THE BOSS Dave Donaghy - Broncos CEO

One press conference in and already Donaghy is showing a backbone, presence and authority with the club's best interest in mind. How refreshing and a complete contrast to Paul White's shriveled raisins.
 
The real talanoa said:
Let's have a look at the current roster.
Lodge and Turpin were buy ins, haas was not a Brisbane junior. Riki is a kiwi, pangai was bought from Canberra, gamble was a local phin who was overlooked and only came in late after a small stint at the tigers, Milford was bought in, isaako was a shark, Coates was from the Tweed, staggs was from nsw, Farnsworth is a pommy, Arthur's is from the storm, dearden was Mackay then Tweed and the list goes on. There isn't many home grown brisbane kids in this team who have come through. That tells me a whole different issue..
Click to expand...
You missed the point too, clearly.
 
The real talanoa said:
No I havent
Click to expand...
The point is against situations like Piakura and Walsh. We should not be in a situation where kids have come through our system and when they are old enough to play get big offers meaning we have to pay on potential or lose them. There should be a system where either they need to have a rookie year with the club they came through or some form of cap dispensation so when this situation happens even though we still need to pay on potential the club that developed them has some cap relief to make it a bit more palatable.
 
In reply to our DD highlighting how some clubs do nothing to develop players and therefore nothing to grow the game and simply poach the best players as they reach the stage of being ready for NRL Graham Annesley said on Monday "Some of our clubs don’t have big junior areas, for example, so they have to rely on buying players" . This is so disingenuous and you really have to wonder why not one single journo has taken him to task for such a myopic statement.

By using the term 'buying' he is suggesting some clubs are not able to invest money in juniors as they are in areas that do not have young families. Instead these clubs 'buy' their players and are therefore (according to Annesley's logic) somehow putting money back into development. That is, by suggesting these clubs 'buy' a player it's as if they invest a lump sum at the end of the process when they 'buy' the ready made product.

I have to ask, as I often wonder - who do clubs like the Storm and Roosters 'buy' their players from? Who do they pay the lump sum to when they 'buy' the player they are after?

The answer is no one. They simply don't 'buy' anyone at all. They pay no purchase fee to anyone. All they do is wait until the player they want is ready for NRL and they then come in and offer them a salary. No money or compensation is given to the club who spent years and real cash developing the player.

So when Annesley, or anyone else uses the term 'buying' it's a smokescreen for poaching. There is absolutely no buying actually happening when they sign these players up.

To be clear, the system developing these players are not compensated a single cent when teams like the Storm, and Roosters pinch a player who has been developed by another club for years.

Now how do you think the money saved by these clubs who do not invest in our game is otherwise used then?

Well these clubs do buy something, and Billy Slater should have remembered this when he had a sly dig at the Broncos yesterday.

These clubs secretly 'buy' the players they want to keep a new boat, or in some cases it might be real estate, like a boat shed because these clubs have no culture and have to resort to 'buying' loyalty.

We all know about the dodgy games of golf where the club 'buys' a player's continued services by ensuring their real take home pay is well over the market asking price except a huge chunk of it is payed via a dodgy brown paper bag system.

Their managers are also looked after by these clubs to ensure their players are never involved in a public auction as this would expose their hypocritical rorting of the salary cap. No, instead when one of their players come up for contract renewal it mysteriously goes deadly silent and no club makes a single offer.

What is happening here is the player and manager have already been 'paid' their asking price albeit a good portion of that will never be declared and so the manager has no need to spruik his client to other clubs.

Unless the development system is recognised and clubs are rewarded for their investments there is a danger of every club copying the Storm and Rooster's model in a race to the bottom. The end result will be fewer players of NRL standard meaning the spectacle and excitement will drop. Eventually the product will suffer and the fans will walk away. The game is already hemorrhaging badly because of Vlandy ball and the percieved Sydney-centric unfair advantages some clubs are given.

Once a club begins to lose their juniors en masse with no compensation the very fabric of the game is destroyed.

If these development areas are shut down, clubs like the Storm and Roosters will overnight lose their 'recruitment area' as without being able to cherry pick from these areas they will cease to exist as a force.
 
Is that the reason the NRL have been handing favourable calls and wins to the Panthers? They threaten to pull their development systems, all of a sudden the development starts paying off dividends with "results" on the field. So the club is happy to keep developing players and the NRL praises the value of development in the hope other clubs continue to do it.

And therefore is that why Double-D is bitching about the same thing? With Brisbane II coming in, they will be in a prime position to "buy" our players, and DD is keen to get on the front foot and hope the NRL gives us some sort of safeguard?
 
