Rumoured and Confirmed signings - Part 4

[herbert henry1908]

I'm not sure its the "only" possibility but I think it likely Maloney is now in our plans for 2020, perhaps having told the club he's not going to the UK yet.

If it is the case, it’s worrying for a couple of reasons.

Firstly they spent Maloney’s money before being sure he was leaving, and secondly there’s basically very little money for any signings.

There might be some money in 2021.

 

[franklin2323]

Had to promote Naden to play him this weekend. Deserves it though.

And would of been cheap too

 

[InSucToSivE]

So peachy last of the 30?

 

[franklin2323]

Not sure. I read an nrl.com article indicating $200k for the balance of 2019 and $500k for 2020, hence the reported $700k.

If DWZ was on $700k for 2020, his manager would have all his clients lining up at the club. Need to remember at the time, he was a potential FB, not a proven or elite FB and we still had Moylan on the books.

I said several times over the last few years. Someone is on overs somewhere... Seems we now know one

 

[franklin2323]

That 700K was correct. Gus was considering his options regarding DWZ and Mansour more than 2 years ago. We would only keep one, DWZ was the concern because he was already on good coin for a rookie, but his contract was backended on the assumption that he'd be an elite fullback, hence the term 'fullback money'.

At the time Mansour was also considered a Rep winger. Mansours injuries and drop of form saw his value plummet so that was a relatively 'easy' resign though I was a little suprised

Which is why I wouldn't of resigned Mansour. DWZ I get if he is playing wing then was on overs.

Blake is the one that only makes sense if the money is used well

 

[OldPanther]

Had to promote Naden to play him this weekend. Deserves it though.

Good to have a kick target in the back line.

 

[Vicpanther]

Good to have a kick target in the back line.

I rate naden. And I think he will show we didn't need Blake. Now I would have preferred to have naden/Blake than naden/whare but can't have it all I suppose.

 

[Abacus]

I said several times over the last few years. Someone is on overs somewhere... Seems we now know one

Is $500 overs? At the time he was a definite start on the wing and good cover for FB. Probably $400-$450 and its a steal for the club. He had more upside than a typical winger and Val Holmes was looking at $800 pre-NFL.

 

[OldPanther]

Sad to see Blake go but he is inju

I rate naden. And I think he will show we didn't need Blake. Now I would have preferred to have naden/Blake than naden/whare but can't have it all I suppose.

You're not wrong.

 

[Flashstep]

Is $500 overs? At the time he was a definite start on the wing and good cover for FB. Probably $400-$450 and its a steal for the club. He had more upside than a typical winger and Val Holmes was looking at $800 pre-NFL.

Well Blake Ferguson who is arguably the best winger in the comp is on 500k so you could argue DWZ being on the same money would be overs.

Holmes was also starting to become a very good fullback which is why he would have gotten around 800+

 

[roofromoz]

So peachy last of the 30?

May not happen. Before 30 June anyway.

 

[Panther Mick]

Apparently we were never chasing Corey Thompson. Small mercies I guess..

I said that in the main NRL section on here a week ago.

I doubt there was even an offer. More like his manager bumping up his deal.

We don't need him and it was an odd rumour linking him to us.

I guess I was right and his manger was playing games due to lack of interest.

 

[Blade23]

He said we're paying DWZ still too. Claiming Bulldogs are giving him minimum wage. We're covering the rest.

That is complete rubbish from Hooper on Dallin.

Our contribution for the last 18 months of his Bulldogs deal is minimal. I have heard that from 2 different people inside the club I trust.

 

[herbert henry1908]

I think there’s mounting evidence that Gus was playing fast & loose with the salary cap.

The club is saying we moved on DWZ & Blake for salary cap reasons, why would you need to clear 800k-1m for the salary cap? That’s a huge chunk.


We’ll know more if Maloney stays here next year, and we only promote from within.

Had someone that knows a few people around the club suggest to me that they weren’t happy with all the 4-5 year deals either.

 

[herbert henry1908]

That is complete rubbish from Hooper on Dallin.

Our contribution for the last 18 months of his Bulldogs deal is minimal. I have heard that from 2 different people inside the club I trust.

That we’re paying anything is crazy. It suggests the moves were because we have cap issues.

 

[OldPanther]

I think there’s mounting evidence that Gus was playing fast & loose with the salary cap.

The club is saying we moved on DWZ & Blake for salary cap reasons, why would you need to clear 800k-1m for the salary cap? That’s a huge chunk.


We’ll know more if Maloney stays here next year, and we only promote from within.

Had someone that knows a few people around the club suggest to me that they weren’t happy with all the 4-5 year deals either.

That we’re paying anything is crazy. It suggests the moves were because we have cap issues.

I do have to say I don't like the 4 - 5 year contracts. Even if it's a player you love and is very talented there is a lot that can go wrong from both sides.

 

[Tronald Crump]

I think there’s mounting evidence that Gus was playing fast & loose with the salary cap.

The club is saying we moved on DWZ & Blake for salary cap reasons, why would you need to clear 800k-1m for the salary cap? That’s a huge chunk.

Clubs often move on players then roll out the old line of salary cap restrictions.
Its usually a miss truth to hide.

A) The player in the clubs eyes is overpaid and the club think they can better spread the money elsewhere.
B) The player is past it.
C) The player is a troublemaker.
D) The player has a bad attitude and it is spreading to rest of the squad.

We keep hearing the line of "this isn't Ivan's roster and he needs to make changes"

The next moves over the next 6 months will be interesting.

If we bring in a few rookies you know we have cap problems.
If we move on another highly paid player and bring in a few plodders, we have cap problems.
If we bring in a player like Peachey on decent coin and maybe 1 or 2 other lower reasonable signings then the salary cap line is BS.

 

[franklin2323]

Is $500 overs? At the time he was a definite start on the wing and good cover for FB. Probably $400-$450 and its a steal for the club. He had more upside than a typical winger and Val Holmes was looking at $800 pre-NFL.

Again paying on upside much better paying what he is worth for those next 2 years and going from there. You pay your wingers that much on potential what are you paying the other key positions on the same thing?

 

[franklin2323]

I do have to say I don't like the 4 - 5 year contracts. Even if it's a player you love and is very talented there is a lot that can go wrong from both sides.

It only takes a change of coach or tactics and that player is in strife. I am the same. 2-3 years at most

 

[franklin2323]

Well Blake Ferguson who is arguably the best winger in the comp is on 500k so you could argue DWZ being on the same money would be overs.

Holmes was also starting to become a very good fullback which is why he would have gotten around 800+

Both those guys are proven in rep footy and won comps. Holmes was going to be FB at Cowboys or Sharks probably for QLD too. So it is market value for elite talent...Not a potential star