Rumoured & Confirmed Signings (2025 Season)

[Chins]

Deals can't really be back ended anymore either, not to any great degree anyways

 

[Hooked]

Deals can't really be back ended anymore either, not to any great degree anyways

Only modestly: Year 1 $400k Year 2 $500k Year 3 $600k.
Nowhere near the Des Hasler shenanigans of $400k that rockets to $850k the next-season.

 

[Hooked]

I did hear Chammas during the week. Stating we wouldn't be signing anyone "significant" until the end of 2027.

 

[Chins]

I did hear Chammas during the week. Stating we wouldn't be signing anyone significant until the end of 2027.

Significant is a bullshit vague word. We can't be letting Sorro and Garner walk and not replacing them with a single player as good. A good solid first grader

 

[Hooked]

Significant is a bullshit vague word. We can't be letting Sorro and Garner walk and not replacing them with a single player as good. A good solid first grader

Possibly.
I am not sure on Sorro's future. Linked to the ESL months ago. Then nothing.
Even if he does go I don't expect a type Fifita signing.

 

[Iamback]

Of course we will replace Garner. Him, Sorro, Capewell etc came here on the cheap.

That is the model find someone cheaper, upgrade Patea etc

 

[Frankus]

If we are after all losses and letting Fish go home early then questions need to be asked.

If it's true we need to maximise the Perth effect and send a few over

Why would questions need to be asked when we have 4 current players in our squad that if they had became available on the market in the past 2 seasons would have been signed to deals over a mill a season. Not to mention Fish and Luai on top of that. The value in our squad is unrivalled.

 

[betcats]

Deals can't really be back ended anymore either, not to any great degree anyways

There are still contracts that raise year on year, plenty of ways to do that still. Cleary off contract after 2027 you can bet the final year of that contract is anywhere from 5-30 percent more than the first year of it, from memory he wanted to take less and the NRL wouldnt allow it.

I dont think we should be broke but we have plenty of guys age 27+ who have been winning premierships and playing in rep teams for four years straight. They are all on more in the final year of their current contract then the first year of it. You dont get to keep Yeo, Cleary Marto, Moses, Dyl, Bizza for what you were paying them 2 or 3 years ago when they are delivering like they have been, not until they get to old and even if they want to take less the NRL would only allow a certain extent of that, so there is always cap pressure when you are exceeding at an all time level. Anytime we free a player from our cap you can bet a fair bit of the space is taken up by contracts with set increases.

Perhaps we couldve managed the cap better than we have i dont really know, the only clubs with significantly more buying advantages are the roosters, broncos and bulldogs(atm) and that is because of the financial support those clubs have. Sure there are other clubs who do well signing palyers and managing the cap but only those spring to mind as clubs with significant advantages over us.

 

[betcats]

Re Garner and the fact he is not on much, well that is why he is leaving, he has reached a point where he has to do as well for himself as possible money wise and that aint us. Do you really want to be giving a 30 year old a significant upgrade? Even if we could afford it id rather they look to the future and figure something else out, we are to old across the pack anyway, I wouldnt start with Garns but you cant just force anyone out without some disruption, if he is already thinking this way then yeah it makes sense for both parties.

 

[Chins]

Re Garner and the fact he is not on much, well that is why he is leaving, he has reached a point where he has to do as well for himself as possible money wise and that aint us. Do you really want to be giving a 30 year old a significant upgrade? Even if we could afford it id rather they look to the future and figure something else out, we are to old across the pack anyway, I wouldnt start with Garns but you cant just force anyone out without some disruption, if he is already thinking this way then yeah it makes sense for both parties.

No reason to let him go a year early.

And if we aren't paying a chunk of Nathan's money to Ivan we are chumps.

 

[betcats]

No reason to let him go a year early.

And if we aren't paying a chunk of Nathan's money to Ivan we are chumps.

Bro they are chumps if they think they could rort the cap by paying his dad, its not 1980.

The only reason to let Garner go early is if he wants it, if he is standing there asking for a release saying he has a deal on the table, more years, more money or whatever he is looking for are we going to stand in his way?

 

[Chins]

Bro they are chumps if they think they could rort the cap by paying his dad, its not 1980.

The only reason to let Garner go early is if he wants it, if he is standing there asking for a release saying he has a deal on the table, more years, more money or whatever he is looking for are we going to stand in his way?

Literally impossible to be caught paying Ivan and Nathan inheriting it in 40 years. Unless you write it down

 

[betcats]

Literally impossible to be caught paying Ivan and Nathan inheriting it in 40 years. Unless you write it down

Maybe they could do that if Nathan and Ivan were silly enough to allow it. Who wants to get paid in 40 years. There is also a big tax issue with Ivan paying tax on it, besides Tax there are other impacts regarding superannuation etc maybe less important to Ivan who should be doing really well, also inheritance even with a will is no sure thing if someone wants to dispute it. At the end of the day if you think that is an easy and obvious solution i think you just havent considered it. How do you keep track of it? they going to open a special account or keep records of their fraud?

 

[chrisD]

We have the best pack in the league and one more first grade forward than there are first grade spots when other teams plod along with one or two on the bench who may or may not be first graders. Off contract a few of ours will be worth more to another team than they are to us.

 

[Chins]

Maybe they could do that if Nathan and Ivan were silly enough to allow it. Who wants to get paid in 40 years. There is also a big tax issue with Ivan paying tax on it, besides Tax there are other impacts regarding superannuation etc maybe less important to Ivan who should be doing really well, also inheritance even with a will is no sure thing if someone wants to dispute it. At the end of the day if you think that is an easy and obvious solution i think you just havent considered it. How do you keep track of it? they going to open a special account or keep records of their fraud?

Every side in the NRL is cheating the cap in some way. We just happen to have the easiest way possible for the games best player.

 

[Chins]

Anyways we are surely getting a decent forward if Sorro and Garner are going. Not rep level but a good first grader.

 

[betcats]

Every side in the NRL is cheating the cap in some way. We just happen to have the easiest way possible for the games best player.

Not really, also Ivans on a cap now as well so it pretty much kills that idea even if they can work the rest of it out.

 

[Frankus]

Certainly ways around it such as paying Ivan RSUs which could then be put in a family trust or bucket company, but that would really need to involve the Panthers Group being floated on the ASX.

paying Ivan directly part of Nathan’s wage is just not viable. At all.

 

[Munky]

The way to rort the cap is to sub contract the cleaning and catering to a company owned by the Cleary's which then sub contracts to legit companies in the sector.

They can skim the margin.

Although being a club chances are that's already being done by someone not related to the footy side if things.

 

[Chins]

No need for anything complex. You just pay Ivan more, its simple stuff