Official Signings, Transfers & Recruitment Discussion 2026

Bundy Shark said:
My initial answer would have been for sure but unfortunately for FB’s, there are lots of decent ones around for clubs to hold the upper hand & dictate price once all the very elite ones get snapped up.
I won’t count PNG as they aren’t a factor for next season, the only clubs I could see who might take a punt on him are coincidentally, clubs he has previously played for, Dragons & Dogs, Perth might offer him a contract?
Click to expand...
He's a good option for anyone who either
-doesn't have a locked in starter next season (Perth)
-has a rep fullback and no established backup (Broncos, Panthers, Roosters if they thought Rex B wasn't ready)
 
bort said:
He's a good option for anyone who either
-doesn't have a locked in starter next season (Perth)
-has a rep fullback and no established backup (Broncos, Panthers, Roosters if they thought Rex B wasn't ready)
Click to expand...
Yeah, not sure what Broncos or Panthers have next up but I think the Roosters would probably look to either Garrick or Ramsey as their next back up (if Rex isn’t ready for 27)
 
bort said:
Hooper reckons we offered Blayke 650k last time we extended him, and that he didn't think it'd be enough. Perhaps we came to the table to the tune of another 100-200k, probably not +50% on our first offer though, I wouldn't think.

His value has gone up since then, and the question was what would you pay them right now, so yeah, you can probably convince me.
Hopefully on more like the 750-850k range. That will ratchet him over the million soon anyway.


We don't want it against the Sharks cap so can you please contact him directly and arrange to send it yourself
Click to expand...
I just remember heaps of talk that he could fetch $1m, and Sam saying if it wasn't it would be trending in that direction. I'd be pleasantly surprised if it wasn't at least 850k.
 
Bundy Shark said:
Yeah, not sure what Broncos or Panthers have next up but I think the Roosters would probably look to either Garrick or Ramsey as their next back up (if Rex isn’t ready for 27)
Click to expand...
Good point, forgot about Garrick. I was thinking they'd run Ramsey once and Rex once so not convinced by either but double checked and was just one game without Teddy, Ramsey played FB, Rex wing. So yeah, between those three, probably fine. Especially with teddy being far from guaranteed another SOO unless he stars in a win tonight.
 
Sharksby40 said:
I just remember heaps of talk that he could fetch $1m, and Sam saying if it wasn't it would be trending in that direction. I'd be pleasantly surprised if it wasn't at least 850k.
Click to expand...
The hooper article that said we first offered 650 said other teams like Perth might be willing to pay a million.
He re-signed before Perth could even make a bid, I don't think we were ever competing against that amount.
Supposedly on 500k before this deal so whatever he's on, was a good bump up. With a bit of home grown loyalty that sort of 750-850 would be my guess but who knows.
 
Xavier Willison set to sign a 3 year deal with the Donkeys. Choosing not to go to the open market so must be a pretty good offer they've made to him.
 
Not sure if its been mentioned but Ben Te Kura (Donkeys) was released from his contract last month to chase an NFL contract in the US. Apparently there are a few clubs who are looking at him already.
 
Gumby said:
Xavier Willison set to sign a 3 year deal with the Donkeys. Choosing not to go to the open market so must be a pretty good offer they've made to him.
Click to expand...
Yeah, 950k feels like big money, but I'm assuming that might be under the new cap, rather than something that's going to ratchet up to 1.5m. Otherwise it feels like a pretty crazy jump.
 
Sharksby40 said:
Yeah, 950k feels like big money, but I'm assuming that might be under the new cap, rather than something that's going to ratchet up to 1.5m. Otherwise it feels like a pretty crazy jump.
Click to expand...
That's crazy money for him. He's a good player and only going to get better, but right now he isn't worth that imo.
 
Sharksby40 said:
Yeah, 950k feels like big money, but I'm assuming that might be under the new cap, rather than something that's going to ratchet up to 1.5m. Otherwise it feels like a pretty crazy jump.
Click to expand...
A lot of people talking about signings as under a new cap or the old cap. Surely teams can only sign someone to the known cap?

The ratchet is supposed to be standard so a player would have to agree to have it taken out of their contract. I'd be surprised if many would agree to that especially with such a big % increase on the horizon. I would assume the standard clause stays in the vast majority of contracts.

Xavier has been playing well for them and they are losing Haas. He is very valuable to them right now. (even with much older Barnett coming)
It would definitely be on the high side at 950+ratchet but the bloke is 23, so they are paying for more upside still to come.
Two years from now he could easily be punching out better games than AFB we are paying something like 1.6m to.

Everyone in the NRL might be about to get a crazy jump in salary.
 
bort said:
A lot of people talking about signings as under a new cap or the old cap. Surely teams can only sign someone to the known cap?

