What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Rumoured signings 2014 / 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nice Beaver

First Grade
Messages
5,920
Jackson was in the Knights system for 1 year before joining the Bulldogs who then spent the next 2 and a half years developing him before he got a crack at first grade

What did the Bulldogs pay him though compared to what the Knights could offer?
 

macavity

Referee
Messages
21,142
Jackson was in the Knights system for 1 year before joining the Bulldogs who then spent the next 2 and a half years developing him before he got a crack at first grade

Yes, he was with the Knights before he was poached by the Dogs.
 

Joker's Wild

Coach
Messages
17,894
Different question. I said the last time Raiders are a different bread.

Panthers have had a HUGE amount of purchased players. Hell most of their line up is now bought. Some highly wanted like Sega, Taylor, Sika etc.

Cowboys not so much, though still Tate, Winterstein, Linnentt, Moga.

Just off the top of my head. Cowboys aren't a team who I think poach a lot. That is likely because their cap is heavily tied up between a few players.

None of which are superstars which i believe was Nicks point
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
12,610
Fwiw as good as Scott and Smith have been for the knights, they were both signed past their prime. They were and still are good players but they are also clearly on the downside of their careers but my point was that these clubs aren't able to go out and poach the next big thing from another clubs books, small markets aren't built that way under the current laws, and if they can't sign the next big thing, the NRL is IMO, if it values parity like it claims to, obliged to help them keep their home grown and developed next big things

Boyd was in his prime but there are mitigating circumstances around that, he simply follows who is essentially his father, nothing to do with the club. Boyd would follow Bennett to Syberia if he had too

Gagai got sacked, he was still sought after but had he never been sacked, he is probably a Bronco till this day, so I don't really include him either
 

Noname36

First Grade
Messages
7,067
I think the last lot is a very fair comment.

That said the Jackson one is off the mark and again guys like Jackson, Finucane, Lafai, Klemmer, Reynolds, Mbye etc show we are producing talent. Even kids like Sezer, Carter and Burr now at other clubs still show this.

I don't see South fans calling Isaac Luke a bulldog product when he was with us and signed by them. It is what it is.

That's the thing though. 10 years ago the juniors the Dogs were bringing through were Thurston, SBW, Myles and Mason. These days they're bringing through blokes like Finucane and Klemmer. The only one I'd say is comparable to the first group is Barba but from what I understand the Dogs had very little to do with him before u20s anyway and most of that was just natural talent. You're being delusional if you don't think the Dogs focus much less on junior development and more on using big dollars to poach other players these days.

The fact that their NYC side won 3 games this year is proof of that. No side with the Dog's resources and catchment area should have junior sides winning 3 games all year.

That's another thing too. I understand some clubs (i.e. the Roosters) don't have much of a catchment area, but the Bankstown area is still very much a league heartland and there's a lot of clubs out there. Yet, very few of the juniors the Dogs are bringing through are local juniors (hence my comment about Jackson). They don't appear to be investing in their catchment area at all.
 
Last edited:

TheViking

Juniors
Messages
335
Fwiw as good as Scott and Smith have been for the knights, they were both signed past their prime. They were and still are good players but they are also clearly on the downside of their careers but my point was that these clubs aren't able to go out and poach the next big thing from another clubs books, small markets aren't built that way under the current laws, and if they can't sign the next big thing, the NRL is IMO, if it values parity like it claims to, obliged to help them keep their home grown and developed next big things

Boyd was in his prime but there are mitigating circumstances around that, he simply follows who is essentially his father, nothing to do with the club. Boyd would follow Bennett to Syberia if he had too

Gagai got sacked, he was still sought after but had he never been sacked, he is probably a Bronco till this day, so I don't really include him either

While I could grant Smith may of been on the decline, I can't Scott.

Even so Smith is and was heavily chased, he was and is a quality player still now. He absolutely was an outstanding an amazing buy. Scott exactly the same. Boyd you said enough yourself.

Gagai yes he was sacked, he was still heavily chased (including by the Dogs) in which the Knights won. He was a quality exciting young prospect. Which is what the question was. Not how they secured them being sacked, granted release or off contract. The fact is they have.

This it was Wayne crap is garbage. It doesn't matter.

I 100% agree with Raiders they are not really on this list at all. The last big name purchase I recall was Shillington? Maybe White?

Obviously tried and had Tedesco at some stage. Have signed some players from all over the shop for next year though hardly many. I think it comes more down to location the money. Ennis, Proctor etc all obviously thought about it.

Knights don't fall in this category as of the past few years!
 

TheViking

Juniors
Messages
335
That's the thing though. 10 years ago the juniors the Dogs were bringing through were Thurston, SBW, Myles and Mason. These days they're bringing through blokes like Finucane and Klemmer. The only one I'd say is comparable to the first group is Barba but from what I understand the Dogs had very little to do with him before u20s anyway and most of that was just natural talent. You're being delusional if you don't think the Dogs focus much less on junior development and more on using big dollars to poach other players these days.

