Craig Frawley a Raider.

[Paullyboy]

Things have taken a negative turn guys, people up here have all of a sudden become a lot more confident in the last 24 hours of retaining Frawley. This could be a certain indicator that De Vere is going, if that happens Frawley will stay in Brisbane the word is

 

[raidersman]

ahhhhhhh f**kkkkkkkkkkkkkk :x

 

[raiders_lover_18]

keep us posted paully boy

 

[greeneyed]

It says in the CT that "the Green Machine's prospects of signing Bronco Craig Frawley were boosted yesterday when Brisbane shored up its 3/4 stocks by re-signing powerful young winger Gary Tupou. Tupou, holding strong prospects for a starting berth in 2005 with Craig Frawley and Mick DeVere expected to leaave the club, becomes the fourth player re-signed by the Broncos in the past two days...." So I wonder what is true....

 

[GreenGuy]

Why not try and get De Vere?

 

[aussies1st]

De Vere is going to England most probably. Frawley would be an awesome buy however. Showed some promise this year.

 

[raiders_boy]

If we don't get Frawley, I'm gonna be so cut :evil:

Now that the papers have got me all excited its just gonna be another crushing blow if we dont sign him

 

[Bay56]

Hoping for dear sakes that I dont have to say "told you so"

C'mon managements prove me wrong and lets see what you are made of ... lets get this doomsville train in reverse.

The main opposition is gone .... how could the rorters explain to the NRL that they are under the cap if they snatched Frawley as well, and the Broncs seem to be playing by the rules ... NO EXCUSES MANAGEMENT !!!!

 

[jed]

Bay56, I appreciate that you're frustrated at our lack of signings, but instead of saying "I told you so" or suggesting that management start playing dirty, how about you give us some practical examples of exactly what we should be doing differently. As I've said before, if players simply don't want to move to Canberra, we are not necessarily going to be able to change that.

 

[Bay56]

Bay56, I appreciate that you're frustrated at our lack of signings, but instead of saying "I told you so" or suggesting that management start playing dirty, how about you give us some practical examples of exactly what we should be doing differently. As I've said before, if players simply don't want to move to Canberra, we are not necessarily going to be able to change that.

If you take a look at some of my posts you will see that I am one of the few that have given "practical examples".
Let me summarise just a few:
1. Sack the current management team and replace them with experienced people who have balls to make tough decisions.
2. Get rid of the current coach immediately and replace him with Collins as caretaker.
3. Throw everything at Stuart, Loz, Bellamy, Lance and other former greats to return and instil the sort of pride in the green jersey necessary to achieve the heights we were used to.
4. I stress pride in the GREEN JERSEY .. therefore sack the person who thought of the idea of wearing a black/yellow/red concoction.

The following is a repeat of one of my other posts:
The only way to get that culture back into the club is to bring back the guys who created it in the first place ... Elliot does not fit that bill in my books and never will.
Unfortunately we face a few more years of the same ... time will come when everyone is absolutely sick and tired of the same and someone will be forced to make the sorts of decisions that need to be made today 17 July 2004.
I know that there are a lot of people in this forum who think my comments are straight out of the "whinging" department ... quite frankly I dont care much for the "shoot the messenger" type of mentality ... what needs to be said I will say.
In the meantime I will support the club by purchasing my season tickets, go to the game, perv at the Raiderettes, bag the ref and try to ignore the fact that my team aint the best.

 

[jed]

I know that's what you want, the needle has worn off with it being played so many times. My question seems to have been misunderstood.

With regards to not signing players (Carmont, Thurston, Kite, Firmin, Head etc), what more should management have done?

 

[Bay56]

I know that's what you want, the needle has worn off with it being played so many times. My question seems to have been misunderstood.

With regards to not signing players (Carmont, Thurston, Kite, Firmin, Head etc), what more should management have done?

To answer your question: I am not privy to player negotiations. I dont know what they offered them nor how they presented themselves. Therefore it is difficult to answer the question "what more should management have done" when I dont know what they did in the first place.

