Unlucky?

[the phantom menace]

Oh dear... someone's spiralling deeper and deeper. Just learn to communicate your "point" better in the first place, yeah?

Or maybe don't bother to start threads or post on here while you're at the swimming pool.

 

[DaveMc]

My position hasn't changed at all, I just dumbed it down for you.

It absolutely has. Your original statement in the context of explaining away the Souths’ loss of Sam Burgess and Greg Inglis was:

“Would’ve freed up plenty of cap space, which is the real currency, not star players. It’s easy to buy/keep players if you’ve got cap space. Look at the annual recruitment by the likes of Canterbury and Wests.”

That is an absurd take. I did not take that out of context - that was the entirety of the post.

You clarified subsequently that “I now believe you read it to mean I think star players don't matter” (I did - that’s what you said) and “that if you lose star players you likely have the cap space to sign new ones or retain emerging talents, which was the case with Souths after 2019” (which is entirely different to what you said).

Your first post was poorly expressed and, as written, was a bad point. I didn’t take it out of context - it is posted above in full. You have acknowledged as much in the balance of your most recent post, save for the quoted bit.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

It absolutely has. Your original statement in the context of explaining away the Souths’ loss of Sam Burgess and Greg Inglis was:

“Would’ve freed up plenty of cap space, which is the real currency, not star players. It’s easy to buy/keep players if you’ve got cap space. Look at the annual recruitment by the likes of Canterbury and Wests.”

That is an absurd take.

What’s absurd about it?

I did not take that out of context - that was the entirety of the post.

You can’t even explain what you don’t like about it.

You clarified subsequently that “I now believe you read it to mean I think star players don't matter” (I did - that’s what you said)

No I didn’t. I said cap space is the currency of success, not star players. Then gave an example of unsuccessful clubs that have overpaid for stars in recent years.

and “that if you lose star players you likely have the cap space to sign new ones or retain emerging talents, which was the case with Souths after 2019”

It’s true.

(which is entirely different to what you said).

Of course it’s different. Just repeating oneself isn’t how clarification works.

Your first post was poorly expressed and, as written, was a bad point. I didn’t take it out of context - it is posted above in full. You have acknowledged as much in the balance of your most recent post, save for the quoted bit.

It may have been poorly expressed, which is why I provided a clarification. The point itself is excellent, which you have conceded by playing semantics. Cheers.

 

[DaveMc]

What’s absurd about it?

You can’t even explain what you don’t like about it.

No I didn’t. I said cap space is the currency of success, not star players. Then gave an example of unsuccessful clubs that have overpaid for stars in recent years.

It’s true.

Of course it’s different. Just repeating oneself isn’t how clarification works.

It may have been poorly expressed, which is why I provided a clarification. The point itself is excellent, which you have conceded by playing semantics. Cheers.

The point is absurd. The idea that it is better to have spare money instead of star players is absolutely ridiculous. That you referred to Canterbury and Wests in support of the point shows the stupidity of the point.

No semantics being played by me - your original post was wrong.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

The point is absurd. The idea that it is better to have spare money instead of star players is absolutely ridiculous.

It is if you don't spend it. But we both know Souths spent it.

That you referred to Canterbury and Wests in support of the point shows the stupidity of the point.

lol you think they have cap space after those signing sprees? What an absurd statement!

Both clubs signed some 'stars' but had to let go of 'stars' to free up the cap space to get them.

No semantics being played by me - your original post was wrong.

Not at all. The benefit of cap space over having that cap space tied up in players is options. Souths/Bennett had far more options for using that cap space once Burgess and Inglis (and Sutton) were off the books.

 

[DaveMc]

It is if you don't spend it. But we both know Souths spent it.

lol you think they have cap space after those signing sprees? What an absurd statement!

Both clubs signed some 'stars' but had to let go of 'stars' to free up the cap space to get them.

Not at all. The benefit of cap space over having that cap space tied up in players is options. Souths/Bennett had far more options for using that cap space once Burgess and Inglis (and Sutton) were off the books.

Your post was wrong, and now you’re doubling down.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You are being increasingly evasive.

 

[DaveMc]

You are being increasingly evasive.

I’m not being evasive at all. That you need to expend so many words to qualify and explain what you meant with your ridiculous first post just demonstrates how poorly expressed it was. You know it, too. You could just admit it.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I’m not being evasive at all.

Of course you're not.

 

[DaveMc]

Of course you're not.

I’m not.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

lol now f**k off and troll someone else

 

[DaveMc]

lol now f**k off and troll someone else

No. I’m not trolling you at all.

You pathologically need to get the last word in. I’m not going to allow it here.

The point made in your first post is absolutely absurd.

Melbourne hasn’t been a better team for having extra cap space after Cameron Smith retired.

Souths haven’t been a better team for having extra cap space after they let Reynolds walk. But Brisbane has been a better side for having him in their team. Having him has chewed cap space, but I doubt they’d prefer Brodie Croft back instead of Reynolds to save some cap.

We wouldn’t be a better team today if we’d have saved cap space by not resigning Moses last year - we’re seeing that exact scenario play out right in front of us now.

Canterbury and Wests have not been better teams for having more cash to splash - in a dry market they’ve gone backwards because they’ve had too much cap space compared to existing quality players and have overspent as a result.

So your entire point was wrong.

You f**k off and troll someone else.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I agree some players are worth overpaying for (in our club only Moses fits that bill). But Burgess and Inglis in 2019 were not that sort of player.

Tigers/Bulldogs squad issues are less to do with the market than their inability to attract players with anything other than cap money. Maybe Laundy has changed that at Canterbury but it’s happening very slowly.

And this is my thread merkin

 

[DaveMc]

I agree some players are worth overpaying for (in our club only Moses fits that bill). But Burgess and Inglis in 2019 were not that sort of player.

Tigers/Bulldogs squad issues are less to do with the market than their inability to attract players with anything other than cap money. Maybe Laundy has changed that at Canterbury but it’s happening very slowly.

And this is my thread merkin

It’s my thread now, merkin.

 

[Gary Gutful]

No. It’s my thread!

 

[hineyrulz]

lol enjoying this thread immensely

It’s hilarious that the worse the Eels go the more erratic Pou’s posting becomes.

Time for another break methinks.

 

[DaveMc]

No. It’s my thread!

Given how much Pou loves getting publicly owned, I think we can accept the thread has been nationalised and now belongs to us all.

 

[emjaycee]

Is this the TLT thread for the Bye week?

 

[Hindmarshisgod2]

I've seen pou get smashed before, but never quite like this.....I actually feel pity for him.

 

[the phantom menace]

lol now f**k off and troll someone else

Good advice, for yourself... just change the someone to somewhere?