The fact that their NYC side won 3 games this year is proof of that. No side with the Dog's resources and catchment area should have junior sides winning 3 games all year.

That's another thing too. I understand some clubs (i.e. the Roosters) don't have much of a catchment area, but the Bankstown area is still very much a league heartland and there's a lot of clubs out there. Yet, very few of the juniors the Dogs are bringing through are local juniors (hence my comment about Jackson). They don't appear to be investing in their catchment area at all.

Very fair comment, that said this could be more to do with lack of quality spotted. It was only a few years ago they had a very good preforming lower grade.

I have for a while questions what Crusher is up too. That said he clearly knows what he is doing, just not seen it yet for the Dogs.
 

eozsmiles

Bench
Messages
3,392
If we can't even keep our best juniors than we might as well pull all funding from junior reps and just throw paycheques around left right and centre. There's just absolute no reward at all for producing juniors

Salary cap is the same, they've got the same sized cheques.
 

eozsmiles

Bench
Messages
3,392
Have to say that people are pretty quick to say this M-Bros deal is all about the money. We don't even know if they have signed for bigger money. Playing under Hasler may well be better than Stone for your career. Playing outside the NSW halves might be better than the Mullen/Gidley show. Playing behind Klemmer, Jackson and co might be better than whoever the Knights have in 2016. If you were a 20 year old kid hoping to maximise your 10 year career, where would you go?

We also don't know if the Knights were going to sign 1 or 4 of them. Or whether that was an issue.

People have also said that the Knights supported their family by helping them get housing (a bit like when a club pays a player's parents rent to get around the salary cap) during tough times. That was part of a deal or a trade off. The families part of that bargain was to help win junior footy games. It's standard and happens at every club.
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
12,610
I dont really care what the ins and outs of it are. The knights have developed these kids, they have spent countless time, money and resources helping them get to where they are now, and they deserve to be rewarded for that investment by having these talented kids ply their trade for the Knights... and the system should be helping them do that.

Currently all the system does is help big market clubs use and abuse small markets clubs. But then i think that's exactly what the NRL wants
 

BennyV

Referee
Messages
26,026
Let's not all be naive.

Have to say that people are pretty quick to say this M-Bros deal is all about the money. We don't even know if they have signed for bigger money. Playing under Hasler may well be better than Stone for your career. Playing outside the NSW halves might be better than the Mullen/Gidley show. Playing behind Klemmer, Jackson and co might be better than whoever the Knights have in 2016. If you were a 20 year old kid hoping to maximise your 10 year career, where would you go?.

Anyone else see a whole lot of irony here?!
 

Parraren

Bench
Messages
4,100
The Knights have an experienced CEO in Matt Gidley backed up by Michael Hagan as head of football operations so I'm sure it will all work out in the end.
 

Billythekid

First Grade
Messages
6,977
I dont really care what the ins and outs of it are. The knights have developed these kids, they have spent countless time, money and resources helping them get to where they are now, and they deserve to be rewarded for that investment by having these talented kids ply their trade for the Knights... and the system should be helping them do that.

Currently all the system does is help big market clubs use and abuse small markets clubs. But then i think that's exactly what the NRL wants

The knights recruitment surely has to play a role in this, Bennett in particular should take some blame. If you're long term goal is to bring through these young players then surely poaching Boyd as your marquee player in the position these guys are going to fill isn't such a good idea.

Boyd is probably the knights highest payed player and is playing in the position i'm assuming one of the brothers is going to play in. You can't have everyone and at some point you have to make some hard choices.

Whose fault is it that the knights had locked down the positions that the brothers were being groomed to play in? You can't expect them to just wait around forever.

Which small clubs are the ones being hard done by out of interest? The Knights for all the complaining have still managed to do quite well for themselves over the years. Despite all the whining i think they're pretty well set up for the future too. The raiders are an obvious one and it's hard to argue but sh*t it's hard to have much sympathy when they do dome stuff like signing Campese to a lifetime contract. Raiders are run like absolute crap and that has played a big role in where they are now.

The cowboys are a small market club and they seem to be able to consistently stay competitive (in recent times anyway, although post Thurston will be interesting). It's hard to call any Sydney club a small market club really.

In general if you look at all the clubs that usually complain about things like this so much of it comes back to terrible management. Raiders, knights, tigers, parra are all examples of this. If you're club is run by incompetent people recruitment and retention becomes all that much harder.

The salary cap isn't a guarantee that every team will be competitive and be able to keep their juniors. There is still a responsibility on the clubs to run their club in a competent manner.

I agree with everyone saying that we should encourage juniors to stay with their clubs, it's one of the great things about the NRL. I don't want us to go down the road of other big sports where playing for your junior club just isn't a thing at all. I like the tribal nature of the game. I just think some of the blame is aimed at the wrong people and some of it is just misplaced.
 

super_coach

First Grade
Messages
5,061
Said it before teams need to have incentives to develope talent and clubs need to be discouraged from using a cheque book to get their talent. The game will die if teams are not willing to develope their feeder systems
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top