Broncos Roster, Signings and Rumours Discussion 2021

[007]

He just has to be an elite running 6, we need a smart 7 to be a game manager. Think Jack Wighton at the Raiders, there's no reason Staggs can't be that type of player.

He will lose most of his speed if hes playing at 6. Defence line will tighten up and be more ontop of him. He will be and is more damaging out side, as its easier for him to spread the defense and find open space man on man. Jack Wighton is also far more smarter game wise. If you watch staggs over the last year, hes still making poor decisions with the ball in hand - so much development would be needed to get him to fire at 6. We would be better off with Milford there at a reduced salary.

 

[Kimlo]

If we have a smart 7 to be a game manager then I'd rather have Milf on a reduced contract than pay overs for Staggs.

Yeah I didn't really think of that, that's definitely a valid option. Keeping Milf around as 6 but at 400k instead of a million, I reckon he's good value at that price.

 

[WASSHHH]

Yeah I didn't really think of that, that's definitely a valid option. Keeping Milf around as 6 but at 400k instead of a million, I reckon he's good value at that price.

What a world we live in; when $400k is considered an average income and a price where people are happy for you to be poor at your job far more often than you are good at it.

The ‘norm’ in professional sport is absolute madness and so far detached from the realities of the real world. Which is why I suspect, for the most part, these blokes have such high opinions of themselves and really don’t know just how lucky they are.

 

[Kimlo]

What a world we live in; when $400k is considered an average income and a price where people are happy for you to be poor at your job far more often than you are good at it.

The ‘norm’ in professional sport is absolute madness and so far detached from the realities of the real world. Which is why I suspect, for the most part, these blokes have such high opinions of themselves and really don’t know just how lucky they are.

I don't think Milford is poor at his job, performance is relative to salary in a cap constrained environment. At 1m I think he's utter rubbish, at 400k for a 5/8 with decent ball playing, good kicking game, and a decent potentially good (if he loses weight) running game, he's good if not great value at 400k.

 

[Thelmus]

What a world we live in; when $400k is considered an average income and a price where people are happy for you to be poor at your job far more often than you are good at it.

The ‘norm’ in professional sport is absolute madness and so far detached from the realities of the real world. Which is why I suspect, for the most part, these blokes have such high opinions of themselves and really don’t know just how lucky they are.

Their careers are short, sometimes over before they begin (take a look at our current junior development players and see how many make it). 5 years is the average but you can the best you can possibly be and still be cut short (yowyeh).
You are often left with pain and remnants of past injuries that will last you a life time.
Of course there are other professions (like bricklayers) that face the same for less but I won't begrudge them a decent salary if they can get it.
Compare that to your average business executive telling us how hard he works for his 5 or 6 figure income (usually with bonus's to boot regardless of the company's performance) and I think I know whom is the more overpaid.
James packer has just been accused of facilitating money laundering criminal syndicates as part of the business model of his casino to which he has a controlling interest.
He will never face prosecution for a crime and he will still be filthy rich regardless.

 

[Wolfie]

I wouldnt even bother with Milf unless he absolutely comes out flying. He is 27 this year and the past couple of years he has just been serviceable and had a few injuries. We could get Blake Green to do that job for far less. Agree with @Kimlo $400k tops for him now. We could have pushed the boat out and had a go for Matt Burton instead of sticking with Milf.

 

[WASSHHH]

I don't think Milford is poor at his job, performance is relative to salary in a cap constrained environment. At 1m I think he's utter rubbish, at 400k for a 5/8 with decent ball playing, good kicking game, and a decent potentially good (if he loses weight) running game, he's good if not great value at 400k.

I think you may have missed the point.

There is no other job where you would get paid $400k and it be OK for you to be good one week and poor for the next 6 (except maybe politicians).

Indeed, if you were that inconsistent at hitting the marks your employer set, I’d argue there is no job you’d be safe in, regardless of your income.

Which is why, when society says someone (and I’m not just talking about Milford here, it’s professional sport in general) is good value at $400k yet they are terribly inconsistent, it perpetuates their self-worth and you are left with the Kotoni Staggs’ of the world demanding big money before they’ve even gone close to justifying it.

Sort of like how Milford was given $1million long before he’d proven he was worth it.

