Just reading over the recent contributions to this thread...
Sharpe may be too much of a talent to waste away on the wing. Both from an internal perspective of having your best players close to the ball, and an external perspective of the pressure that will be felt when external clubs start sweet talking him with bigger offers and better positions to play. We're not the Roosters and we can't play a Joey Manu out wide like they could. We don't have that kind of clout or rizz.
Are we really going to offer Sharpe big money if another club comes knocking and offers him a better position than wing or centre?
You can say we've got him locked down, and that's fine, but the contract is a cheap one comparitively to his talent. One way to keep him happy would be to play him in important positions. Do you really think he'll hang around to play wing on shit money for the next few years? I don't, and if the coach wants Sandon at halfback then I think one of Ponga and Sharpe is not here long term.
On the "too much of a talent to waste away on the wing" point, is this also true of Mark Nawaqanitawase? Brian To'o? Josh Addo-Carr? Picking very different winger archetypes for a reason there.
The guy scored 9 tries in 7 games on the wing last year and found extra ways to impact the game from the wing besides scoring tries because he's a great footballer. He also arguably saved that season by being the only player who could replace Dom effectively all year. Also wingers can have a huge impact in a negative sense too: How many tries did players like Schiller (especially) and Greg bomb this year via butterfingers or being horribly out of position? This wasn't the only issue with the attack obviously but we left a lot on the table via, for example, Schiller just constantly being too flat with his centre to receive a pass, or too far back - just never seemed to learn.
Would it seem like as much of a waste if we literally get +10 tries from whatever wing Fletcher is on instead of Greg or Schiller?
It's also not just the Roosters who have aspiring fullbacks playing elsewhere, there's Sea Eagles, Dragons, Titans, Rabbitohs, Tigers, Dolphins... are these all on the Chooks' level? I don't know, compromising with a wannabe fullback by playing him at centre is one of the most common things in the sport, the idea we can't do it with a local junior who loves the club seems absurd to me. What a state we would be in.
And yeah I am absolutely assuming Ponga is just going to play out his contract and then go. That's all the commitment he's given us. I'm not even positive he'll be here in 2027 tbh. And it may be the case it's for the best if he does go if a lot of our juniors keep coming along - if we need to extend Hopwood, McEwen, Lucas, Sandon Smith, all on decent to good money, we need to come up with cap space - moving out a $1.4 million fullback, securing Fletcher with a pay rise (let's say a bump from the 4-500K he might be on now to about 900K) and then lock down the very talented squad of mostly internally developed players we have hopefully built over the next couple of years.
What does my head in is people who advocate Fletcher moving to 9, 13, 14... there are so many examples of very impactful outside backs, I don't understand the urge to overthink it like that. He's a strike weapon. Play him in a strike weapon position.
Get the best players into the team into the configuration that best suits that talent and then evaluate as we go. And at the end of the day I would say something which would help keep Fletcher is if the team is good. It's harder to be good with spine players who have real difficulties with the demands of their position.