Ennis For The Exit

[Guest]

Sorry mate but it would a deadset joke to suggest he has proven himself at the club and as having the potential to reach the standard Cameron Smith and Robbie Farah produce for their side on a consistant basis,

GCBRONCO, Frank thinks you should give up now as many on here seem to be convinced that because of a few good games Michael Ennis is the next Darren Lockyer/Andrew Johns.

Sure Ennis has played great in a few games, but hes also been lacklustre in a few and even in the matches where he played great there were periods where he went missing. hes gotta play at his best for a few seasons before you could even suggest hes gonna be half the player cameron smith is, or even luke priddis.

Could it be that I agree with Frank... eusa_think

 

[Hamm.0]

I would only take him if he agrees to stop being a whinging little bitch.

He may seem like the above, however what is Ennis?

Who did I say that about again? Wasn't that in another thread or am I still half asleep?

NO sorry, Nashy quoted you, then I quoted Nashy, but deleted the "quote" part, hence it looks as though I'm quoting you, when in fact I'm quoting Nashy, quoting you. I have since, gone on to quote you asking about me quoting you, which is of course, me quoting Nashy quoting you. icon_thumbs_u

P.S. Nashy was in reference to Camn Smith. I was highlighting the fact that whilst Cam Smith has a certain way of appearing negative with his on field behaviour, Ennis is exactly the same and has actually cost us a penalty and nearly a try with his carrying on in recent games, not too mention some lie-downs.

 

[Guest]

Thanks for "clearing" that up Hammo... [icon_shru

 

[Clintos]

I might be alone on this, but I couldn't give a rats arse if Ennis leaves. He has shown good form of late, but apart from that, nothing worth mentioning. I know injuries have played a part, but I don't care too much. When we first signed Ennis I knew he would be a player that would leave for more money. He didn't present himself too me as a loyal player, so I was confident he would leave as soon as he hits some form. It would be a good move for a lot of players. I'm sure Sims, Marsh and Robinson could demand more now that they have worn the Broncos jersey and have played under Wayne Bennett. It could be a good financial move for the Sydney clubs now that Bennett is heading to the Dragons.

 

[Chumba]

Howdy one and all,

Ennis would be a great loss, as would any player of quality and in form, but falou will be a far greater gain and if we have to let ennis go as a hang over from that deal already done, then so be it.

We have had ups and downs around the ruck area over the years, granted, but we have failed to offer real sting out wide for some time; as long as we can score the points when we get down the other end through the likes of falou, hodges, hunt, robinson and even the likes of boyd and micheals, then I think our pack and a hooker like PJ can get us down there.

It as been a lack of real tryscoring potential when in the attacking zone that we have lacked, falou will restore that a little, even without locky, so it seems like a fantastic gain for not that great a real loss in ennis.

 

[Bucking Beads]

The Bulldogs have been linked to Brett Kimmorley as well so hopefully if they get Kimmorley we can keep Mick Ennis. If the Rumour was true you would think we would have confirmation by now.

 

[Guest]

The Bulldogs have been linked to Brett Kimmorley as well so hopefully if they get Kimmorley we can keep Mick Ennis. If the Rumour was true you would think we would have confirmation by now.

Not necessarily - the Falou to Brisbane rumour hung around for a few weeks.

 

[spoonbled]

the sad fact of rugby league is you will never see the same squad 2 years in a row (except for retirements of course)

Every team will lose a few and some will gain a few.

 

[Foordy]

Ennis manager has said that Ennis hasn't decided what he will do yet and the talk linking him to the bulldogs is premature. eusa_think also apparantly the bulldogs are only going to sign Kimmorly if theSharks pay part of his contract (as he still has a year to run on that one)

 

[rnabokov]

The debate about Ennis is flawed simply because he is starting to show his potential, he is likely to be departing and too many of us want instant stars instantly from our "new" signings".

