What's new
The Front Row Forums

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!

Rumours and Stuff

T.S Quint

Coach
Messages
14,465
im still shocked they offered a option. 1 year with a player option???? at that point you know where the kids head is at.

This club acts scared and i think player managers can smell it from a mile away.

Does he sign if we offer him two years? Probably not unless we are offering overs. He and his manager know that he is a highly rated junior who can command more money each year he develops.

He might have just signed for one year, but how many teams are offering a one year contract? Probably all of them.

Offer him the safey net of a player option and suddenly our contract becomes more attractive. He gets his one year contract, an opportunity to renegotiate for the next season after a year of development, and can opt into an extra year on the same pay (or whatever they negotiated) if he gets injured.

A slight risk for the club, no risk for him and everyone is happy. I don't think it's the club being 'scared' but more that they are trying to get the right players to the club with an extra chance to hold onto them. Usually a player is easier to re-sign if they are at the club already. Blaize is just one that didn't work out.
 

Pazza

First Grade
Messages
9,753
Does he sign if we offer him two years? Probably not unless we are offering overs. He and his manager know that he is a highly rated junior who can command more money each year he develops.

He might have just signed for one year, but how many teams are offering a one year contract? Probably all of them.

Offer him the safey net of a player option and suddenly our contract becomes more attractive. He gets his one year contract, an opportunity to renegotiate for the next season after a year of development, and can opt into an extra year on the same pay (or whatever they negotiated) if he gets injured.

A slight risk for the club, no risk for him and everyone is happy. I don't think it's the club being 'scared' but more that they are trying to get the right players to the club with an extra chance to hold onto them. Usually a player is easier to re-sign if they are at the club already. Blaize is just one that didn't work out.

So how long before the rest of the league catches on??? How long are we going to be able to leverage this considerable competitive advantage??
 

Noise

Coach
Messages
18,149
So far the options for Blaize, Dunster and Matterson haven’t worked out well for the club. The other options will all kick in over the next year or two. Brown will only take up his if he fully tears the rest of his ACL.
 

Pazza

First Grade
Messages
9,753
So far the options for Blaize, Dunster and Matterson haven’t worked out well for the club. The other options will all kick in over the next year or two. Brown will only take up his if he fully tears the rest of his ACL.

This club knows what's its doing.....

Everyone is a rational actor... even the Parramatta Eels
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
91,071
Agree 100% which is why I listed it as a negative.
It’s definitely a negative, just like committing cap space to a player. But those negatives (PO or cap space) are taken on in return for exclusive (at least at club level) use of the player’s contributions on the field. It’s a transaction. So if salary cap space can be exchanged for onfield contributions, so can the PO. This leads naturally to the concept of exchanging the PO for cap space. Both are negatives, but the PO is a risk while the cap space is a cost. The benefit of pure cap space up front is that you can budget for it. The benefit of the PO is that it doesn’t count under the salary cap until/unless it is activated.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
91,071
I think you’re both conflating the problem. On here it became a highlight that almost everyone in our squad seemed to have an option of some sort. If we’re in a position where waiting on one player to decide costs us a potential replacement, that’s simply negotiation and talent identification. It happens.
It’s the volume and in some case the scenarios it’s occurred in that’s the problem.
They were a gamble played to lower cost during 19-22. The gamble didn’t pay off and now we’re paying the bookie for it. And so far we seem bereft of correcting it.
Most of these contracts were negotiated after the 2021 and 2022 seasons, when we were under cap pressure and trying to keep the team together. I’m sure the fans wouldn’t have been happy if the club had decided it was time to rebuild.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
91,071
Players they want to keep? like Ryan Matterson and Mika Sivo? players who have been told theyre free to look elsewhere.
We might prefer them to go but we offered those options with the understanding they wouldn’t hurt us if the player decided to stay. These are players we already knew when the options were negotiated. They are cleanskins and professionals. People call Sivo lazy but he obviously works very hard in the gym. The merkin is ripped massive.
the difference is that there is no incentive for the player with the option to re sign before Nov 1,
The incentive is like with any contract offer. Clubs have deadlines and can withdraw contract offers of the player takes too long to decide. The PO is just another contract offer with clearly defined deadline.
The option, the safety net enables the player to go onto the player market and test their value. That money could be taken off the table by the club to look for someone else, but the option locks the club into keeping that money aside. This off season the players have all the power, its going to affect our ability to re shape out roster.
Yes it’s a benefit to the player. This isn’t in dispute. That’s why the player was happy to give something up for it.
what benefit did we get? you claim guys like Brown and Moses re signed for less due to these options? show me the evidence!!
We weren’t involved in negotiations so we don’t know what the club got in return for conceding those options. But this is a business run by ‘bean counters’ and nothing is free.
i dont see it in our squad. given we have more options than any other NRL team, there go according to your logic we must have saved a fair amount of money. i just done see it in our list, we got some good well paid players but we also got a lot of junk.
When have we ever had anything close to the best squad in the NRL? Even when we were minor premiers under Brian Smith we didn’t have the best squad in the game. Those teams overachieved. And we haven’t been minor premiers for almost 20 years.
also i find curious, that since giving options to players is a great way of operating. why (according to NRL signings tracker) are there no options in the Lomax, Iongi, Simonson, Hopgood contracts???? it will be interesting to see the Hawkins contract.
I’d say most players would prefer extra money more than a one year safety net. For a club and player to agree on an option (PO or CO or both) they have to agree on its value. Plenty of players would think no PO is worth giving up money for unless the PO was for more than he’s worth. But in that case the club wouldn’t agree to it. A no-brainer option is no option at all. It’s just an extra year on overs. That might eventually be the case where the player gets badly injured (e.g. Dunster) but if the club knew in advance they wouldn’t have agreed to it.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
91,071
i just dont think going into Nov 1 with 2 million dollars worth of cap tied up in POs is a good idea......

