Jack Bird Discussion

Number6 said:
I see where you are coming from but you are saying he is as good as he was at 19.... Shouldn't he be much much better? The issue is that he has moments of brilliance in between being a turnstile in defence and absent in attack all while seeming to have lost a fair bit of speed (in match forget irrelevant straight line sprint arguements). He has more below average games than good ones in the halves. His best plays are still ballplaying fullback ones: following the ball for an offload, running on change of angle or broken play and chiming in at the right time for a little ball playing to create a new point of attack. As for 2015, Hunt was killing it as dominant half to let Milford play more freely and he had a defensive centre to hide his deficiencies more.

As for rep selection yet to see him on a team list and short of injuries might just get a look in at World Cup squad as backup or experience. It isn't in top 17, he should have ousted the overrated Morgan a couple of years ago with this talent.

At end of the day hard enough for a natural half to be worth his asking of nearly million a year in output at 22 let alone one in still in their apprenticeship. Might be ready when he's in his late 20s. In meantime has best mentor in Boyd (a smart hard working but less talented footballer) to teach him the defensive and organisation parts of fullback.

I suppose the question is if not now then when do we judge Milf at five-eight a waste of talent? Does anyone seriously believe he is in the top 5 or perhaps 10 halves in the competetition on a consistent basis? Or do we just double down on failure and make him our halfback when bird arrives? He can have another 3 years to show he isn't yet a halfback....
Click to expand...

I said that in my opinion I think he is a better player now. Which is the polite way of saying he is objectively much better now.

Where he is the same is strike rate. That is, he is scoring the same amount of tries per game as he did when he was solely an X factor option at Canberra. But not only is he scoring the same amount of tries, he is leading the team around, handling kicking duties, and being a play maker. That is to say, he is individually just as good but now he also shoulders a lot more responsibility which he is doing rather well and is consistently improving at. Is he a top 5 half? probably not. Is he the best half under 25? I think so.
 
For whatever reason Milford and Hunt, cop way to much heat on these boards in comparison to their performances.

Milford was excellent last night.

Hunt understandably after dropping the 2015 premiership, I still havent forgiven bulgarelli for 2003.

That said, if you guys are in trouble or lose a match its because of hunt or milford, when imo they are the strongest part of the broncos. You forward defend really well (as do your backs) but in attack they dont get you much by way of offloads or pushing there head through the line getting your halves weasker defensive lines to attack.

And your outside backs, roberts is fast, and oates can finish with size/power but otherwise arent a massive headache.

That all said, I would be surprised if the broncos long term halves pairing was milf/bird it just seems to lack direction.
 
theshed said:
I said that in my opinion I think he is a better player now. Which is the polite way of saying he is objectively much better now.

Where he is the same is strike rate. That is, he is scoring the same amount of tries per game as he did when he was solely an X factor option at Canberra. But not only is he scoring the same amount of tries, he is leading the team around, handling kicking duties, and being a play maker. That is to say, he is individually just as good but now he also shoulders a lot more responsibility which he is doing rather well and is consistently improving at. Is he a top 5 half? probably not. Is he the best half under 25? I think so.
Click to expand...
Fair point but it didn't address the key question of effectiveness and value for money in his role factoring in opportunity cost for how effective he would be at fullback. I'm all for investment in future but not willing to spend another 5 million give or take over 5 years to manufacture him finally into a half. Also second issue is with bird coming (and apparently won't be a centre) best fit is Bird at five eight, Milford at fullback and Boyd at what used to be inside centre (which will prolong his career). We still need an organising and kicking half.back We also don't have enough muscle or meter eaters to carry a 93kg Bird at ballplaying lock.
 
