Rumoured Targets 3

[slotmachine]

Lolo is one of those guys who has no real loyalty to his teams and is going to take the best $$ he can get

That would be why he knocked back the Warriors in 2015 and cost himself $800k over two years.

 

[nick87]

That would be why he knocked back the Warriors in 2015 and cost himself $800k over two years.

A few things:
1. Those were media figures, which we all know are always 10000% SPOT ON. I mean you guys are paying Ponga about 6 mil a year now arent you? Wait, what?! hah.
2. He's got his ring now. That can often shift players motivations
3. Im just relaying what i've been told by someone who actually knows him, haha

 

[Spot On]

Wow news flash.......

Player takes as much money as he can get.

Who would have thought?

FFS.

 

[Tom155]

 

[Alex28]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl...t/news-story/17129d609a10b5e527653271d1a72d5b

 

[Johns Magic]

Not the player he was but I would be happy to get him.

 

[Spot On]

No, but still one of the best and would be perfect for a couple of years with the young blokes we have.

 

[Johns Magic]

Yep agreed. Hope we get him and he has a Ben Kennedy effect.

 

[slotmachine]

Signing Scott is a giant risk. He's turning 33, was a shadow of his former self this season and has a crook back. You're paying for the player he was. Spend a bit more and aim for his team mate who is the best forward in the comp.

 

[Caped Crusader]

Signing Scott is a giant risk. He's turning 33, was a shadow of his former self this season and has a crook back. You're paying for the player he was. Spend a bit more and aim for his team mate who is the best forward in the comp.

Pretty sure Jesse Bromwich plays for Melbourne

 

[PhilGould]

Chris Garry is reporting it like it's a done deal.

 

[perverse]

Signing Scott is a giant risk. He's turning 33, was a shadow of his former self this season and has a crook back. You're paying for the player he was. Spend a bit more and aim for his team mate who is the best forward in the comp.

Dunno about a huge risk if it's only a 2 year deal. He still goes pretty good. Would prefer 'lolo, but will take what we can get. Scott is a good hard old head.

 

[Spot On]

Signing Scott is a giant risk. He's turning 33, was a shadow of his former self this season and has a crook back. You're paying for the player he was. Spend a bit more and aim for his team mate who is the best forward in the comp.

We've been paying pretty average footballers money that a bloke like Scott (who is a deadset top shelf rep player, who carries his team forward week after week) should have been getting for years.

Even into his 30's he will shit all over the bloke we had here who took 15 weeks to get fit and yet most thought was a top prop. I never understood that.

I think its worth the risk if his back isn't shot.

 

[Swarzey]

Can only trust Brown and Mooney (especially Mooney) in this situation.

If his back holds up then It's an excellent signing but even at worst we sign another Smith/Scott who will miss a few games throughout the year but still provide plenty. We have a group of forwards with plenty of potential but very little experience not just within the role but club in general.

It's basically Mullen's contract we're offering so what difference is really being made? We're not going to sign some in their prime prop, we could pay (and have paid) overs for a LOT worse and I wouldn't consider 1.5 over 2 years to be overs for Scott.

 

[Johns Magic]

Signing Scott is a giant risk. He's turning 33, was a shadow of his former self this season and has a crook back. You're paying for the player he was. Spend a bit more and aim for his team mate who is the best forward in the comp.

He's turning 32.

Due diligence on injuries of course required but he still averaged 125+ metres a game this year.

I would love Taumololo but think Scott is a good move too. I'm not convinced Taumololo will be able to keep up his form for much longer than a year or two more either.

As much as we may be paying for the player he was to an extent, I think the leadership aspect is important. And importantly I think if we sign Scott it will be easier to attract other players to the club.

 

[Spot On]

A lot of what Taumololo does comes off the back of Matt Scott.

Taumolo did not have much of a 4 Nations series - in fact he was near impotent in that Kiwi side at seasons end. You may have your theories as to why but he certainly was poor to say the least.

 

[Frederick]

Matt Scott would have the same immediate effect that Craig smith had when he joined our club.

Although I'm not sure about the 1.5million over two years figure...that's an awful lot of money for a player in his early 30s

 

[Frederick]

Toohey reckons he's heard nothing about Matt Scott, but he wouldn't go near him given his age and injuries. He also reckons knights have heard nothing from souffs about sims, and that the Broncos offer is too low

 

[Spot On]

Matt Scott would have the same immediate effect that Craig smith had when he joined our club.

Although I'm not sure about the 1.5million over two years figure...that's an awful lot of money for a player in his early 30s

We were giving Mullen 750K a year apparently. Now that was an awful lot of money for a bloke if his callibire. Matt Scott is in a different bracket altogether. I dont want to the club to pay that much but the benefits of having him for 2 seasons playing and training with the young props we have here now could be immense for them and their careers.

 

[PhilGould]

It's been reported that it could be up to $1.5m over 2 years. I think it would be less than that.