As for Ben Hunt and whoever in the younger grade - given we have signed Marsh, why did we bother signing Ennis?

Perhaps we should have just signed Marsh and brought these young guns up this year?

But we didn't - perhaps because we all thought Ennis was going to be our long term option as 1st choice hooker. Which, for me, means he should have been a priority signing.

Or is our Club's vision limited to 1 season?

 

[rnabokov]

But we're not talking about any other joe blow who has joined the club and has suffered injuries. Wayne saw something special in Michael Ennis and he's now showing the world what he is capable of. His form in the last month easily matches the form of say a Robbie Farah or a Cameron Smith on any given day. The only thing that seperates these 2 superstars to Michael Ennis is consistancy.

As far as skill, vision, kicking game, defence and tactical nouse goes he matches Farah and Smith with these traits. He shown that he can dominante a game like these 2 players. He's proven that he is capble of peforming well in a big game. The Only thing Ennis needs to prove now is that he can consistantly do this over a pro-longed preiod of time.

Does that mean we sit back and say, "Meh, we ain't gonna bother to offer him a contract until he becomes consistant, we don't want to take the risk, let's use the money elsewhere."

Or should we say, "This man has played awesome in the last month, he'd had big raps on him for years, maybe he's showing his potential, let's offer him a competitive contract and see what he wants to do."

I think the latter!

Absolutely.

People who "downplay" Ennis's talent are clearly off the planet.

 

[Clintos]

His talent isn't questioned. I just thought he was always going to leave once people see how good he is.

 

[rnabokov]

His talent isn't questioned. I just thought he was always going to leave once people see how good he is.

Gee, you are a cynic! [icon_razz1

 

[Clintos]

In this case, I am. I said to my old man as soon as Ennis signed on, "I wonder how long he'll hang around". I think I may have been right. As I said in my previous post, I think some players just come to Brisbane to play under Bennett, improve their game and then take more money elsewhere. Seems smart to me. Personally, I don't agree with it, but it happens...

 

[rnabokov]

In this case, I am. I said to my old man as soon as Ennis signed on, "I wonder how long he'll hang around". I think I may have been right. As I said in my previous post, I think some players just come to Brisbane to play under Bennett, improve their game and then take more money elsewhere. Seems smart to me. Personally, I don't agree with it, but it happens...

Sad, but, I agree with you.

 

[GCBRONCO]

The debate about Ennis is flawed simply because he is starting to show his potential, he is likely to be departing and too many of us want instant stars instantly from our "new" signings".

As for Ben Hunt and whoever in the younger grade - given we have signed Marsh, why did we bother signing Ennis?

Perhaps we should have just signed Marsh and brought these young guns up this year?

But we didn't - perhaps because we all thought Ennis was going to be our long term option as 1st choice hooker. Which, for me, means he should have been a priority signing.

Or is our Club's vision limited to 1 season?

Why did we sign PJ Marsh? because we lost our number one hooker option in Shaun Berrigan and he wasn't even a specialist hooker, with the club having players like Tom Hunt and Tom Butterfield coming up through the ranks the club needed a short term option until they were ready and a quality player who could bring something to the side that Berrigan provided. Ennis was brought to the club with the view as a longterm prospect, but never was he brought to the club as being the sole longterm prospect and if I a club took that view in a decision like that that would be neglecting their responsibilies of making sure the club had options available if (and as shown imports for sides don't always work) something happened. If I felt that we didn't have options available that could make the step up I assure you I wouldn't be saying this right now, my concern is the focus is so much on Ennis when the focus should be on all options available not just the most immediate popular one.

Rnabokov I certainly don't expect players to be instant stars, heck you know my thoughts on Sam Thaiday for example and have show patience since he hit the scene and his had quite a lot of hype surrounding him since his debut, it took him a number of seasons to hit his potential on a more consistant basis but even so he still showed potential during those seasons and after a mixed season last year has come back even stronger then he was in 2006. However there comes a time when a player has to start showing form on a consistant basis, not just a handful of games in one season out of several, true his been hampered by injury but thats a risk that can just as easily continue well into the future, something clubs have to well consider when it comes to making decisions like this, it sounds heartless and even I don't like it but its something that still has to be faced for the best interests of the club.