Number6 said:
Fair point but it didn't address the key question of effectiveness and value for money in his role factoring in opportunity cost for how effective he would be at fullback. I'm all for investment in future but not willing to spend another 5 million give or take over 5 years to manufacture him finally into a half. Also second issue is with bird coming (and apparently won't be a centre) best fit is Bird at five eight, Milford at fullback and Boyd at what used to be inside centre (which will prolong his career). We still need an organising and kicking half.back We also don't have enough muscle or meter eaters to carry a 93kg Bird at ballplaying lock.
Click to expand...

I think he is value for money. Within 2 years Thurston and Cronk will be gone and Maloney will be winding down. Milford will still be shy of 25, and at his current trajectory he will be a top 3 half. He is a very good 5/8th already. Behind only Foran, and Maloney in my eyes. He drops further down the list if you compare him to halfbacks as well. 900k is the right amount of money for him. And as I said, he is already better value for money in the halves than he is at fullback. Boyd is a far better fullback in every aspect except running so moving him doesn't make sense. Not to mention that he is also worth around the 900k mark which is a waste at centre.

Bird, in a short period of time, can become a very good 5/8th, fullback, or lock. Though I'd prefer him at lock with another half to partner Milf. I don't disagree with you on prop situation though, we do need a bigger metre making prop long term. If we have real props he won't need to do as much grunt work but he's a great ball runner and I have no worry about him making metres.


Edit: and all that being said, we have no idea what our attacking set up will be for next year. Do we play a left side half and a right side half, do we have one dominate half who sticks to the middle third and two five eights a la the way the cowboys use Coote. Do we try and do a better version of the dogs with forwards taking over a lot of first receiver responsibilities. Depending on that it's too hard to say how Bird should be used.
 
Last edited:
theshed said:
I think he is value for money. Within 2 years Thurston and Cronk will be gone and Maloney will be winding down. Milford will still be shy of 25, and at his current trajectory he will be a top 3 half. He is a very good 5/8th already. Behind only Foran, and Maloney in my eyes. He drops further down the list if you compare him to halfbacks as well. 900k is the right amount of money for him. And as I said, he is already better value for money in the halves than he is at fullback. Boyd is a far better fullback in every aspect except running so moving him doesn't make sense. Not to mention that he is also worth around the 900k mark which is a waste at centre.

Bird, in a short period of time, can become a very good 5/8th, fullback, or lock. Though I'd prefer him at lock with another half to partner Milf. I don't disagree with you on prop situation though, we do need a bigger metre making prop long term. If we have real props he won't need to do as much grunt work but he's a great ball runner and I have no worry about him making metres.


Edit: and all that being said, we have no idea what our attacking set up will be for next year. Do we play a left side half and a right side half, do we have one dominate half who sticks to the middle third and two five eights a la the way the cowboys use Coote. Do we try and do a better version of the dogs with forwards taking over a lot of first receiver responsibilities. Depending on that it's too hard to say how Bird should be used.
Click to expand...
Not sure Wayne has the creativity to change the style of play too much. As people get older they get less flexible. Bennett has never been a master tactician known for his flexible game plan, his skills are man management, identifying talent and he has built on his aura so much that I suspect he believes it himself. I do agree with the Boyd problem re getting value for money for his high wage but if salary cap is around 9 million 1/10 isn't the worst value when you consider he would be a gun centre, captain and factor in tax for coach's son. He's a sunk cost that isn't changing at this point wherever we play him so might as well play him in the best position for the team.

Is Milford a really good five eight? Most talk relates to potential or flashes of brilliance. He contributes to maybe 1 try a game (tries, try assists, line breaks) on average and is a major factor in letting 1 maybe 2 in a game (admittedly isn't helped by Moga). He's been good last few games but more than half games this season and last was dead weight. His form doesn't seem to last more than half a season at a time. I've said it before but I'd be fat, slow and down in confidence after being sold a lie trying to be something I'm not when I could be tearing it up in the right position using my core talents properly.

I agree we are harsh on Milford but if you are paid the big $ then it is reasonable to be expected to earn it. Feel more sorry for hunt who is paid less and has been left psychologically scarred by one terrible 15 minutes (after he carried the team to the gf) and looks like may never recover. But hey for 1.2 million Ill gladly develop a case of the yips.
 
