Rumours and Stuff

[hindy111]

Our problem Hindy is we have very little skill, most of our forwards don't, won't, can't offload. Its that simple, small skilful forwards could be good but we don't have them. BA has had 4 plus years to fix that and hasn't. That is his most damning mistake and I'll bring him down.

I watched Tepai play for Wenty once. Must of had 5 or 6 offloads. In NRL barely any.

 

[TheRam]

How many players in RFM's situation have actually agreed to move clubs mid-contract just 3 months after signing a new extended and upgraded 3-year deal? Barba I guess? Who else? It might be possible if there was some other genuine issue (e.g. wants to go back to Auckland coz his cat was dying or something) and the new club had something specific to offer.

There's certainly scope for deals when a club is under cap pressure and has older players on big $$ that they decide to offload and pay some of the freight.

I did't say, signing anyone is a guarantee, especially someone under contract, but salary cap pressure is there and if we can finagle our way into luring him across, then why not? That is what great deal makers can do. Are they always successful? Of course not, but they try the seemingly impossible and sometimes pull it off. Like I said, noting ventured nothing gained.

But of course there is the other more obvious option, Klemmer. All the press at the moment are saying that the dogs won't be able to move forward, unless they let at least one of their big name player go. Why not romance him. A player that should of been playing for us all along anyway, but at 15yrs was playing in the 3rd grade level comp and being ignored. The Dogs scouts weren't that silly and offered him greater honours if he went over to them. Not surprising at all really.

Well maybe we can somewhat rectify that a little by taking advantage of their misfortune at present. But then again, I doubt it. If Klemmer were to be available, the Roosters would get their man not us.

 

[Glenneel]

Of course you have a right to be critical. Just as others have a right to assess your criticisms and determine that they are ill informed.

A mob wanting blood is hardly rational and sometimes a little perspective is needed.

That's what a KKK mob do.

 

[emjaycee]

OK, I'm sorry I made it so frustrating, but that's what you guys do to me all the time with some of your question or statements that are designed to frustrate me or asked just to further criticise. But anyway, below is a copy/paste of what I wrote previously.

Do your best. But I think you have been around long enough to know that when Bullfrog or Arthurson were around, especially when they smelt blood in the water, if there was someone they wanted, they would take advantage of any situation that gave them the upper hand. And look at Uncle Nick today, he also knows how to persuade successfully. Sure the guy is and will be under contract, but nothing ventured nothing gained. Remember I am only advocating this because the Dogs are in salary cap trouble and you never know when there are pressures involved. Funny things can happen.

Now remember that the below post was my response to 84 Baby suggesting that Mariner was probably on very little and therefore wouldn't relieve much salary cap pressure for the dogs to benefit and therefore why would they release one of their better players?
____________________________________________________________________________

Yes exactly. Perfect in fact. If for arguments sake, he is on 200k and we offer him 350-400k for example, which he is well worth it and on form is playing closer to a 500k player, then that would be very very tempting for a player like him. To increase your earnings by around 100% at this point of his career he and his manager would be mad not to seriously look at making the move.

On the other hand, the Dogs are in a very difficult position to try and match our offer. Then even if they obviously wouldn't want to let him go, if he got a bee in his bonnet about it, voila, they may have very little choice in the matter. To keep a player that is very unhappy in a team that isn't travelling to well can be an even bigger cancer.

BA can throw even more kindling onto the fire and court him with love and uber praise and respect and outline the wonderful things he could add to his game in a team with great halves and better finishers...e.t.c.

We have seen players and managers do this a million times. The difference is usually arsehole teams are the beneficiaries. It is about time we turned the tables on them while they are vulnerable I say.

Not rocket science, just good smart strong management. Stuff Peter Bullfrog Moore would be proud of.

I seem to recall that Bullfrog and Arthurson were the CEO's or Chairmen of their respective clubs and not coaches. Maybe you should be comparing them to Bernie Gurr and not sledging BA.

 

[TheRam]

Bullfrog or Arthurson didn't have to worry about salary caps.

They also didn't work for clubs stupid enough to dob themselves in for cheating and invite a ridiculous amount of scrutiny on all of their business dealings.

They also didn't work for a club that had an independent board appointed who are more interesting in financial stability than winnning.

Some very different circumstances which are not the fault of Arthur in any way. You'd call them excuses but I don't agree.

