Nathan brown- MANLY COACH

[love my saints]

Thanks Peter

Mate iv actually got "real" contacts in the NRL. For you to claim your mate from the NRL said what you claimed he said is rubbish.
And when caught out look at how you respond, hahaha its laughable at.
im not sticking up for Doust, im simply stating FACTS, you claim the NRL will be calling in the loans? I say they wont.
Lets see who is more on the money with inside info. Keep making up false stories to try and de-stabalise our club.
Pitty to see we have supporters like yourself following our club. Making up false stories just to enable you to continue having pot shots at the CEO and the board.
No-one is happy with them, but to scoop that low as fo claim you have "a mate at the NRL", budddy i doubt you have any mates period!!! Our club is badly run, we all know that, but to add lies to strengthen your point is really sad.
Remember, Peter Doust is still CEO, and Mary is still coach, with those thoughts go and have a good weekend hahahaha.

 

[TonyT6]

Mate iv actually got "real" contacts in the NRL. For you to claim your mate from the NRL said what you claimed he said is rubbish.
And when caught out look at how you respond, hahaha its laughable at.
im not sticking up for Doust, im simply stating FACTS, you claim the NRL will be calling in the loans? I say they wont.
Lets see who is more on the money with inside info. Keep making up false stories to try and de-stabalise our club.
Pitty to see we have supporters like yourself following our club. Making up false stories just to enable you to continue having pot shots at the CEO and the board.
No-one is happy with them, but to scoop that low as fo claim you have "a mate at the NRL", budddy i doubt you have any mates period!!! Our club is badly run, we all know that, but to add lies to strengthen your point is really sad.
Remember, Peter Doust is still CEO, and Mary is still coach, with those thoughts go and have a good weekend hahahaha.

No lies or false claims at all, let's just see how it pans out.

 

[bottle]

We have 6 centres, Neilsen, Farrell, aitken, matatuia, runciman, gerrard tuamavei. 5 halves in marshal, widdop, henry, crook, Hutchison. 4 hookers in rein, lestrange, keating and garvey. A plethora of second rowers.

Do we really need 6 centres, 5 halves and 4 hookers? talk about an unbalanced roster. Don't think Nathan Brown would be managing our roster like it currently is.

The fans would have to make a lot of noise before the nrl take over. And if they do, be prepared to play home games out of homebush. Compromises need to be made if we all want a successful footy team.

What would be your squad make up keeping in mind depth is required to cover injuries and the like?

 

[Get2dachopper!]

What would be your squad make up keeping in mind depth is required to cover injuries and the like?

No Neilsen, Wakeman, Henry, Green is a start. That's at least 350k saving to throw towards a forward. I also would have only picked up either Keating or Le'Strange, both are not needed. Quinlan to Parra should have resulted in a swap with a prop. Ditto with Morris. No ifs or buts.

The roosters, souths or bulldogs don't have 6 or so centres, 4-5 halves or 3 hookers, most with first grade experience.

The main point is, the competitive teams have a cap that is more centralised, whilst ours is more spread out.

 

[bottle]

The main point is, the competitive teams have a cap that is more centralised, whilst ours is more spread out.

You keep saying this but it's simply not true. The cap applies to, and only to, the nominated top 25 for every club.

 

[Mr Red]

You keep saying this but it's simply not true. The cap applies to, and only to, the nominated top 25 for every club.

I think his point is looking at the top 25 most clubs invest heavily in the top 11 to 13 and then gamble on some youngsters or fringe first graders to step up and make up the rest of the 25.
This is a risk most clubs will take... If you have a relatively injury free year you'll go close to winning the Competition, however a few injuries to key players and you might have a tough season.
Dragons logic is very different , they aren't willing to take this risk so they invest more evenly in talent across the whole 25. The result is you have more depth to cover for injuries, however the overall talent of your top 11 to 13 players isn't as good as the rest of the teams, therefore not giving yourself a chance to win the comp at all..

 

[Get2dachopper!]

You keep saying this but it's simply not true. The cap applies to, and only to, the nominated top 25 for every club.

Yes I know. And the NRL gives every club 5.5 million for the top 25 players. Clubs can then spend 400k on other players outside the top 25 who may play nrl during the year.

http://www.nrl.com/nrlhq/referencecentre/salarycap/tabid/10434/default.aspx

The nrl website doesn't make it clear about this 400k, but I'm assuming it's at the clubs expense.

So, going back to some of my earlier posts, in particular our player listings on the Dragons websites which shows 36 players in our squad, it's evident that we are spreading out our 5.5 million over a greater number of players than other clubs.

 

[Get2dachopper!]

I think his point is looking at the top 25 most clubs invest heavily in the top 11 to 13 and then gamble on some youngsters or fringe first graders to step up and make up the rest of the 25.
This is a risk most clubs will take... If you have a relatively injury free year you'll go close to winning the Competition, however a few injuries to key players and you might have a tough season.
Dragons logic is very different , they aren't willing to take this risk so they invest more evenly in talent across the whole 25. The result is you have more depth to cover for injuries, however the overall talent of your top 11 to 13 players isn't as good as the rest of the teams, therefore not giving yourself a chance to win the comp at all..