Jack Bird is one of the best young players in the competition, and he deserves a fat contract. He's also a massive loss for the Sharks. He doesn't deserve to be panned for accepting a good offer.
There is a lot more to the Bird story. When Bird was negotiating with Cronulla no senior officials were involved, until the very end. That's the formula that is normally successful for the Sharks as coach Shane Flanagan is a known deal maker.
On the other hand, Bird was wooed by Brisbane and Newcastle's coach, chief executive and other officials.
The Sharks will say he should never have been meeting with other clubs, but Bird's management will argue he wasn't talked to by the Sharks until January. Cronulla will say they had Valentine Holmes to lock down. It is safe to say neither side is thrilled. But that is what can happen when negotiations go south.
Debate has been raging about exactly how much the Broncos will pay Bird. Brisbane have been hosing down the price because they fear what they are going to need to pay off-contract starsDarius Boyd and Anthony Milford.
My sources tell me the original offer was $800,000 for year one, $850,000 for year two and $900,000 in the third year. That was knocked back by Bird's management. Until I see the contract, I will believe my sources who say Bird was eventually paid $950,000 for three years. In year four the deal is for $1.2million, and the option for that fourth year is in Bird's favour.
That matches the $4 million for four years I was told after the deal was done. That's a long way from the original figure the Broncos were feeding to the local media of $700,000 a year for three years. A star Bronco would have accepted that without thinking twice.
Brisbane are now trying to change the focus of the media by saying the Sharks shouldn't have put out a statement saying Brisbane had signed him. Brisbane don't need their players wondering why they aren't on "Bird money". It has the potential to be distracting and take the focus off their season.
Boyd has the right to feel he should be the highest paid player at the club. And despite internal pressure for Milford to do a deal, his agent, Sam Ayoub, is not in a rush.
Bird wasn't Wayne Bennett's only choice. The Broncos coach made a very sneaky play to try to snatch brilliant young fullback Kalyn Ponga. He was being sold Boyd's fullback position.
Bird will be sorely missed by the Sharks, which is why, on Wednesday, a group of senior players did their best to keep him. Chris Heighington and Paul Gallen had a long chat to Bird over a coffee in Cronulla. Gallen then drove Bird to a crisis meeting with Flanagan. Gallen offered to attend the meeting with Bird, but the young star went on his own and left 40 minutes later without signing on.
According to Danny weidler in the Sydney morning herald.
 
Sounds to me like a bit of heavy handed pressure from his team mates.
 
Surely thats with TPAs included broncos pay him 700k and tpas the rest?
 
Nearly 1mill a year sounds crazy unless he was signed specifically to play fullback next year. And that's still crazy.

I think there's no chance he plays 13. Doesn't have enough size to maintain heavy contact for 80minutes. And who's paying that money for a lock unless it's Lolo or Burgess at his best.

Watching him today he kills it at centre.
 