The ratchet is supposed to be standard so a player would have to agree to have it taken out of their contract. I'd be surprised if many would agree to that especially with such a big % increase on the horizon. I would assume the standard clause stays in the vast majority of contracts.

Xavier has been playing well for them and they are losing Haas. He is very valuable to them right now. (even with much older Barnett coming)
It would definitely be on the high side at 950+ratchet but the bloke is 23, so they are paying for more upside still to come.
Two years from now he could easily be punching out better games than AFB we are paying something like 1.6m to.

Everyone in the NRL might be about to get a crazy jump in salary.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's not unfair I guess, he has been brilliant for them, I just wasn't expecting that large a contract so quickly.
 
bort said:
A lot of people talking about signings as under a new cap or the old cap. Surely teams can only sign someone to the known cap?
Click to expand...
You sign them to a contract starting on a specific date. i.e. 1 November 2027 for the 2028 season. It's up to teams to manage their cap year to year. Some teams are more conservative and wait for the real cap number and others don't.

In practice I think these numbers that get floated round would be current + assumed rise/ratchet. I expect the contracts have some clauses for re-negotiation if the rise is way off the mark or something.

Ratchet is not just mandated by the PA. It's mandated by the league, so if they have another covid-type situation everyone goes down.
 
Sharks NRL Prospects said:
You sign them to a contract starting on a specific date. i.e. 1 November 2027 for the 2028 season. It's up to teams to manage their cap year to year. Some teams are more conservative and wait for the real cap number and others don't.

In practice I think these numbers that get floated round would be current + assumed rise/ratchet. I expect the contracts have some clauses for re-negotiation if the rise is way off the mark or something.

Ratchet is not just mandated by the PA. It's mandated by the league, so if they have another covid-type situation everyone goes down.
Click to expand...
It's probably more a media problem than anything but you can't offer someone 950k new cap money, before a cap has been confirmed.
Like you say, maybe it's 650k+ ratchet for anything cap does from the point of signing and the media just take a guess so they have a good number to spruik.

A 'minimum' clause would be an interesting addition, and perhaps gives the media a number they behind the scenes, like he has signed 750K ratchet, with 950 minimum guaranteed, so they can comfortably report 950?
Who knows though, you never know the validity of these numbers, players always say they are incorrect*, and the media just do whatever gets clicks.

Is the ratchet definitely 'mandated'? or just included as standard?
Obviously if a club removed a bunch of them they'd be ****ed if covid2.0 saw the cap slashed, so they would almost never remove it, as it's not really in players interest either.

*I'm sure some are being a bit facetious "I didn't get paid anywhere near that" and leaving off stuff like after my managers cut and tax.
 
bort said:
It's probably more a media problem than anything but you can't offer someone 950k new cap money, before a cap has been confirmed.
Like you say, maybe it's 650k+ ratchet for anything cap does from the point of signing and the media just take a guess so they have a good number to spruik.

A 'minimum' clause would be an interesting addition, and perhaps gives the media a number they behind the scenes, like he has signed 750K ratchet, with 950 minimum guaranteed, so they can comfortably report 950?
Who knows though, you never know the validity of these numbers, players always say they are incorrect*, and the media just do whatever gets clicks.

Is the ratchet definitely 'mandated'? or just included as standard?
Obviously if a club removed a bunch of them they'd be ****ed if covid2.0 saw the cap slashed, so they would almost never remove it, as it's not really in players interest either.

*I'm sure some are being a bit facetious "I didn't get paid anywhere near that" and leaving off stuff like after my managers cut and tax.
Click to expand...
Yeah agree with all this. Probably some of the totals are including TPA’s too - or just made up.

The report I saw quoted someone saying the league has mandated the ratchet. That could mean it’s “opt out”. Just guessing at language.
 
Sharks NRL Prospects said:
Yeah agree with all this. Probably some of the totals are including TPA’s too - or just made up.

The report I saw quoted someone saying the league has mandated the ratchet. That could mean it’s “opt out”. Just guessing at language.
Click to expand...
Yeah I'm sure I'd seen 'included as standard' which would allow for negotiating out but I doubt very many would.
Any circumstance a player would feel that was especially beneficial for them just endangers the club even more if the cap did drop.

More likely to be 'edited' such as is thrown around with Dearden.
 
bort said:
Yeah I'm sure I'd seen 'included as standard' which would allow for negotiating out but I doubt very many would.
Any circumstance a player would feel that was especially beneficial for them just endangers the club even more if the cap did drop.

More likely to be 'edited' such as is thrown around with Dearden.
Click to expand...
Yeah. This was the DCE deal back in the day too. Effectively “ratchet-only” but a big ratchet. More like a Stilson clause.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top