I've acknowledged that ad nauseum but we must also admit paying a winger 500K for example is piss poor cap management. If the cap is ever 'balanced' across the squad we can buy players, granted we will never have the ability to purchase a team of rep players like the top 5 clubs have year after year.
Yes 10th will be a successful campaign unless Brown is an absolute genius.
On Aku:
At the time he was signed, he would have attracted 500k+ offers from other clubs if he hit the market - not all of it on the cap of course.
We wanted to keep our shining light / fan favourite / home grown son.
I completely understand the signing.
They could not have known he would go to shit.
On our cap management:
Hindsight is beautiful. I don't think our cap management is as bad as you guys would like to make out - it is simply a matter that we are now feeling the full effects of the TPA uneven playing field which means we have had to pay "OVERS" for basically everyone we have signed since the rules allowed the unevenness came into place, excluding unproven/unheralded rookies - whether in house or external.
Meaning we have to fill squads with very young players.
Look at who we are/were paying "overs" - they are the guys who, at the time of singing, would have been of interest to other clubs via either potential (Matautia, Clydesdale who we all thought would kick on) or proven status (Mullo, Aku, Gags).
Look at who we have at "market value" - guys who there wasn't huge demand for and kicked on since they last signed - Rochow, Korbin.... players who may have potential but haven't really done anything of note - Mamo, Fitzgibbon, Feeney... or players no one else really wants (too many to list).
This is the new reality of being a Knights fan - basically the club needs to pay "overs" to the right "stars" (in reality, the "good but not quite star" players like Hokko, Mullo and Tariq).... hope they get that right (no injuries, no Aku-itis, no Roberts brain farts), then hope our unheralded kids (often left overs after the eyes are picked out of our area) grow an extra leg to compete at NRL level.... and then watch as the kids who do kick on are poached by (or have their prices inflated by) basically any other club in the comp, all of whom can throw more cash at them (Tapine).
I agree with the club putting values to players and sticking to those values to try to balance the cap, because we really have no other option but to try to have some sort of system to counter the inequality in the cap - but we need to recognise that is going to mean losing a lot of players we want to keep - because for us, "market value" (meaning what others will pay) is almost always going to be "overs".
We need to find value and utility in the guys no one wants - meaning we are also going to have to be used to a lot of player turnover, because they are likely to be gone as soon as they are off contract and someone wants them.
All this to accomplish the grand goal of finishing 10th.
It isn't changing until we get a level playing field.
As for Pauli Pauli, 130k would have been fair when he signed the deal, but he is in the last year of it, isn't he? What is he getting next deal if he kicks on and attracts interest?
I know I am the resident merchant of melancholy, but I'm not wrong and you are kidding yourself if you don't acknowledge the reality.