Morkel said:
Is that the reason the NRL have been handing favourable calls and wins to the Panthers? They threaten to pull their development systems, all of a sudden the development starts paying off dividends with "results" on the field. So the club is happy to keep developing players and the NRL praises the value of development in the hope other clubs continue to do it.

And therefore is that why Double-D is bitching about the same thing? With Brisbane II coming in, they will be in a prime position to "buy" our players, and DD is keen to get on the front foot and hope the NRL gives us some sort of safeguard?
Click to expand...
They better shorten up that 10 meters too.
 
Morkel said:
Is that the reason the NRL have been handing favourable calls and wins to the Panthers? They threaten to pull their development systems, all of a sudden the development starts paying off dividends with "results" on the field. So the club is happy to keep developing players and the NRL praises the value of development in the hope other clubs continue to do it.

And therefore is that why Double-D is bitching about the same thing? With Brisbane II coming in, they will be in a prime position to "buy" our players, and DD is keen to get on the front foot and hope the NRL gives us some sort of safeguard?
Click to expand...
We are at the other end of the spectrum at the minute and you do get the feeling they are happy to keep us there. Maybe the nightmare of having two Qld teams or one Qld and one Vic in the grand final is still haunting the NSWRL.
Whatever I couldn’t be happier with the way Dave came out of the blocks. He’s clearly had time to pick his maiden Broncos presser. Well done sir and keep it coming.
 
The real talanoa said:
I'm not sure I agree with that mate, let's take Jack bird and Milford as an example. Milford was a raider since 13 and they pumped a heap of cash and time into him and then he gets poached by red hill, Jack bird was a dragons junior his whole life and the sharks were first then the broncos came in to poach 2nd. We poached haas from the titans also remember.
The Walsh situation isn't poaching in my opinion, it's identifying talent that clearly someone or some people in out system haven't. They didn't play him at nrl level even though he was killing them at training last year.
They even played tesi niu, Kennar Arthur's and others in front of him. That shows and says a lot.
I would bet my left nut if he had played he wouldn't have left to go to the warriors. Walsh was also another kid from the Gold Coast and played for the gulls down there.
My argument is, who is making these monumental decisions which are clearly disasters...
Click to expand...
Milford came because he wanted to. Like I said you cant stop what a player wants to do. He took less to move back to QLD and play here. Like 360 said the Raiders had 1 mil on the table back then. So no we didn't poach him. Bird was not poached by us, as you point out so that is not worth a mention. Payne was poached from the Titans? never heard that, I can't find any info that they had him signed and actually developed him. If your claiming because he lived in GC and attend Keebra means we poached him then I disagree and again it not what DD is talking about and it shouldn't be. Any area should be free for all for clubs and scouts. It's in what that club does for scouted player, A) Invest money into them, B) Sign a contract c) Develop them at their academy D)put them through their system.

I think the NRL needs to clearly define what a developed player is for any incentives to be actionable. See you can't just say they came from our clubs catchment area, you can't just say we signed some kid in the bush and sent him some boots, club shirt and a cheque in the mail. You should need to be able to show that person has been given those things but has also attended footy camps, the academy, actually had development put into them. Was Walsh playing on the GC but under a Broncos development contract? because I heard he was signed at 13. The area is not the issue, it's what club was investing in him, how often in those years was he going upto the Broncos for training, did the Broncos pay for courses he did in personal development outside footy. He didn't play last year because he was 17, and covid had canceled the ISC. We hadn't seen the bloke play men up until the Broncos trial games this year and he would have been signed by us but the Warriors came in and poached him, Walsh is the very definition of poaching, same with the attempt on Piakura. Guys who have not even made a debut, just about to sign their first top 30 contract and the vultures come in paying overs. This puts pressure on us to match it, potentially putting our cap out of wack because clubs are throwing hail mary's to land a future star.
 
heartly87 said:
Milford came because he wanted to. Like I said you cant stop what a player wants to do. He took less to move back to QLD and play here. Like 360 said the Raiders had 1 mil on the table back then. So no we didn't poach him. Bird was not poached by us, as you point out so that is not worth a mention. Payne was poached from the Titans? never heard that, I can't find any info that they had him signed and actually developed him. If your claiming because he lived in GC and attend Keebra means we poached him then I disagree and again it not what DD is talking about and it shouldn't be. Any area should be free for all for clubs and scouts. It's in what that club does for scouted player, A) Invest money into them, B) Sign a contract c) Develop them at their academy D)put them through their system.

