JokerEel
Coach
- Messages
- 13,634
Apparently we can't afford To'o but Penrith can with all their stars..
Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
They are and have lost plenty over the past 2 years. They've obviously prioritised players/positions more effectively than say Parramatta.... We'd have way more money tied up in our pack than they have I reckon and yet we're getting, at best, maybe similar output....at worst, noticeably less....
Pretty sure the guys on the recruitment committee do the recruiting. And BA is one of those guys.
It's because they are a rich club and can still pay unders. We are just like Cronulla, apparently.
I'm pretty sure BA suggests who they should sign too and has final say, if he doesn't I f**king give up. The committee just look at the figures and see if they can fit them into our cap. Mark O'Neill probably does the negotiations.
I think they were good decisions. Our outside backs weren't the reason for our shit defence. Our forwards were. Ofahengaue and Davey have improved us in that area, though you wouldn't f**king think so after last week. At full strength I reckon our defence will be good. Maybe even premiership quality. I like having Matterson defending on the edge. The downside is that his footwork is so effective through the middle.
I was comparing the supermarket (loaves of bread) to the player market, where demand outstrips supply.FMD you merkins have short attention spans...
In reality though you'd think it was a good decision if they now bought Chris Sandow to play front row.
You literally said no bidding war over the Last loaf of bread. Last loaf would imply a shortage of supply.....no? They are not bidding on shelves stocked with bread, literally the last loaf......adn you merkins did engage in a bidding war for the last loaf for months.
I'm sure he does. But that doesn't mean he gets every player he wants, at the price he thinks they're worth. It's not like fantasy footy any more than it's like shopping in Belgrade under the Communists.
When did I ever say that? I think he is far more likely to have veto power than carte blanche to sign whomever he wants.
Veto power, not Tito power
Yep, just one of them. And he would give his opinion to inform committee decisions and even meet with prospective recruits to see if they fit. I reckon he would probably be able to veto any given signing. But he wouldn't have the final say on whether a player could be signed. There would be a process where a majority of the committee (or even all of them) would need to agree on a price for any given player, no matter how much Arthur wanted them at the club. And he would never deal with managers and do the negotiations.
A final say of no is very different to a final say of yes. Like any asset, the maximum value you can derive is determined by how much you agree to pay. No team ever got into cap trouble by refusing to sign a player.
It's resources that got them those socks.
No I think the retention of Paulo was a bad decision. I've made that clear. He obviously provides benefits or else he wouldn't have played so much Origin or appeared in two grand finals. But I think our attack is good enough without him that we shouldn't need to carry him in defence.
I was talking about the supermarket ffs. Where you don't have to pay overs for the one load of bread every merkin wants. Learn to read ffs you dumb dunce
It was a pretty shit analogy pou....I expect better from you