Ah every other Sydney club works with the same rules. We are talking about the COACHES abilities in recruitment. By all reports we have room to move in the salary cap. Bernie isn't as stupid as the previous board. Between the coach and CEO they should have the talent to get it right. So how did they get it so wrong?

I blame the coach and his recruitment strategy. All the other things you are stating ARE just excuses. How long are you going to keep looking back for? By your statements above, then we will never have a winning team, because poor old Parra is a crippled club and I and the rest of us just have to except it. Woe is me...

 

[TheRam]

I seem to recall that Bullfrog and Arthurson were the CEO's or Chairmen of their respective clubs and not coaches. Maybe you should be comparing them to Bernie Gurr and not sledging BA.

Coach and CEO should work in tandem. You know same page kind of stuff.

 

[TheRam]

Of course you have a right to be critical. Just as others have a right to assess your criticisms and determine that they are ill informed.

A mob wanting blood is hardly rational and sometimes a little perspective is needed.

Perspective is all I give. Well my perspective that is...der!

 

[emjaycee]

Don't think anybody has said that but we don't have them. It appears that Cowboys got their man in McLean and other clubs like Tigers, STI and Knights to name a few got their targets but not Parra.

So did we make an offer or miss out? We'll probably never know but there were no rumours around and BA seemed happy with what we have. From everything written he was only looking for someone taller so ended up with Evans and apparently was the only one who showed interest in him. Wonder why that was?

Just for clarity, on the Jan 1st 2017, we had 18 players on our roster that were contracted into at least 2018. 3 of those were release mid-contract throughout the year. We had 2 mid-season signings in Moses and Davis so effectively we had 17 players for 2018 contracted. BA then went looking for a big bopper and signed Evans early, giving us 18.

BA then attempted to get a new hooker in Liccha who priced himself out of our reach, and so we extended Cameron King (19).

Over the next few months, 7 additional players who were off contract at the end of 2017 were extended:
- Auva'a, Gennings, Gower, Moeroa, Niukore, Terepo and Will Smith (not in any order). That gave us a squad of 26.

Hunting for a long-term half/utility found us Jaemon Salmon in early November (27) and then knowing we needed another big bopper, BA signed Williams in mid-November before announcing Hayne in early December (spots 28 and 29).

So, understanding that to release an under-contract player, someone needs to want to buy them, we started recruiting for 2018 with a pretty high number of middle forwards taking up our salary cap already. The only 2 that could have not been extended were Terepo and Gower and neither was re-signed until late in the year.

Auva'a, Gennings, Moeroa, Niukore and Smith were all extensions we needed to make and were deserved on the back of performances in either FG or ISP.

I don't think fans guessing whether BA was happy or not and making assumptions that he was happy tell the full the story.

 

[emjaycee]

Coach and CEO should work in tandem. You know same page kind of stuff.

Absolutely they should.... but do they?
I don't think they always do.

 

[84 Baby]

Just for clarity, on the Jan 1st 2017, we had 18 players on our roster that were contracted into at least 2018. 3 of those were release mid-contract throughout the year. We had 2 mid-season signings in Moses and Davis so effectively we had 17 players for 2018 contracted. BA then went looking for a big bopper and signed Evans early, giving us 18.

BA then attempted to get a new hooker in Liccha who priced himself out of our reach, and so we extended Cameron King (19).

Over the next few months, 7 additional players who were off contract at the end of 2017 were extended:
- Auva'a, Gennings, Gower, Moeroa, Niukore, Terepo and Will Smith (not in any order). That gave us a squad of 26.

Hunting for a long-term half/utility found us Jaemon Salmon in early November (27) and then knowing we needed another big bopper, BA signed Williams in mid-November before announcing Hayne in early December (spots 28 and 29).

So, understanding that to release an under-contract player, someone needs to want to buy them, we started recruiting for 2018 with a pretty high number of middle forwards taking up our salary cap already. The only 2 that could have not been extended were Terepo and Gower and neither was re-signed until late in the year.

Auva'a, Gennings, Moeroa, Niukore and Smith were all extensions we needed to make and were deserved on the back of performances in either FG or ISP.

I don't think fans guessing whether BA was happy or not and making assumptions that he was happy tell the full the story.

That sounds awfully like excuse talk

 

[TheRam]

Absolutely they should.... but do they?
I don't think they always do.