Thank you Mr Red, at least someone understands my point. Umm, does this mean I'm part of the NFI crew? :lol:

 

[BennyV]

Thank you Mr Red, at least someone understands my point. Umm, does this mean I'm part of the NFI crew? :lol:

Yes. Prepare to be constantly 'put in you're place' and 'made to look stoopid'...

On the rest of it, I think this 'spreading' of the salary cap is now a necessity following the high payment of relative plodders like Hunt, Rein, Beale and so on.

 

[bottle]

I think his point is looking at the top 25 most clubs invest heavily in the top 11 to 13 and then gamble on some youngsters or fringe first graders to step up and make up the rest of the 25.
This is a risk most clubs will take... If you have a relatively injury free year you'll go close to winning the Competition, however a few injuries to key players and you might have a tough season.
Dragons logic is very different , they aren't willing to take this risk so they invest more evenly in talent across the whole 25. The result is you have more depth to cover for injuries, however the overall talent of your top 11 to 13 players isn't as good as the rest of the teams, therefore not giving yourself a chance to win the comp at all..

Red, your post I get. This however is different.

So, going back to some of my earlier posts, in particular our player listings on the Dragons websites which shows 36 players in our squad, it's evident that we are spreading out our 5.5 million over a greater number of players than other clubs.

And incorrect. It's not a greater number of players, it's the top 25.
Am I missing something? I don't think I'm that stupid but I'm happy to be shown otherwise.

 

[Get2dachopper!]

Red, your post I get. This however is different.


And incorrect. It's not a greater number of players, it's the top 25.
Am I missing something? I don't think I'm that stupid but I'm happy to be shown otherwise.

You're not stupid!

I'm looking at our website, it clearly has 36 players listed. Do you know who exactly makes up our top 25 squad?

I'm thinking the nrl hands over the 5.5 million and its up to the clubs discretion to spend it on the 'top 25' or to stretch it further and spend it on more than 25 players, especially for clubs that are doing it tough financially.

 

[bottle]

You're not stupid!

I'm looking at our website, it clearly has 36 players listed. Do you know who exactly makes up our top 25 squad?

I'm thinking the nrl hands over the 5.5 million and its up to the clubs discretion to spend it on the 'top 25' or to stretch it further and spend it on more than 25 players, especially for clubs that are doing it tough financially.

No mate that's wrong, absolutely. The top tier cap applies to, and only to, the top 25 players. I'm sure the others will back me up on that.
I have no idea what makes up our definitive top 25 though. The others are funded by 2nd tier cap as you say. Not sure if there is a number limit on that.

 

[The Damo]

This is my understanding. That 5.5 mill is for the nominated top 25. And given our known issues managing the cap, we must be spending all of that on the top squad. Which of those 36 is the nominated top 25 I don't know. The issue as BennyV says is that too much of the cap is tied up paying hunt and other plodders so we have to have more of the squad as minimum wage earners.

 

[Jubileeboy]

I think his point is looking at the top 25 most clubs invest heavily in the top 11 to 13 and then gamble on some youngsters or fringe first graders to step up and make up the rest of the 25.
This is a risk most clubs will take... If you have a relatively injury free year you'll go close to winning the Competition, however a few injuries to key players and you might have a tough season.
Dragons logic is very different , they aren't willing to take this risk so they invest more evenly in talent across the whole 25. The result is you have more depth to cover for injuries, however the overall talent of your top 11 to 13 players isn't as good as the rest of the teams, therefore not giving yourself a chance to win the comp at all..

So you agree that if a few of your heavily invested 11-13 top players at other clubs get injured, they won't win it either? Would that , by your logic, mean that when other teams lose those 'heavily invested' top players, that Dragons would be better equipped by having more above average squad members? Therefore not really giving those other teams a chance to win the comp?
Have you just started following the game? I'm confused as to how you know what Dragons logic is and the player payments across the NRL that support your claims.

 

[Get2dachopper!]

This is my understanding. That 5.5 mill is for the nominated top 25. And given our known issues managing the cap, we must be spending all of that on the top squad. Which of those 36 is the nominated top 25 I don't know. The issue as BennyV says is that too much of the cap is tied up paying hunt and other plodders so we have to have more of the squad as minimum wage earners.

So everyone thinks we are spending 5.5 mil on the top 25, whomever they are. And a measly 400k on the other 11 players. Doesn't add up to me.

I think that the dragons are using some of the 5.5 million top tier salary cap money to help fund the other 11 players. My point is that it's been very poorly managed, with unnecessary depth in some positions in the squad and not enought quality in other positions.

 

[Jubileeboy]

So everyone thinks we are spending 5.5 mil on the top 25, whomever they are. And a measly 400k on the other 11 players. Doesn't add up to me.

I think that the dragons are using some of the 5.5 million top tier salary cap money to help fund the other 11 players. My point is that it's been very poorly managed, with unnecessary depth in some positions in the squad and not enought quality in other positions.