 

[Kimlo]

I think you may have missed the point.

There is no other job where you would get paid $400k and it be OK for you to be good one week and poor for the next 6 (except maybe politicians).

Paul White?? Intel CEO? There's about a million people on big money who are shit at their job in high positions.

 

[WASSHHH]

Their careers are short, sometimes over before they begin (take a look at our current junior development players and see how many make it). 5 years is the average but you can the best you can possibly be and still be cut short (yowyeh).
You are often left with pain and remnants of past injuries that will last you a life time.
Of course there are other professions (like bricklayers) that face the same for less but I won't begrudge them a decent salary if they can get it.
Compare that to your average business executive telling us how hard he works for his 5 or 6 figure income (usually with bonus's to boot regardless of the company's performance) and I think I know whom is the more overpaid.
James packer has just been accused of facilitating money laundering criminal syndicates as part of the business model of his casino to which he has a controlling interest.
He will never face prosecution for a crime and he will still be filthy rich regardless.

The average annual income in Australia is ~$90k. So for each year a footballer earning, as an example, $500k plays, that is more than 5 years for a regular joe (not going into the complexities of tax). That’s not including any endorsements, rep games etc. they may get.

So a 5 year career is, very loosely, 20-25 years for your average Australian.

If they retire at 30, they then have 30 or so years to earn far less money than most others will require in their final 30 years of employment. And sure, there are trade-offs, but let’s not make out that to play professional sport, these blokes have any qualifications or other that they weren’t simply born with and have trained and honed.

In short, they get great money to play the same sport others play for free but over time, us very supporters have placed these people on pedestals, which has done nothing but enable (again, not all, but most) players to have inflated self-worth and foster their ego trips.

Paul White?? Intel CEO? There's about a million people on big money who are shit at their job in high positions.

One job I would not want at the moment is the CEO (or equivalent) of a large company. From the handful of people I know in such roles, as the figurehead, guiding their companies through COVID19 has been absolute hell. The buck stops with them.

Sure, Paul White has pulled some wrong reins along the way, but I don’t envy him, the PM (or each states premier) or anyone else trying to keep companies, countries or even small business afloat during this time.

The decisions they will have had to make, the people they would have had to upset and the countless sleepless nights they would have had mulling over things and stressing about what tomorrow might bring, is far more overwhelming and personally taxing than kicking, passing, running and tackling.

 

[Foordy]

The average annual income in Australia is ~$90k

you might need to halve that figure

 

[Kimlo]

The average annual income in Australia is ~$90k. So for each year a footballer earning, as an example, $500k plays, that is more than 5 years for a regular joe (not going into the complexities of tax). That’s not including any endorsements, rep games etc. they may get.

So a 5 year career is, very loosely, 20-25 years for your average Australian.

If they retire at 30, they then have 30 or so years to earn far less money than most others will require in their final 30 years of employment. And sure, there are trade-offs, but let’s not make out that to play professional sport, these blokes have any qualifications or other that they weren’t simply born with and have trained and honed.

In short, they get great money to play the same sport others play for free but over time, us very supporters have placed these people on pedestals, which has done nothing but enable (again, not all, but most) players to have inflated self-worth and foster their ego trips.


One job I would not want at the moment is the CEO (or equivalent) of a large company. From the handful of people I know in such roles, as the figurehead, guiding their companies through COVID19 has been absolute hell. The buck stops with them.

Sure, Paul White has pulled some wrong reins along the way, but I don’t envy him, the PM (or each states premier) or anyone else trying to keep companies, countries or even small business afloat during this time.

The decisions they will have had to make, the people they would have had to upset and the countless sleepless nights they would have had mulling over things and stressing about what tomorrow might bring, is far more overwhelming and personally taxing than kicking, passing, running and tackling.

You say that as if it's easy. Which sport do you know of where even half the player base are consistently excellent every single week? It's ridiculously hard to even be good enough to reach first grade, let alone be so good that you can maintain an incredibly high standard week in week out. It's easy to look bad playing against the very best in the world in your profession and the mind battle of being up every single week is difficult.

