Broncos V Dragons Match Thread Spoilers

[gUt]

Says much about this forum that the loss threads get to 10+ pages quickly while the win threads die quietly.

 

[tkday]

Yes that's definitely true, but a quiet pig is a happy pig?

 

[Porthoz]

Yeah sounds like Gus. One might say he develops an "agenda".

Yeah, you should know! [icon_lol1. [icon_lol1. [icon_lol1.

 

[tkday]

Hahah, come on now, let's not go off topic, but was funny. I wasn't paying attention to Locky this game, I was really focused on Macca, Glenn and Winter. How did he go?

 

[gUt]

He was steady without standing out. Threw a couple of shockers and a couple of pearlers. It seemed that both teams were tentative and it showed in how all the halves went.

 

[Anonymous person]

90%? Try 20%.

And the problem wasn't the fact that he was paid so much, it was because we were losing a bunch of players for him.

I still would have prefered to keep Hannant, Ennis and Boyd over Folau right now.

nah, try 90%.

we didnt lose any players for him. TC left, was on a large sum of cash, and Folaus contract was reportedly VERY back ended. Folau got TCs money, thats it. we didnt lose Hannant, Ennis or Boyd because of Folau. we lost Hannant because he just cares about the money - and there is NO way he was worth the $350k or whatever it was that the Bulldogs offered. at that stage - and even now imo - he wasnt even worth $200k a season. Ennis we lost because he was a grub and not very liked amongst the club. he wasnt the type of player we wanted in our team. Boyd, well he wanted to go with Bennett, and im guessing he wanted to play Fullback. we had Hunt there, and not looking like he would be leaving any time soon. same way Hodges left us 'to play fullback'.

Folau didnt make us lose ANYONE. its a myth bigger than 'Wallace is a great Halfback, hes just out of form'.

 

[Nashy]

OMG. Both of you just shutup.

 

[Porthoz]

OMG. Both of you just shutup.

AP has a double personality?
That would explain a lot! eusa_think

 

[Nashy]

What? Him and Rocky.

They should agree to disagree. Opinions have been put forward, they're both stubborn. Just give up.

 

[Black Philip]

[quote="The Rock":1atczre6]
90%? Try 20%.

And the problem wasn't the fact that he was paid so much, it was because we were losing a bunch of players for him.

I still would have prefered to keep Hannant, Ennis and Boyd over Folau right now.

nah, try 90%.

we didnt lose any players for him. TC left, was on a large sum of cash, and Folaus contract was reportedly VERY back ended. Folau got TCs money, thats it. we didnt lose Hannant, Ennis or Boyd because of Folau. we lost Hannant because he just cares about the money - and there is NO way he was worth the $350k or whatever it was that the Bulldogs offered. at that stage - and even now imo - he wasnt even worth $200k a season. Ennis we lost because he was a grub and not very liked amongst the club. he wasnt the type of player we wanted in our team. Boyd, well he wanted to go with Bennett, and im guessing he wanted to play Fullback. we had Hunt there, and not looking like he would be leaving any time soon. same way Hodges left us 'to play fullback'.

Folau didnt make us lose ANYONE. its a myth bigger than 'Wallace is a great Halfback, hes just out of form'.[/quote:1atczre6]

I remember it being more of an argument over where he should play, centers or wing. A lot of people didn't think a player getting 300k+ a season should be sitting on the wing.

As the season goes on the more pissed off I feel about us losing him. I would have much preferred to keep him over us potentially getting GI.

 

[Professor47]

[quote="The Rock":2srpu8mq]
90%? Try 20%.

And the problem wasn't the fact that he was paid so much, it was because we were losing a bunch of players for him.

I still would have prefered to keep Hannant, Ennis and Boyd over Folau right now.

nah, try 90%.

we didnt lose any players for him. TC left, was on a large sum of cash, and Folaus contract was reportedly VERY back ended. Folau got TCs money, thats it. we didnt lose Hannant, Ennis or Boyd because of Folau. we lost Hannant because he just cares about the money - and there is NO way he was worth the $350k or whatever it was that the Bulldogs offered. at that stage - and even now imo - he wasnt even worth $200k a season. Ennis we lost because he was a grub and not very liked amongst the club. he wasnt the type of player we wanted in our team. Boyd, well he wanted to go with Bennett, and im guessing he wanted to play Fullback. we had Hunt there, and not looking like he would be leaving any time soon. same way Hodges left us 'to play fullback'.

Folau didnt make us lose ANYONE. its a myth bigger than 'Wallace is a great Halfback, hes just out of form'.

I remember it being more of an argument over where he should play, centers or wing. A lot of people didn't think a player getting 300k+ a season should be sitting on the wing.

As the season goes on the more pissed off I feel about us losing him. I would have much preferred to keep him over us potentially getting GI.[/quote:2srpu8mq]

That is how the argument started. A lot of the time people expect gun signings to pick up where they left off... look at how Folau is going now... still far from perfect but leaps and bounds since he started... He should have stayed - I think he could have been successful here at the Broncs.

Done and dusted now - if we get GI.. we start again.

 

[tkday]

Hahaha, hilarious as that was, you are absolutely right. No-one here knows what the crap goes on behind closed doors and through players negotiations. Hell even when it's reported on the news it's just rumours. Anyways, why do we have to keep going back to the same crap arguments. Let's keep the topics on freaking topic because I am easily distracted as it is, I don't need other peoples encouragement :)

 

[gUt]

So should they move Lockyer to 6 or leave him at fullback?

 

[Bucking Beads]

Is it just me or was it not that boring? Maybe Gould has got sucked into the Hayne Plane style of scoring lots of points and that's what makes footy entertaining? I remember he used to mourn the lack of defensive arm wrestles in the game.

Or maybe he's just dirty that it was the Broncos vs Wayne Bennett's Dragons?

It was a great game yesterday IMO. It had everything except a few soft tries.. Gould is just a big fat curly haired F###

 

[Nashy]

I thought the Wallabies v. All Blacks was a far more exciting game.

Two tries and shitloads of defense and errors doesn't make footy exciting for mine.

 

[Coxy]

I thought the Wallabies v. All Blacks was a far more exciting game.

Two tries and shitloads of defense and errors doesn't make footy exciting for mine.

Rugby onion is never more interesting than league. Ever.

 

[QUEENSLANDER]

i agree with gus, the game was far from excited. very very boring for the most part, but thats not the point, the point is we got the win

 

[Nashy]

No. The Wallabies v. All Blacks match was one of the best football matches of this year. And it blew most of this weekends league out of the water.

Since I'm assuming you didn't even think to watch it, you will no longer comment on said game.... ;-)