You can not use that money elsewhere, it can only be spent on the top 25 nominated NRL players.
The Cutters would also be contributing towards players not in our 2nd tier and is dependant upon who they are contracted with....Cutters or Dragons.
It doesn't mean we have to spend it all, or that it is currently being spent on this years existing players.
It could also be that contracts are front loaded for some or back ended for others. We may not be spending our entire cap on those 25 players and would seem we are front loading a few for the next year or two. We got some bargain priced depth players this year.

 

[Mr Red]

So you agree that if a few of your heavily invested 11-13 top players at other clubs get injured, they won't win it either? Would that , by your logic, mean that when other teams lose those 'heavily invested' top players, that Dragons would be better equipped by having more above average squad members? Therefore not really giving those other teams a chance to win the comp?
Have you just started following the game? I'm confused as to how you know what Dragons logic is and the player payments across the NRL that support your claims.

Dumbest post of the year...but very much what I expect from you....and your wait and see approach
Yes let's just wait and see if the top 5 or 6 teams ALL have injuries to key players ALL at the same time in order to allow the dragons mediocre roster a chance at the comp...nice
The likelyhood of that scenario is close to zero..
Are you Steven Bradbury by any chance???? Waiting for the other teams to all fall over in order for the dragons to have a chance..... :roll:

 

[Jubileeboy]

Dumbest post of the year...but very much what I expect from you....and your wait and see approach
Yes let's just wait and see if the top 5 or 6 teams ALL have injuries to key players ALL at the same time in order to allow the dragons mediocre roster a chance at the comp...nice
The likelyhood of that scenario is close to zero..
Are you Steven Bradbury by any chance???? Waiting for the other teams to all fall over in order for the dragons to have a chance..... :roll:

Funny you mention Bradbury as even he's had more success than you do with your speculative posts. I really have zero concern about your thoughts on my posts, so I won't stoop to your low level of maturity or understanding but your previous one with your explanation, wild guessing and 'logic' on how things work is right up there and wasn't sure if it was meant to be funny?
I suppose this is why the experts are given their role and you and I do what ever it is we do.
Now tell me where I have offered a wait and see approach or did you just make that up as well?
To win a comp really needs the equivalent of the stars aligning at the right time. There are so many contributing factors. Do you honestly believe we target average players to recruit? That we would prefer an Ah Mau over a Scott? A Farrell over a Hodges ? Where is the 'logic' in that?
The salary cap is no longer relevant with TPA's blowing some clubs away but in previous years it has been extremely difficult to manage and we are now behind the 8 ball (did you notice my acknowledgement of poor salary cap management there? Which is different to a salary cap crisis and claims from some of overspending). Mulholland will make amends to balancing our squad and the casualties of this were Morris, Merrin and their higher demands. Good luck to them.
And to keep everyone happy, thank you for your opinion

 

[love my saints]

Funny you mention Bradbury as even he's had more success than you do with your speculative posts. I really have zero concern about your thoughts on my posts, so I won't stoop to your low level of maturity or understanding but your previous one with your explanation, wild guessing and 'logic' on how things work is right up there and wasn't sure if it was meant to be funny?
I suppose this is why the experts are given their role and you and I do what ever it is we do.
Now tell me where I have offered a wait and see approach or did you just make that up as well?
To win a comp really needs the equivalent of the stars aligning at the right time. There are so many contributing factors. Do you honestly believe we target average players to recruit? That we would prefer an Ah Mau over a Scott? A Farrell over a Hodges ? Where is the 'logic' in that?
The salary cap is no longer relevant with TPA's blowing some clubs away but in previous years it has been extremely difficult to manage and we are now behind the 8 ball (did you notice my acknowledgement of poor salary cap management there? Which is different to a salary cap crisis and claims from some of overspending). Mulholland will make amends to balancing our squad and the casualties of this were Morris, Merrin and their higher demands. Good luck to them.
And to keep everyone happy, thank you for your opinion

Couldnt agree more. Well said and very true.

 

[BankstownDragon]

I think his point is looking at the top 25 most clubs invest heavily in the top 11 to 13 and then gamble on some youngsters or fringe first graders to step up and make up the rest of the 25.
This is a risk most clubs will take... If you have a relatively injury free year you'll go close to winning the Competition, however a few injuries to key players and you might have a tough season.
Dragons logic is very different , they aren't willing to take this risk so they invest more evenly in talent across the whole 25. The result is you have more depth to cover for injuries, however the overall talent of your top 11 to 13 players isn't as good as the rest of the teams, therefore not giving yourself a chance to win the comp at all..

Red,

We obviously all are not privi to inside information, to know what our board are thinking planning ect...

But this IMHO seems the most spot on assessment of our conservative style of management with reference to player recruitment and retention. I think it has been like this since 1999 when Doust took over Brain Johnson (correct me if I'm wrong with time line on this).

99 times out of 100, if any off contract players gets offered more elsewhere consider them gone if they are a Dragons player of any note. I know this happens everywhere, but again with us its almost a given, as management seem to think anyone can be replaced.