Broncos Roster, Signings and Rumours Discussion 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sproj said:
If you are loaning a player, why would you agree to it if you have to pay some of the loan yourself? Why not just keep the player in that case. All you are doing is benefiting another club. Essentially, the wording of the announcement implies that Arthars for all intents and purposes is a Warrior for 2022, so why should we have to pay ANY of his remaining wage?

The Warriors need a back, we gave them one, we are doing them a favour not the other way around. So why do another club a favour AND pay some of the wage to boot?

I’m not sure what’s so difficult to understand? Which bank would provide a loan AND then pay for part of it themselves? That’s just dumb.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was just wanting to clarify what you meant before responding to it. I wasn’t implying you made a bad point or anything.

I agree that ideally you would want to get the warriors to pay all of it and if I had to guess, they probably are. But regardless it doesn’t really matter how much they are paying, what matters is what loaning Arthurs out allows us to do.

We will obviously have to wait and see what the club does with the extra top 30 spot but there are a number of scenarios (like the 2 examples I gave before) where the loan benefits us regardless of if warriors are getting a discount.

An extreme example would be imagine we have $900k unused cap and Ponga is on the cusp of signing yet we are $100k under his asking price and don’t have a top 30 spot. You’d easily give the warriors Arthurs on loan for the slashed price of $100k and sign Ponga.

If you don’t want Ponga than replace him with any player or position you think we need at a price that makes the example still make sense.
 
theshed said:
Sorry, I was just wanting to clarify what you meant before responding to it. I wasn’t implying you made a bad point or anything.

I agree that ideally you would want to get the warriors to pay all of it and if I had to guess, they probably are. But regardless it doesn’t really matter how much they are paying, what matters is what loaning Arthurs out allows us to do.

We will obviously have to wait and see what the club does with the extra top 30 spot but there are a number of scenarios (like the 2 examples I gave before) where the loan benefits us regardless of if warriors are getting a discount.

An extreme example would be imagine we have $900k unused cap and Ponga is on the cusp of signing yet we are $100k under his asking price and don’t have a top 30 spot. You’d easily give the warriors Arthurs on loan for the slashed price of $100k and sign Ponga.

If you don’t want Ponga than replace him with any player or position you think we need at a price that makes the example still make sense.
Click to expand...
Exactly… I think it’s great business and there is **** all chance we are paying a cent of his contract except maybe this first month of it but I’m not to sure. It’s great because we can give a train and trial player there spot in the squad (still leftover because Quai-Ward is definitely a dev contract) and then we still have a decent amount of cash to spend on another position. Whether that be Dunamis Lui or it gets kept up our sleeve until we want to use it
 
theshed said:
Sorry, I was just wanting to clarify what you meant before responding to it. I wasn’t implying you made a bad point or anything.

I agree that ideally you would want to get the warriors to pay all of it and if I had to guess, they probably are. But regardless it doesn’t really matter how much they are paying, what matters is what loaning Arthurs out allows us to do.

We will obviously have to wait and see what the club does with the extra top 30 spot but there are a number of scenarios (like the 2 examples I gave before) where the loan benefits us regardless of if warriors are getting a discount.

An extreme example would be imagine we have $900k unused cap and Ponga is on the cusp of signing yet we are $100k under his asking price and don’t have a top 30 spot. You’d easily give the warriors Arthurs on loan for the slashed price of $100k and sign Ponga.

If you don’t want Ponga than replace him with any player or position you think we need at a price that makes the example still make sense.
Click to expand...
It was really nice to see a discussion that did not devolve into insults on either side.
 
Sproj said:
So we are going to pay part of his already low wage and pick up someone better for say minimum wage?
Click to expand...

Pick up someone that’s going to benefit us more than what Arthars is. Whether that’s a centre or fullback or hooker, we’ll find out.

Like I said, it’s common for loan deals to include the club loaning the player out to be paying a part of his wage and Warriors would have negotiated that. It would likely be Warriors would be paying a larger portion of his wage this season. It’s just about freeing up a spot to bring in someone else or promote someone. Plus Arthars will have more games under his belt when he comes back.

Win/win situation either way.
 
Anyway, this is the sub-player market we have currently. Clearly it leaves a lot of ambiguity for everyone outside the front offices of the clubs involved.

You might be okay with that, but it makes it hard for us as fans to properly hold our clubs to account when we have zero transparity on this particular part of the player market.

We do arguably need a transfer window...one that is closed during the season.
 
Arthars is going in as a spy to lure Suga Walsh back on minimum wage.
 
Screenshot_20211203-163029_Twitter.jpg


Get Jake Simpkin up here, now.
 
pagey said:
maybe why we made room , someone mentioned simpkin will be back
Click to expand...

Gotta convince the Tigers to release Simpkin though ... doubt they will unless they get Api early
 
Foordy said:
Gotta convince the Tigers to release Simpkin though ... doubt they will unless they get Api early
Click to expand...
yeah not sure what the deal was but apparently they are trying to off load Liddell so i can't see it happening.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
New Posts

Unread

Watch

YouTube
0 0 883
1:26:10
NSWRL Preliminary Final, 1990 - Canberra Raiders vs Brisbane Broncos
View full media list »

Active Now

... and 1 more.
Total: 223 (members: 21, guests: 202)
Robots: 138
Back
Top