That's the point. To be making way less money than co-workers with similar or less seniority while performing much better is an insult. Hence the passive aggressive public comment. Like some moron on this forum called me something nasty a few weeks back (can't recall who, but if I were to guess, I'd say Rover) and then added "only joking"....... Oates "jokingly" eluded to how much money Milford was on compared to himself.
I never even suggested his preference wasn't/isn't to stay at the Broncos. Firstly, given the environment he is in almost every day, what do you expect him to say? Secondly, it's his "preference" which means very little. While being disappointed, I couldn't begrudge him accepting a much higher offer from elsewhere. It's ............ someones fault for the farcical position the team is in, in regard to the salary-cap. Milford is overpaid and signed for too long. Boyd is significantly overpaid and his contract is far too long. Gillett is overpaid and signed for too long. The forums favorite punching bag, Sam Thaiday isn't overpaid or signed beyond this season. Bird is shaping up to be a monumental signing blunder.
This is the environment in which Oates "prefers" to stay.
I will say this. There are people who would with your opinion of Boyd and Milford being overpaid. I think milf was paid on promise and Boyd on past performance. That said they are both good players, and despite criticism of their form (sometimes fair, sometimes not) are easily the best for their positions in the club, injury allowing.
Gillet though has been and still is if not the best 2nd rower in the competition, close to it. You may have a dissenting opinion based on recent performances, but remember he was essentially playing with a broken neck.
On his day, when fit, will run as hard as sua and make as many tackle as macca. Ones that hurt their opponents. Also he plays the full 80 minutes without break, allowing impact players to rest up.
You never know how players recover from injuries and Gillet may never be that player again but if he is close to it, he is easily worth his price.
As for Oates being worth more than Milford, let's break that down. Milford is a devastating runner who can draw defenders, offload in tackles, organise the attack and kick profficently. His form is inconsistent and needs to be corrected but in his worst games still has more impact on the teams attack than Oates because of the threat he represents.
Oates is a good winger in hot form, who deserves more money. He is a good runner, a proficient catch and an excellent finisher, but that's it. He can tackle alright on the wing but is sometimes caught out when he is closer to the ruck. He rarely passes or kicks (it's not his job). He almost never passes except to beat the last defender and has stuffed that up at times. No way would I lose Milford for him, let alone pay him more.
