herbert henry1908
Referee
- Messages
- 21,880
Of course, you have no facts to support this because all the deals are confidential. I would also point out that you are only looking at one side of contract management. The other side is being able to get rid of players.
Gus himself said that you back a player, if he doesn't deliver value for the deal he is on, you move him on. He is worth more to some clubs than he is to you.You see that as a problem, I see it as good roster management. Any other approach to roster management requires perfect hindsight. You never really know how a player will perform until they get the contract and start playing. Nobody does. That's why you need somebody well networked like Gus, who can find homes for unwanted players. Sure, he could have signed them to 3 year deals, but so what, they were still able to be moved on.
We may have had to pay for Blake and RCG, but that list you have made have all been moved on and we have retained the junior talent we want to. Blake and RCG are delivering for the Eels, they weren't for us. Im not sure what the contract has to do with that. Perhaps look closer to home at Cleary. RCG was an SOO player under Hook.
Moylan has continued to play well for a few games before his tissue paper body (probably due to his famed lack of work ethic in training) gives out. No loss really. he would have been great for us, when he was on the field but what would the negative impact be on the attitudes of our junior players with his lazy, selfish attitude.
As for Bryce, it is just a tragic waste of talent. Again I'm not sure how his contract rorm Gus was a bad thing,what role did that have to play?
The length of the deals were never confidential.
As for the other stuff, we’ve discussed it all before. My view is Gus managed the club poorly in his last few years, your view is different. That’s fine.