Have you tried to be top of the field at anything? I couldn't do it, neither can most NRL players, and sure they get big wages, but they get those big wages because relative to others they can hold a higher weekly standard, even if there is ebb and flows. Smith is known for being one of the greatest players in history because he is able to maintain a high standard every single week.

Milford isn't in some bash and barge role where you don't need much thinking, he's in one of the most crucial positions on the field that require a whole lot of sync between the rest of the squad. A lot of his performances depend on the coaching staff, the game plan, the commitment other players have.

I'm not defending Milford BTW, I think he's been a fucking disgrace but at 400k, I think he's well and truly worth it. He's not ideal but unless you're the Roosters you can't have a star in every position because there just isn't enough great players out there so we end up in this awkward spot where you either pay on potential or take someone who probably isn't going to reach great heights (Milford) anymore at a reduced salary because you know what you can get and the price is right.

 

[Fitzy]

I wouldnt even bother with Milf unless he absolutely comes out flying. He is 27 this year and the past couple of years he has just been serviceable and had a few injuries. We could get Blake Green to do that job for far less. Agree with @Kimlo $400k tops for him now. We could have pushed the boat out and had a go for Matt Burton instead of sticking with Milf.

You say 27 as if he is old... if we can get the best out of him this year he is playing well going into his prime

 

[Wolfie]

You say 27 as if he is old... if we can get the best out of him this year he is playing well going into his prime

Its not old, but people cant keep banging on about what he is potentially capable of anymore. Feels like every year he is apparently in the best condition he has ever been in and we are going to see him back to his old self. Sounds like the Dave Taylor argument all over again. He has the ability, he just doesnt perform to that ability. Should be a top line player but just isnt. I'd love to see him back to his very best but i'm not sure we ever will now.

 

[WASSHHH]

you might need to halve that figure

Average earnings rose in May as low paid jobs lost

www.abs.gov.au

$1714 / week.

You say that as if it's easy. Which sport do you know of where even half the player base are consistently excellent every single week? It's ridiculously hard to even be good enough to reach first grade, let alone be so good that you can maintain an incredibly high standard week in week out. It's easy to look bad playing against the very best in the world in your profession and the mind battle of being up every single week is difficult.

Have you tried to be top of the field at anything? I couldn't do it, neither can most NRL players, and sure they get big wages, but they get those big wages because relative to others they can hold a higher weekly standard, even if there is ebb and flows. Smith is known for being one of the greatest players in history because he is able to maintain a high standard every single week.

Milford isn't in some bash and barge role where you don't need much thinking, he's in one of the most crucial positions on the field that require a whole lot of sync between the rest of the squad. A lot of his performances depend on the coaching staff, the game plan, the commitment other players have.

I'm not defending Milford BTW, I think he's been a fucking disgrace but at 400k, I think he's well and truly worth it. He's not ideal but unless you're the Roosters you can't have a star in every position because there just isn't enough great players out there so we end up in this awkward spot where you either pay on potential or take someone who probably isn't going to reach great heights (Milford) anymore at a reduced salary because you know what you can get and the price is right.

I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with what you are saying, because there is merit in some of it.

What I am saying though, is that somewhere along the line, it’s become the ‘norm’ for these blokes to be paid very handsomely and have very little actual responsibilities.

Sign contract. Play well, get paid. Play terrible, get paid. They have no real pressure to perform. They get paid more than the PM for **** sake, yet I know who is held far more responsible and accountable.

I just don’t understand at what point, or how, we have become so flippant to say someone who is pretty ordinary and inconsistent at their job is good value at $400k.

 

[Sproj]

I’m still holding out hope we can somehow get a spine of this:

1. Walsh / Brimson
6. Staggs
7. Dearden
9. Grant

 

[Thelmus]

The average annual income in Australia is ~$90k. So for each year a footballer earning, as an example, $500k plays, that is more than 5 years for a regular joe (not going into the complexities of tax). That’s not including any endorsements, rep games etc. they may get.

So a 5 year career is, very loosely, 20-25 years for your average Australian.

If they retire at 30, they then have 30 or so years to earn far less money than most others will require in their final 30 years of employment. And sure, there are trade-offs, but let’s not make out that to play professional sport, these blokes have any qualifications or other that they weren’t simply born with and have trained and honed.