Regardless your entitled to your opinion likewise so am I and I respect that, frankly I just want the contracts sorted out now so we can move on, I really believe we are forming a side that is far less reliant on a handful of players to be at the standard needed to compete at the top level, theres still much work to do to get to where we need to be but to me things are looking very bright. This is the last thing I'm going to say on the subject as I have had more then enough say on it.

 

[rnabokov]

The debate about Ennis is flawed simply because he is starting to show his potential, he is likely to be departing and too many of us want instant stars instantly from our "new" signings".

As for Ben Hunt and whoever in the younger grade - given we have signed Marsh, why did we bother signing Ennis?

Perhaps we should have just signed Marsh and brought these young guns up this year?

But we didn't - perhaps because we all thought Ennis was going to be our long term option as 1st choice hooker. Which, for me, means he should have been a priority signing.

Or is our Club's vision limited to 1 season?

Why did we sign PJ Marsh? because we lost our number one hooker option in Shaun Berrigan and he wasn't even a specialist hooker, with the club having players like Tom Hunt and Tom Butterfield coming up through the ranks the club needed a short term option until they were ready and a quality player who could bring something to the side that Berrigan provided. Ennis was brought to the club with the view as a longterm prospect, but never was he brought to the club as being the sole longterm prospect and if I a club took that view in a decision like that that would be neglecting their responsibilies of making sure the club had options available if (and as shown imports for sides don't always work) something happened. If I felt that we didn't have options available that could make the step up I assure you I wouldn't be saying this right now, my concern is the focus is so much on Ennis when the focus should be on all options available not just the most immediate popular one.

Rnabokov I certainly don't expect players to be instant stars, heck you know my thoughts on Sam Thaiday for example and have show patience since he hit the scene and his had quite a lot of hype surrounding him since his debut, it took him a number of seasons to hit his potential on a more consistant basis but even so he still showed potential during those seasons and after a mixed season last year has come back even stronger then he was in 2006. However there comes a time when a player has to start showing form on a consistant basis, not just a handful of games in one season out of several, true his been hampered by injury but thats a risk that can just as easily continue well into the future, something clubs have to well consider when it comes to making decisions like this, it sounds heartless and even I don't like it but its something that still has to be faced for the best interests of the club.

Regardless your entitled to your opinion likewise so am I and I respect that, frankly I just want the contracts sorted out now so we can move on, I really believe we are forming a side that is far less reliant on a handful of players to be at the standard needed to compete at the top level, theres still much work to do to get to where we need to be but to me things are looking very bright. This is the last thing I'm going to say on the subject as I have had more then enough say on it.

For a start, you know I have a high regard for your opinions - whether we agree or otherwide. Ok.

My understanding is that we signed Ennis as our SOLE long term hooker option, with PJ as as back-up and utility, during which time our young guns would be given appropriate time to make their mark.

I DON'T care what anyone thinks - on his past 4 0r 5 performances, Ennis in my view, is showing that he will soon reach close to Cam Smith's abilities, barring injuries and given opportunities.

Given that, he should have, again IMO, been a priority signing, as our hooker for the next, say 2 seasons at least, with Marsh as back-up utility.

IMO, with those 2 in our team, we are a very special team.

Without Ennis, well, this season is ours with few doubts, but next year, if Ennis goes, it again becomes truly problematic, as PJ is surely competent, but he ain't no Ennis, and our young guns are certanly a few seasons away from really making a mark at the top level.

Yeah GCB - 'nuff said.

 

[Coxy]

At least some things about the old forum have been retained.

Like the essay writing contests betwen rnabokov and GCBRONCO :P