You seem to be trying to tell me something. I can only comment on the results of what is happening on the field and the coach is directly responsible for that and will live or die on those results.

If he is being hampered by a CEO that doesn't want to follow the coaches script, or the CEO doesn't value the coach's wishes then I wouldn't know about that.

But still it is irrelevant to all of us and our criticism of the team an its terrible performances. Like I said, when the results are bad enough, heads will roll. First up it will be the coaches. If the next coach is also a failure then we will start to look at the board and CEO. It would be inevitable. It is what we and the media will and always do.

For now the coach will cop it. Now if you know more, it is up to you whether you want to elaborate. But you probably won't because that's what people like you do. Throw in comment like that and then run and hide. Like the proverbial grenade in the room. Boom!

 

[Gronk]

OK, I'm sorry I made it so frustrating, but that's what you guys do to me all the time with some of your question or statements that are designed to frustrate me or asked just to further criticise. But anyway, below is a copy/paste of what I wrote previously.

Do your best. But I think you have been around long enough to know that when Bullfrog or Arthurson were around, especially when they smelt blood in the water, if there was someone they wanted, they would take advantage of any situation that gave them the upper hand. And look at Uncle Nick today, he also knows how to persuade successfully. Sure the guy is and will be under contract, but nothing ventured nothing gained. Remember I am only advocating this because the Dogs are in salary cap trouble and you never know when there are pressures involved. Funny things can happen.

Now remember that the below post was my response to 84 Baby suggesting that Mariner was probably on very little and therefore wouldn't relieve much salary cap pressure for the dogs to benefit and therefore why would they release one of their better players?
____________________________________________________________________________

Yes exactly. Perfect in fact. If for arguments sake, he is on 200k and we offer him 350-400k for example, which he is well worth it and on form is playing closer to a 500k player, then that would be very very tempting for a player like him. To increase your earnings by around 100% at this point of his career he and his manager would be mad not to seriously look at making the move.

On the other hand, the Dogs are in a very difficult position to try and match our offer. Then even if they obviously wouldn't want to let him go, if he got a bee in his bonnet about it, voila, they may have very little choice in the matter. To keep a player that is very unhappy in a team that isn't travelling to well can be an even bigger cancer.

BA can throw even more kindling onto the fire and court him with love and uber praise and respect and outline the wonderful things he could add to his game in a team with great halves and better finishers...e.t.c.

We have seen players and managers do this a million times. The difference is usually arsehole teams are the beneficiaries. It is about time we turned the tables on them while they are vulnerable I say.

Not rocket science, just good smart strong management. Stuff Peter Bullfrog Moore would be proud of.

Reminds me of the Trumpster who was saying during the election that healthcare reform was easy ..

“Together we’re going to deliver real change that once again puts Americans first. That begins with immediately repealing and replacing the disaster known as Obamacare … You’re going to have such great health care, at a tiny fraction of the cost—and it’s going to be so easy.”

Then when he actually opened the hood and had a look at the cluster f**k that was universal health care he says months and months later.

"Now, I have to tell you, it's an unbelievably complex subject," he added. "Nobody knew health care could be so complicated."

With the greatest of respect to you Ram, I think you (like me) have NFI when it comes to recruitment, retention, cap management and player negotiation. What might appear to be simple is not. Those who are achieving success have stumbled upon a great deal of luck and probably have an unfair advantage over others (one town teams, dodgy TPAs, cheating the cap etc).

 

[84 Baby]

I can only comment on the results of what is happening on the field

The problem is you don't. You take what's happening on the field and make wild, unconfirmed and ill-conceived judgments on what must be happening off the field to fuel whatever bias you have running at the time and then make irrational statements and plain insults whenever someone attempts to refute your position. Granted this place is hardly the be-all and end-all of debate, but if this is what you are actually like, I can only assume you are posting at little lunch whilst you are in the primary school playground. That is what most of your excuse-makers take umbrage over

 

[Gary Gutful]

Perspective is all I give. Well my perspective that is...der!

The perspective of a member of "a mob wanting blood" which isn't a particularly valuable or informed one from my perspective.

 

[TheRam]

Just for clarity, on the Jan 1st 2017, we had 18 players on our roster that were contracted into at least 2018. 3 of those were release mid-contract throughout the year. We had 2 mid-season signings in Moses and Davis so effectively we had 17 players for 2018 contracted. BA then went looking for a big bopper and signed Evans early, giving us 18.