In short, they get great money to play the same sport others play for free but over time, us very supporters have placed these people on pedestals, which has done nothing but enable (again, not all, but most) players to have inflated self-worth and foster their ego trips.


One job I would not want at the moment is the CEO (or equivalent) of a large company. From the handful of people I know in such roles, as the figurehead, guiding their companies through COVID19 has been absolute hell. The buck stops with them.

Sure, Paul White has pulled some wrong reins along the way, but I don’t envy him, the PM (or each states premier) or anyone else trying to keep companies, countries or even small business afloat during this time.

The decisions they will have had to make, the people they would have had to upset and the countless sleepless nights they would have had mulling over things and stressing about what tomorrow might bring, is far more overwhelming and personally taxing than kicking, passing, running and tackling.

Tell me this. How many CEO's have been killed as a result of their jobs or left in a wheel chair for life? How many will end up needing pain killers on a weekly basis?
Running a company at this time is hard. It might mean laying off staff, but you know what's harder? Losing your job and having to choose between your kid's school fees and the mortgage payments or the rent. Having to borrow from family and friends (not to support an investment but to keep a car running because it's old and starting to fall apart.
As for a PM's job? Show me one ex pm or minister who has said he has regretted it. Show me one pm or minister who hasnt walked into a job of 6 figures or more afterward, regardless of party affiliation. For that matter show me an ex politician who is scraping to get by.
The thing with money is: the more you pay someone, the more you are staking on them to be good. So you are invested in a successful outcome regardless of their competence.
That's why they are paid a lot more than doctors and nurses whose decisions only decide if people die or not, or teachers who only raise our kids for a third of their lives.
So a Milford on big money has to succeed or his investment is an indictment on the people who hired him. Meanwhile half a dozen players paid considerably have been discarded and there is barely a mention.
Money isn't a measure of worth but a bet by those paying it on their successes. And like Milford, it is a gamble.
Getting rid of him (or any other player for that matter) isnt a guarantee that we will find "better" value for money because the NRL has gotten into the habit of paying on expectation rather than reputation.
That's why I'm reluctant to recommend spending more on a would be 5/8 in staggs.
Milford at least possesses some of what we need, though clearly hasnt been the star we expected.
I think it's a wait and see in both their cases.

 

[Alec]

The average annual income in Australia is ~$90k. So for each year a footballer earning, as an example, $500k plays, that is more than 5 years for a regular joe (not going into the complexities of tax). That’s not including any endorsements, rep games etc. they may get.

So a 5 year career is, very loosely, 20-25 years for your average Australian.

If they retire at 30, they then have 30 or so years to earn far less money than most others will require in their final 30 years of employment. And sure, there are trade-offs, but let’s not make out that to play professional sport, these blokes have any qualifications or other that they weren’t simply born with and have trained and honed.

In short, they get great money to play the same sport others play for free but over time, us very supporters have placed these people on pedestals, which has done nothing but enable (again, not all, but most) players to have inflated self-worth and foster their ego trips.


One job I would not want at the moment is the CEO (or equivalent) of a large company. From the handful of people I know in such roles, as the figurehead, guiding their companies through COVID19 has been absolute hell. The buck stops with them.

Sure, Paul White has pulled some wrong reins along the way, but I don’t envy him, the PM (or each states premier) or anyone else trying to keep companies, countries or even small business afloat during this time.

The decisions they will have had to make, the people they would have had to upset and the countless sleepless nights they would have had mulling over things and stressing about what tomorrow might bring, is far more overwhelming and personally taxing than kicking, passing, running and tackling.

Average would be heavily influenced by all the millionaires and billionaires. Median salary would probably be more accurate IMO, I'd imagine that's far lower than 90K and probably closer to what they'd earn without NRL. So I think it's even more like 8-10 times the annual amount for a player on 500K.

 

[NSW stables]

It kind of shits me that the talk is always about the broncos coming off contract whilst decent players and prospects at other clubs go under the radar.

For example, i think sam walker's contract expires the end of this year. When he was with broncos there was news about how great he was going to be, but now with the roosters there is bugger all word about it so the roosters will resign him with no fuss and little competition.

If the broncos wanted to try and get him back, his dad and uncles might be a bit happier with kevie and donaghy at the helm.