I think the NRL needs to clearly define what a developed player is for any incentives to be actionable. See you can't just say they came from our clubs catchment area, you can't just say we signed some kid in the bush and sent him some boots, club shirt and a cheque in the mail. You should need to be able to show that person has been given those things but has also attended footy camps, the academy, actually had development put into them. Was Walsh playing on the GC but under a Broncos development contract? because I heard he was signed at 13. The area is not the issue, it's what club was investing in him, how often in those years was he going upto the Broncos for training, did the Broncos pay for courses he did in personal development outside footy. He didn't play last year because he was 17, and covid had canceled the ISC. We hadn't seen the bloke play men up until the Broncos trial games this year and he would have been signed by us but the Warriors came in and poached him, Walsh is the very definition of poaching, same with the attempt on Piakura. Guys who have not even made a debut, just about to sign their first top 30 contract and the vultures come in paying overs. This puts pressure on us to match it, potentially putting our cap out of wack because clubs are throwing hail mary's to land a future star.
Click to expand...

You've touched on the key point in here. No one has actually taken the time to sit down and discuss what a developed player means but almost everybody wants to shoot it down because they assume they know what DD is talking about. This is rugby league in a nutshell. Don't actually listen, assume you know what is being talked about and then blow up about what you don't actually understand because it hasn't actually been discussed.
 
heartly87 said:
Milford came because he wanted to. Like I said you cant stop what a player wants to do. He took less to move back to QLD and play here. Like 360 said the Raiders had 1 mil on the table back then. So no we didn't poach him. Bird was not poached by us, as you point out so that is not worth a mention. Payne was poached from the Titans? never heard that, I can't find any info that they had him signed and actually developed him. If your claiming because he lived in GC and attend Keebra means we poached him then I disagree and again it not what DD is talking about and it shouldn't be. Any area should be free for all for clubs and scouts. It's in what that club does for scouted player, A) Invest money into them, B) Sign a contract c) Develop them at their academy D)put them through their system.

I think the NRL needs to clearly define what a developed player is for any incentives to be actionable. See you can't just say they came from our clubs catchment area, you can't just say we signed some kid in the bush and sent him some boots, club shirt and a cheque in the mail. You should need to be able to show that person has been given those things but has also attended footy camps, the academy, actually had development put into them. Was Walsh playing on the GC but under a Broncos development contract? because I heard he was signed at 13. The area is not the issue, it's what club was investing in him, how often in those years was he going upto the Broncos for training, did the Broncos pay for courses he did in personal development outside footy. He didn't play last year because he was 17, and covid had canceled the ISC. We hadn't seen the bloke play men up until the Broncos trial games this year and he would have been signed by us but the Warriors came in and poached him, Walsh is the very definition of poaching, same with the attempt on Piakura. Guys who have not even made a debut, just about to sign their first top 30 contract and the vultures come in paying overs. This puts pressure on us to match it, potentially putting our cap out of wack because clubs are throwing hail mary's to land a future star.
Click to expand...

Haas was with the Titans and Warriors before the Broncos. Titans stuffed it by telling him he couldn't play for Keebra anymore.
 
heartly87 said:
Milford came because he wanted to. Like I said you cant stop what a player wants to do. He took less to move back to QLD and play here. Like 360 said the Raiders had 1 mil on the table back then. So no we didn't poach him. Bird was not poached by us, as you point out so that is not worth a mention. Payne was poached from the Titans? never heard that, I can't find any info that they had him signed and actually developed him. If your claiming because he lived in GC and attend Keebra means we poached him then I disagree and again it not what DD is talking about and it shouldn't be. Any area should be free for all for clubs and scouts. It's in what that club does for scouted player, A) Invest money into them, B) Sign a contract c) Develop them at their academy D)put them through their system.

I think the NRL needs to clearly define what a developed player is for any incentives to be actionable. See you can't just say they came from our clubs catchment area, you can't just say we signed some kid in the bush and sent him some boots, club shirt and a cheque in the mail. You should need to be able to show that person has been given those things but has also attended footy camps, the academy, actually had development put into them. Was Walsh playing on the GC but under a Broncos development contract? because I heard he was signed at 13. The area is not the issue, it's what club was investing in him, how often in those years was he going upto the Broncos for training, did the Broncos pay for courses he did in personal development outside footy. He didn't play last year because he was 17, and covid had canceled the ISC. We hadn't seen the bloke play men up until the Broncos trial games this year and he would have been signed by us but the Warriors came in and poached him, Walsh is the very definition of poaching, same with the attempt on Piakura. Guys who have not even made a debut, just about to sign their first top 30 contract and the vultures come in paying overs. This puts pressure on us to match it, potentially putting our cap out of wack because clubs are throwing hail mary's to land a future star.
Click to expand...