its like going to a house action but a quarter of your money isnt available for 1 - 6 months.

look its just my opinion, im not going to claim to be right or know more than anyone else around here.
Well I certainly f**ken am!
 

Pazza

First Grade
Messages
9,753
Yes it’s a benefit to the player. This isn’t in dispute. That’s why the player was happy to give something up for it.

what if the player got the full amount they were looking for and the player option?? i think that is a very likely outcome, especially when there is a lot of pressure on the club to retain players after a period of hemorrhaging a lot of talent.

We weren’t involved in negotiations so we don’t know what the club got in return for conceding those options. But this is a business run by ‘bean counters’ and nothing is free.

if the parramatta eels were a business in any other sector of the economy they would have gone out of business long ago
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
91,071
true, but it has been claimed POs lowers their cap number

no one saying the POs are offered for nothing.

I think its got more to do with the club being desperate after mohoney, Papali, Niukore, Kalfusi, stone, etc all walked out.

to say the eels have found a way to game the cap is ridiculous...... just ridiculous
Nobody’s saying we’re gaming the cap. Yes we are taking more risk, and the likely reason is due to salary cap pressure. The reason for that is desperation to keep a competitive team together.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
91,071
Most of those players we would want to keep, and the ones that we would be ok to lose are still good enough players to have in your top 30 (even your top 17) apart from Dunster who would cost f**k all.

The club would be in constant conversation with the managers of these players. I highly doubt it's a shock to the club when a player exercises their option, or chooses not to take it up. At least in most cases.
I reckon Dunster’s option would be at least $200k. He was worth more than that when he re-signed. Is he even worth minimum salary now? He’s the one player we can guarantee is on overs.
 

Pazza

First Grade
Messages
9,753
Nobody’s saying we’re gaming the cap. Yes we are taking more risk, and the likely reason is due to salary cap pressure. The reason for that is desperation to keep a competitive team together.

you keep saying the PO is the lube for the lowball. i dont agree, i think the PO is the lube for the club so the player managers stay happy
 

hindy111

Post Whore
Messages
62,867
So far the options for Blaize, Dunster and Matterson haven’t worked out well for the club. The other options will all kick in over the next year or two. Brown will only take up his if he fully tears the rest of his ACL.

I'm just glad we put Talagi on display. Let him get a few highlights and show everyone his potential. His NSW cup form was average at best. Almost poor. I'm sure others clubs knew of him but none where offering 400k+ based on how average his form in cup was and a handful of Flegg games.
Massive cock up.

Huggers come at me
 

hindy111

Post Whore
Messages
62,867
I reckon Dunster’s option would be at least $200k. He was worth more than that when he re-signed. Is he even worth minimum salary now? He’s the one player we can guarantee is on overs.

I'm glad he got some money. Would of been horrible had he done knee and thrown out to dry. Atleast he walks away with maybe 750k

About the same as JA I'd say.
 

Latest posts

Top