Ennis For The Exit

[Alec]

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.

I pretty much agree with this.

 

[sydney_bronco09]

ennis is critical to the broncos, as there is nothing concrete on what lockyers plans are, on one hand bruno says hes happy to let him go and on the other henjak needs him more than wants him. it is critical that ennis has to be there next season.

 

[Coxy]

Pffft. We don't need Ennis! We can just shift Stagg to hooker :P

Or maybe Wallace, and pull another class halfback out of our arses. We've had no problem doing that for, what, 10 years :P

Yes, Ennis is a valuable player to have, but we do have PJ Marsh who is as good a hooker as Ennis, plays similar style etc. And Marsh can groom the youngsters better than Ennis, who is still learning his trade really.

I think a few people need to take a deep breath and realise that if Ennis goes it's not the end of the world!

 

[Smithdom]

http://rugbyleaguelive.com.au/Articles/ ... gning.aspx

Brisbane rake Michael Ennis has denied reports that he has signed with the Bulldogs.

Speaking to rugbyleaguelive.com, Ennis insisted he is still unsigned and maintained he would like to stay at his new found home in Brisbane.

 

[Bucking Beads]

I guess we either lose Ennis or Hanant which is a shame. I would prefer to keep Ennis I think our forward pack is pretty good and we have hardly seen Dave Taylor this year.

 

[ningnangnong]

http://rugbyleaguelive.com.au/Articles/1138/2008/05/08/Ennis_denies_Bulldogs_signing.aspx

Brisbane rake Michael Ennis has denied reports that he has signed with the Bulldogs.

Speaking to rugbyleaguelive.com, Ennis insisted he is still unsigned and maintained he would like to stay at his new found home in Brisbane.

Offer him a contract then FFS.

If we dilly dally around we'll just lose him. [icon_non

 

[Jeza23]

http://rugbyleaguelive.com.au/Articles/1138/2008/05/08/Ennis_denies_Bulldogs_signing.aspx

Brisbane rake Michael Ennis has denied reports that he has signed with the Bulldogs.

Speaking to rugbyleaguelive.com, Ennis insisted he is still unsigned and maintained he would like to stay at his new found home in Brisbane.

Offer him a contract then FFS.

If we dilly dally around we'll just lose him. [icon_non

Cant agree more ning [eusa_clap.gi

 

[Alec]

I'm willing to lose Hannant,Boyd and even Michaels (who is one of my favourite players) just to retain Ennis. I can see him having a huge future, but I've already mentioned that many times over the years.

 

[Jeba]

I'm willing to lose Hannant,Boyd and even Michaels (who is one of my favourite players) just to retain Ennis. I can see him having a huge future, but I've already mentioned that many times over the years.

Ennis is good but not THAT good.

 

[Alec]

I'm willing to lose Hannant,Boyd and even Michaels (who is one of my favourite players) just to retain Ennis. I can see him having a huge future, but I've already mentioned that many times over the years.

Ennis is good but not THAT good.

Isn't that good yet. I am confident he will be though, as long as he has a relatively injury free career.

 

[Jeba]

I'm willing to lose Hannant,Boyd and even Michaels (who is one of my favourite players) just to retain Ennis. I can see him having a huge future, but I've already mentioned that many times over the years.

Ennis is good but not THAT good.

Isn't that good yet. I am confident he will be though, as long as he has a relatively injury free career.

Yeh but why should we risk that on 3 players who also have massive potential? Particularly Hannant who is shaping as the new pack leader. Surely management can come up with a better solution than that!!

 

[Clintos]

I'm willing to lose Hannant,Boyd and even Michaels (who is one of my favourite players) just to retain Ennis. I can see him having a huge future, but I've already mentioned that many times over the years.

Ennis is good but not THAT good.

Isn't that good yet. I am confident he will be though, as long as he has a relatively injury free career.

I think that's putting too many eggs in one basket. I think there is more chance of Thomas The Tank growing pubes tomorrow.

 

[mick]

Honestly, Hannant and Ennis just HAVE to both be re-signed.

Kemp and Robinson aren't on much dough and have shown they can do the job. I'd be fine to see Hewitt, Boyd and Michaels all leave as long as Hannant and Ennis can be kept tbh...

 

[Je$ter]

Have we re-signed Robinson at all? I know he was on a 1 year deal. He is nothing but a run of the mill winger, Hewitt, Kemp, Boyd, Michaels can all do the same job.

Ennis is a priority, moreso than Hannant imo.

 

[Coxy]

Have we re-signed Robinson at all? I know he was on a 1 year deal. He is nothing but a run of the mill winger, Hewitt, Kemp, Boyd, Michaels can all do the same job.

Ennis is a priority, moreso than Hannant imo.

Bringing in Folau, there's no way known the Broncos won't unload at least one of Boyd, Michaels, Kemp, Robinson or Hewitt.

I'd say Hewitt is gone for sure, and the form of Robinson and Kemp for the next 6-8 weeks, and whether Boyd attracts interest from other clubs, will determine which of them stays or goes.

 

[Je$ter]

You'd think at least 2 of Boyd, Kemp, Robinson, Michaels (has he put pen to paper?), Hewitt is gone.

 

[Coxy]

Yes, and if it was me, it'd be Robinson and Hewitt. Not that Robinson would free up much on the cap. The only one that would is Michaels...

 

[WayBDay]

Ennis is a grub. Good but a grub. I'd be happy to see him go.