But I can say this ... Missing out on one of them is understandable, two is an oversight, three shows a distinct pattern, four is unacceptable. The signature of Frawley will be a further test of their abilities. If they fail here the skillion of confidence that I still have in management will be completely wiped out .... what say you, will you still be backing them ... If you do, sorry to say but you are a fool.

What I could have done is not in question here ... more "what is management not doing".

A response to you comment ... "As I've said before, if players simply don't want to move to Canberra, we are not necessarily going to be able to change that" ... if you really believe that you are even a bigger fool. Unfortunately thats what the current crop of "management" think ... thats not the sort of mindset you want from decision makers.

 

[I Bleed Green]

Bay... Brisbane has supported Frawley through 2 knee reconstructions and has made him into the player that he is. What if he sticks with the Broncos because he wants to repay them some loyalty?

How is that management's fault?

 

[greeneyed]

It says in today's CT that Frawley is "odds on to sign with Canberra in the next few days".

 

[raidersman]

WOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOO

 

[jed]

I know that's what you want, the needle has worn off with it being played so many times. My question seems to have been misunderstood.

With regards to not signing players (Carmont, Thurston, Kite, Firmin, Head etc), what more should management have done?

To answer your question: I am not privy to player negotiations. I dont know what they offered them nor how they presented themselves. Therefore it is difficult to answer the question "what more should management have done" when I dont know what they did in the first place.

But I can say this ... Missing out on one of them is understandable, two is an oversight, three shows a distinct pattern, four is unacceptable. The signature of Frawley will be a further test of their abilities. If they fail here the skillion of confidence that I still have in management will be completely wiped out .... what say you, will you still be backing them ... If you do, sorry to say but you are a fool.

What I could have done is not in question here ... more "what is management not doing".

A response to you comment ... "As I've said before, if players simply don't want to move to Canberra, we are not necessarily going to be able to change that" ... if you really believe that you are even a bigger fool. Unfortunately thats what the current crop of "management" think ... thats not the sort of mindset you want from decision makers.

OK, fair enough, I'm not privvy to what's happened either. But saying that they need to be replaced etc is a kneejerk reaction. For all we know, they may have done nothing wrong (although I doubt it).

As for

"As I've said before, if players simply don't want to move to Canberra, we are not necessarily going to be able to change that" ... if you really believe that you are even a bigger fool.

How would you go about changing players minds? Remembering that we're only able to offer what's in the $3.25M cap, and no 2nd party payments.

It's all well and good to say that things are bad (I don't think anyone's disagreeing with you there), but if you're going to be an armchair critic, at least have some realistic suggestions, other than "sack the lot of 'em", especially if you can't define exactly what they're doing wrong.

 

[Bay56]

jed .... I repeat .... missing out on one of them is understandable, two is an oversight, three shows a distinct pattern, four is unacceptable .... five, six, seven, eight ..... hey when is enough enough for you guys.

Four years under Elliot whence I have seen this club do the same ol dumb things.

I compare that with the rorters and especially the broncs. Mant experts believed that the broncs would not even finish in the eight this year, yet look where they are .. they keep what they want (from all sources within the rules) and they get one or two other strategic buys. Thats what I aspire to.

PS is that you in the pciture with rubes ... boyo you were hit with the ugly stick :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[I Bleed Green]

Bay... please respond to my post above, because either you missed it or you're choosing to ignore it.

Who says his decision is based upon money, structure of the club, etc... why can't his decision be based on loyalty if he does indeed stay?

And I understand about missing out on several signings, but if he stays with the Broncos in this particular case, I really don't think you can blame management for this one...

 

[jed]

PS is that you in the pciture with rubes ... boyo you were hit with the ugly stick :lol: :lol: :lol:

Hit or beaten senseless? :lol:

 

[Bay56]

Bay... please respond to my post above, because either you missed it or you're choosing to ignore it.

Who says his decision is based upon money, structure of the club, etc... why can't his decision be based on loyalty if he does indeed stay?

And I understand about missing out on several signings, but if he stays with the Broncos in this particular case, I really don't think you can blame management for this one...

My answer is in the post before your last.