I made this point yesterday, junior is outdated. You're right it should be the effort made up to you making your debut and then where did you debut.

That's why I think Donaghy shouldn't have said junior. If he's spoken about development and debuts I think he would have got more traction.
 
Jedhead said:
In reply to our DD highlighting how some clubs do nothing to develop players and therefore nothing to grow the game and simply poach the best players as they reach the stage of being ready for NRL Graham Annesley said on Monday "Some of our clubs don’t have big junior areas, for example, so they have to rely on buying players" . This is so disingenuous and you really have to wonder why not one single journo has taken him to task for such a myopic statement.

By using the term 'buying' he is suggesting some clubs are not able to invest money in juniors as they are in areas that do not have young families. Instead these clubs 'buy' their players and are therefore (according to Annesley's logic) somehow putting money back into development. That is, by suggesting these clubs 'buy' a player it's as if they invest a lump sum at the end of the process when they 'buy' the ready made product.

I have to ask, as I often wonder - who do clubs like the Storm and Roosters 'buy' their players from? Who do they pay the lump sum to when they 'buy' the player they are after?

The answer is no one. They simply don't 'buy' anyone at all. They pay no purchase fee to anyone. All they do is wait until the player they want is ready for NRL and they then come in and offer them a salary. No money or compensation is given to the club who spent years and real cash developing the player.

So when Annesley, or anyone else uses the term 'buying' it's a smokescreen for poaching. There is absolutely no buying actually happening when they sign these players up.
Click to expand...
If a club like the Roosters has no jr catchment area or only a few clubs, what stops them finding a club or two in Queensland and signing some deal with them. Put your logos on their jersey and pump money into them, actually support them. I bet you would find that club start drawing talent.
It also starts to deal with issue of clubs dying in the bush. Why are clubs not expected to invest back into the game. I know the Broncos do this because when I was playing against Gympie they had the Broncos emblem in the center of their chest. They had players going down to Brisbane for training and even had a few players getting paid some dosh to play there. I don't know if that is still the case or not but it was.
 
1910 said:
Haas was with the Titans and Warriors before the Broncos. Titans stuffed it by telling him he couldn't play for Keebra anymore.
Click to expand...
Interesting, I didn't know that but did we end up doing the brunt of investment ect?
 
heartly87 said:
If a club like the Roosters has no jr catchment area or only a few clubs, what stops them finding a club or two in Queensland and signing some deal with them. Put your logos on their jersey and pump money into them, actually support them. I bet you would find that club start drawing talent.
It also starts to deal with issue of clubs dying in the bush. Why are clubs not expected to invest back into the game. I know the Broncos do this because when I was playing against Gympie they had the Broncos emblem in the center of their chest. They had players going down to Brisbane for training and even had a few players getting paid some dosh to play there. I don't know if that is still the case or not but it was.
Click to expand...
You make a great point. There is nothing to stop them from affiliating with teams in NSW or Qld. The Storm do it with the Falcons and let's face it without them they 'd be struggling. The Warriors have now moved in with the Dolphins. The only drawback is that the more teams that move into these areas the chance the Broncos have of snaring the next Locky, or JT, CS9 etc.
 
Jedhead said:
You make a great point. There is nothing to stop them from affiliating with teams in NSW or Qld. The Storm do it with the Falcons and let's face it without them they 'd be struggling. The Warriors have now moved in with the Dolphins. The only drawback is that the more teams that move into these areas the chance the Broncos have of snaring the next Locky, or JT, CS9 etc.
Click to expand...
The Falcons is a hard one for me, a lot of what was promised actually never happened, I played for them in the early days. It also did a lot of harm to the local league as clubs suffered immensely as their talent was pulled from under them, the money wasn't being trickled down into the local comp and some teams ended up being full of Falcons player and others not. When they were the Sea Eagles there FOGS team got relegated and plaid in the local comp, you can imagine what that did. It was floggings all round, a bitter pill to swallow. It's come good but I would argue it hasn't been a huge benefit to the local League, especially the A grade comp.
 
New Posts

Unread

Watch

YouTube
0 0 836
1:34:00
NRL Semi Final, 2001 - Brisbane Broncos vs St George Illawarra Dragons
View full media list »

Active Now

  • Xzei
  • broncsgoat
  • Broncosgirl
  • Sproj
  • Hurrijo
  • Battler
  • Redux
  • RolledOates
  • Fitzy
Total: 96 (members: 12, guests: 84)
Robots: 182
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.