BA then attempted to get a new hooker in Liccha who priced himself out of our reach, and so we extended Cameron King (19).

Over the next few months, 7 additional players who were off contract at the end of 2017 were extended:
- Auva'a, Gennings, Gower, Moeroa, Niukore, Terepo and Will Smith (not in any order). That gave us a squad of 26.

Hunting for a long-term half/utility found us Jaemon Salmon in early November (27) and then knowing we needed another big bopper, BA signed Williams in mid-November before announcing Hayne in early December (spots 28 and 29).

So, understanding that to release an under-contract player, someone needs to want to buy them, we started recruiting for 2018 with a pretty high number of middle forwards taking up our salary cap already. The only 2 that could have not been extended were Terepo and Gower and neither was re-signed until late in the year.

Auva'a, Gennings, Moeroa, Niukore and Smith were all extensions we needed to make and were deserved on the back of performances in either FG or ISP.

I don't think fans guessing whether BA was happy or not and making assumptions that he was happy tell the full the story.

Yes but these are all decisions he chose to make. He could of made different ones. He could of seen what I and others had been seeing and adjusted accordingly. He could of chosen NOT to re-sign players and perused others that were available at the time. Your comments don't take into account that the player market is always open for business and has been for the full duration of his time here with us.

Big boppers win matches. End of story. His coaching career lives or dies on that. He should of made that a priority over any other signings since our halves were settled. Especially since Semi left a huge hole in the teams ability to plough forward on kick returns. Who did he think was going to do that? What he doesn't watch video? Did he think Hayne was going to play like a bulldozer or those midget forwards were going to miraculously all of a sudden put on an extra 10kg and 5 inch in height to drain the energy levels of the opposition as big powerful forwards do and the advantage they give on quick play the balls.?

I mean the only decent big bopper he signed was Williams, and that was way late in the piece, and it was a gamble that he got lucky on. But hardly a master stroke. I think he realised that he needed size but was not prepared to pay for it. Well that has turned out just fine. Wouldn't you say?

 

[Stevie]

Its just a typical Monday in here, after a loss.

 

[Eelementary]

What the hell? Did you even read my post?

I could ask you the same question.

 

[Eelementary]

What are you talking about? His recruitment has been laid bare for all to see with the results so far this season. They are the fruits of his recruitment. How are you missing this? Whether he tried to sign better players or not, the squad he has are the results of what he was able to recruit.

Therefore that is why there is that old saying that the best coaches are the best recruiters. That also includes being good at working out value for money cheapies and spending big on the right players in the right positions.

Does that sound like our squad at the moment to you?

I think you misunderstood what I'm saying.

 

[Gronk]

Its just a typical Monday in here, after a loss.

100% right. Nobody is safe after a loss.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Ah every other Sydney club works with the same rules. We are talking about the COACHES abilities in recruitment. By all reports we have room to move in the salary cap. Bernie isn't as stupid as the previous board. Between the coach and CEO they should have the talent to get it right. So how did they get it so wrong?

If we are talking about COACHES then why are you are comparing a COACH with a CHAIRMAN and a CEO. From 30 F**KEN YEARS AGO!!!

I blame the coach and his recruitment strategy.

Me too.

All the other things you are stating ARE just excuses.

No they are CIRCUMSTANCES. Circumstances that should be evaluated when being critical.

How long are you going to keep looking back for? By your statements above, then we will never have a winning team, because poor old Parra is a crippled club and I and the rest of us just have to except it. Woe is me...

Completely untrue and is a case of you projecting.

I actually think that BA has a lot of room for improvement and has not been great. I just make sure that my criticisms are cognisant of the set of circumstances our club is in.

You point to other examples of things that you think are great and argue that we should automatically be like them. This is despite the fact that:

1. You don't understand what it is you are comparing us to. If you applied the same scrutiny to others as you do to BA you would realise that.

2. You are comparing us to eras that are long gone. Arko and Bullfrog? F**ken please.

3. You think that evaluating a set of circumstances is a sign of weakness that will only deliver a litany of excuses. This is crazy and it is stopping you from ensuring that your criticism is informed and therefore actually constructive and meaningful.

You are about a useful as a chocolate tea pot and only slightly more delicious.