to mind are Chad signing away and then we dropped him. I think he would have kept trying for us, not like we excelled without him. And Jimmy Maloney who wasn't eligible to sign elsewhere and still managed to be a raging tosser about his contract situation.

I think in the scheme of things the current negotiating deadline is a very minimal issue. I'd rather see the MRC/judiciary mess cleaned up and less howlers from the bunker.

*good chance if we don't sign McInnes when we did we never do, due to injury and coaching change. He certainly wouldn't have made us less attractive to Fitz/Finucane/Hynes... maybe a very good thing we signed him so early,..

 

[Sparkles]

Fair

I guess as the consumer of the product how upset I am that the players may have more rights than some in other sports is up to me. I like that it's the case as the outcome for them, not as the outcome for me though. But I can accept those who are the key to the product being looked after.

As Sharks fans how is our product currently diminished by players being able to sign elsewhere a year out? I don't think it is.
After November there may be some movement but even then to an extent if player keeps playing well for us then it is just future disappointment you know about for longer. Same as we had future excitement of McInnes for longer*.

The examples of contract issues we've had at Sharks that spring to mind are Chad signing away and then we dropped him. I think he would have kept trying for us, not like we excelled without him. And Jimmy Maloney who wasn't eligible to sign elsewhere and still managed to be a raging tosser about his contract situation.

I think in the scheme of things the current negotiating deadline is a very minimal issue. I'd rather see the MRC/judiciary mess cleaned up and less howlers from the bunker.

*good chance if we don't sign McInnes when we did we never do, due to injury and coaching change. He certainly wouldn't have made us less attractive to Fitz/Finucane/Hynes... maybe a very good thing we signed him so early,..

I'd agree in the scheme of things the player signing window probably wouldn't make a difference as to who went where. And there's probably not that many people who care all that much about it these days anyway... but I want MY team to win. Not a bunch of mercenaries who move around every year. It's a bit of old school thinking I suppose.

I'm really pleased we seem to have a culture where players are looking to stay together. It's easier to keep them together when they've played together for years in the reggies, and I'd take them and their shortcomings over signing the next shiny thing any old day.

(Except for Dale, who's always really been a Shark. You can tell.)

 

[bort]

I'd agree in the scheme of things the player signing window probably wouldn't make a difference as to who went where. And there's probably not that many people who care all that much about it these days anyway... but I want MY team to win. Not a bunch of mercenaries who move around every year. It's a bit of old school thinking I suppose.

I'm really pleased we seem to have a culture where players are looking to stay together. It's easier to keep them together when they've played together for years in the reggies, and I'd take them and their shortcomings over signing the next shiny thing any old day.

(Except for Dale, who's always really been a Shark. You can tell.)

Yep, you make a good team and you will retain good players.
But I don't mind attracting good players too.

I think we can get Dale, Nicho and even McInnes all remembered as Sharks!
You'd rather sign guys like them who come because they like what you are doing than the bloke your **** club threw 1 million at when he was in good form at the end of the year over a season ago...

 

[Gumby]

Brett White is the new assistant coach for the Titans

 

[egg]

Brett White is the new assistant coach for the Titans

Tigers get the bloke they axed ?

 

[Sparkles]

Yep, you make a good team and you will retain good players.
But I don't mind attracting good players too.

I think we can get Dale, Nicho and even McInnes all remembered as Sharks!
You'd rather sign guys like them who come because they like what you are doing than the bloke your **** club threw 1 million at when he was in good form at the end of the year over a season ago...

Don't get me wrong, I like the odd mercenary, especially if they're holding a grudge... Like Ennis