Grant, McKendry more fictions of previous administration

[darkbloom]

Grant & McKendry Story

Man that pesky previous administration keeps causing us problems, doesn't it?

If we face any salary cap issues this year or next I wonder if any of it could be caused by failure to consider existing commitment when undertaking the recent massive recruitment drive.

I guess not, they can't really be expected to plan around existing commitments if they did not make them.

 

[darkbloom]

I am sure I wrote the word "victims" not "fictions" in the thread name!

 

[franklin2323]

A telegraph story means 99% it's bullshit.

Though on the off chance it's not. I can't see anyone off contract this year we may lose if both go. On the otherside of the coin if both went we would be very light in the front row.

The Grant long serving player will release some pressure off the cap & for 2016 we offer a reasonable contract either they take it or not.

 

[Blues Riff]

Ahh, it's just a beat-up loosely based on facts. The media will rehash this one all year, especially if we have a good year. They plant the seeds of doubt and hope in the fans minds to keep us buying papers.
One of them may move on, others will step up.
I'm getting sick of these player movement stories in general. Whatever.

 

[franklin2323]

Ahh, it's just a beat-up loosely based on facts. The media will rehash this one all year, especially if we have a good year. They plant the seeds of doubt and hope in the fans minds to keep us buying papers.
One of them may move on, others will step up.
I'm getting sick of these player movement stories in general. Whatever.

Yeah I don't listen to that paper fullstop

 

[mxlegend99]

Considering the rumours about Jennings, Walsh, Lewis, Coote etc. all proved to be true, I think there's a great chance one or both of them will be elsewhere in the next 12 months. Hope we keep them though. Well worth the money considering what Fifita has gotten and the discounts they will be eligible for soon. Just try signing them to new deals that are a bit better for us when they're up for new contracts.

 

[Doomednow]

It will all come down to the payers themselves. Are they prepared to restructure or take a cut to stay with the team. How has it worked out for the players who moved on? Sure, Jennings got a premiership, and good on him, but those who went to the sharks don't have much to show for it and poor Coote's season didn't exactly have a good start, or any start.

 

[MaxPower]

Are they prepared to restructure or take a cut to stay with the team?

We already know they aren't. Gus asked a few players to restructure their contracts a little over a year ago. They declined. Two of those players are now at other clubs. Two more may be soon.

 

[Doomednow]

They might have changed their minds.

 

[MaxPower]

Grant & McKendry Story

Man that pesky previous administration keeps causing us problems, doesn't it?

If we face any salary cap issues this year or next I wonder if any of it could be caused by failure to consider existing commitment when undertaking the recent massive recruitment drive.

I guess not, they can't really be expected to plan around existing commitments if they did not make them.

They are considering existing commitments and they are planning around existing commitments. Why do you think they have been releasing players? Letting these guys go limits the amount of damage their contracts do to the club, and reduces the timeframe required for the rebuild.

Consider this - if Gus simply decided to wait for the contracts he inherited to die a natural death, where would the team be now? The rebuild wouldn't even begin until next year. As it stands now, it is almost complete.

How can you say they aren't considering existing commitments when they have taken action to directly nullify the harm those commitments cause?

 

[darkbloom]

They are considering existing commitments and they are planning around existing commitments. Why do you think they have been releasing players? Letting these guys go limits the amount of damage their contracts do to the club, and reduces the timeframe required for the rebuild.

Consider this - if Gus simply decided to wait for the contracts he inherited to die a natural death, where would the team be now? The rebuild wouldn't even begin until next year. As it stands now, it is almost complete.

How can you say they aren't considering existing commitments when they have taken action to directly nullify the harm those commitments cause?

Are you saying the club willingly undertook contracts knowing that they would have to break contracts in order to comply with salary cap rules? That's how it sounds. If that is taking those commitments into consideration, it demonstrates a very interesting concept of contract.

I am sure many would think this a good thing to do, keeping people on their toes so to speak - some others probably think it is not a very moral approach and not conducive to a harmonious workplace.

 

[mxlegend99]

Why do you assume we NEED to get rid of them to be under the salary cap? We could have fit Jennings into the Salary cap last year, it just worked out better for 2014 onwards with the way we worked it.

If we get rid of Grant or McKendry, I would assume it's for a similar reason. There's no way Gus would risk us being over the salary cap. He's playing by the rules.

 

[GongPanther]

Ah yes.Here we go again and it's hardly surprising with the DT trying in vain to upset the applecart on the eve of playing it's geniused bastard off-spring,the melbourne storm.

This story surfaces now as we are two weeks into the comp and the DT,as usual,shelves it for this occasion.

In future,darkbloom,could you please name the source as well as providing a blind link?

There are people in here that stopped reading the cartoons when they were children.

 

[darkbloom]

Ah yes.Here we go again and it's hardly surprising with the DT trying in vain to upset the applecart on the eve of playing it's geniused bastard off-spring,the melbourne storm.

This story surfaces now as we are two weeks into the comp and the DT,as usual,shelves it for this occasion.

In future,darkbloom,could you please name the source as well as providing a blind link?

There are people in here that stopped reading the cartoons when they were children.

If I remember to do so I will but ...

This story is not dissimilar to previous speculation that in fact turned out to be true despite persistent denials.

 

[darkbloom]

Why do you assume we NEED to get rid of them to be under the salary cap? We could have fit Jennings into the Salary cap last year, it just worked out better for 2014 onwards with the way we worked it.

If we get rid of Grant or McKendry, I would assume it's for a similar reason. There's no way Gus would risk us being over the salary cap. He's playing by the rules.

Only going on the regurgitation of the issue about "salary cap problems being created by the previous administration". My point surrounds the position asserted in the story.

If the club wants to get rid of these two players because the club feels they are paid too much then that is OK. The salary cap has nothing to do that position and there should be no mention of salary cap issues - and the club and especially Gould should be forthright and honest in dealing with that fact and not pretend it is salary cap pressure.

As to your last 2 sentences: Gus has NEVER believed in a salary cap - if he is playing by the rules now it is not because he has a belief in those rules it is because he is afraid of getting caught breaching them. And the corollary is?

To be fair though the rules have changed a fair bit and the size of the NRL grant has been raised a lot, so he may well now feel that he can now tolerate adhering to them - progress of a sort.

 

[Panther Pete]

The 'Panther Rumblings' column in the Western Weekender indicates the rumours are true Grant and McKendry are being shopped around as they are are both on the outer. It claims Tim Grant and Cleary don't see eye to eye and he was fit for last weeks Storm game but just wasn't selected. The tip is he will playing for the Titans by mid year.

 

[Doomednow]

Not sure how I feel about that. What could possibly be such a problem that a little professionalism couldn't overcome it?

 

[mxlegend99]

Trade him for Dave Taylor. Would be a downgrade, but hopefully Cleary could get him to show the same sort of form he had Mose Masoe showing for us.

 

[betcats]

Trade him for Dave Taylor. Would be a downgrade, but hopefully Cleary could get him to show the same sort of form he had Mose Masoe showing for us.

Dave has been coached by Bennet and maguire, both punted him, apparently Maguire had to threaten to drop him every week to get him to play how he wanted. Id rather get nothing back than Taylor. Ryan James would be alright...

 

[Luke Bowden]

What we need is more Nigel Plums. No Politics, No Rifts with the coach and no massive contracts messing up our cap.

Just hard running and MASSIVE hits.