Pushkin said:
Jack Bird is one of the best young players in the competition, and he deserves a fat contract. He's also a massive loss for the Sharks. He doesn't deserve to be panned for accepting a good offer.
There is a lot more to the Bird story. When Bird was negotiating with Cronulla no senior officials were involved, until the very end. That's the formula that is normally successful for the Sharks as coach Shane Flanagan is a known deal maker.
On the other hand, Bird was wooed by Brisbane and Newcastle's coach, chief executive and other officials.
The Sharks will say he should never have been meeting with other clubs, but Bird's management will argue he wasn't talked to by the Sharks until January. Cronulla will say they had Valentine Holmes to lock down. It is safe to say neither side is thrilled. But that is what can happen when negotiations go south.
Debate has been raging about exactly how much the Broncos will pay Bird. Brisbane have been hosing down the price because they fear what they are going to need to pay off-contract starsDarius Boyd and Anthony Milford.
My sources tell me the original offer was $800,000 for year one, $850,000 for year two and $900,000 in the third year. That was knocked back by Bird's management. Until I see the contract, I will believe my sources who say Bird was eventually paid $950,000 for three years. In year four the deal is for $1.2million, and the option for that fourth year is in Bird's favour.
That matches the $4 million for four years I was told after the deal was done. That's a long way from the original figure the Broncos were feeding to the local media of $700,000 a year for three years. A star Bronco would have accepted that without thinking twice.
Brisbane are now trying to change the focus of the media by saying the Sharks shouldn't have put out a statement saying Brisbane had signed him. Brisbane don't need their players wondering why they aren't on "Bird money". It has the potential to be distracting and take the focus off their season.
Boyd has the right to feel he should be the highest paid player at the club. And despite internal pressure for Milford to do a deal, his agent, Sam Ayoub, is not in a rush.
Bird wasn't Wayne Bennett's only choice. The Broncos coach made a very sneaky play to try to snatch brilliant young fullback Kalyn Ponga. He was being sold Boyd's fullback position.
Bird will be sorely missed by the Sharks, which is why, on Wednesday, a group of senior players did their best to keep him. Chris Heighington and Paul Gallen had a long chat to Bird over a coffee in Cronulla. Gallen then drove Bird to a crisis meeting with Flanagan. Gallen offered to attend the meeting with Bird, but the young star went on his own and left 40 minutes later without signing on.
According to Danny weidler in the Sydney morning herald.
Click to expand...

Wiedler is pus.
 
Yeah, Weidler just makes up stuff that doesn't involve his butt buddies (SBW, Hussain and co). I find it hard to believe anyone outside that group even talks to him.
 
2ndPhase said:
Nearly 1mill a year sounds crazy unless he was signed specifically to play fullback next year. And that's still crazy.

I think there's no chance he plays 13. Doesn't have enough size to maintain heavy contact for 80minutes. And who's paying that money for a lock unless it's Lolo or Burgess at his best.

Watching him today he kills it at centre.
Click to expand...

Looks like he could be a pretty decent left centre, couldn't he...
 
Why Broncos recruit Jack Bird really wanted to quit Sharks
external

JACK Bird has told Wayne Bennett he is prepared to team with James Roberts in the centres and give the Broncos the most potent strike force in the NRL.
In a revelation that will further infuriate the Sharks, Brisbane’s new recruit Bird is happy to be a Broncos centre — the very position that contributed to his exit at Cronulla.
The Courier-Mail can reveal the contents of a meeting between Bennett and Bird that clinched one of the most exciting signings in Brisbane’s 29-year history.
CONTRACT TALKS: Peats breaks silence on Titans future
SUCCESSION: Morgan leaves Cowboys at sixes and sevens
PLAYER MARKET: NRL rich list spiralling out of control
e5ea55d0cf8b30d7eb08851cf7030a65

Jack Bird will leave Cronulla for the Broncos next season. Picture: Gregg Porteous
The Sharks last week lashed Bird in a press release after the Broncos formally secured the NSW Origin utility from next season.
But tensions with the Sharks have been brewing for some time, with Bird communicating his frustration to Bennett over his tactical treatment at the premiers.
Bird’s grievance at Cronulla does not specifically relate to being posted in the centres, rather the way in which he is being used as part of coach Shane Flanagan’s tactical blueprint.
The 22-year-old is expected to partner Anthony Milford at the Broncos scrumbase next season, but Bird has told Bennett he has no issue playing centre if used the right way.
Bennett has assured Bird he would not be starved of ball in the three-quarters.
It was that dialogue which formed a key plank in Bird’s belief he could go to the next level as a footballer under Bennett’s tutelage at Red Hill.
7de87ffe1a37fc235d0278ccf088125b

Jack Bird during the Cronulla Sharks training session at Forshaw Park, Sylvania. Picture: Gregg Porteous
The Broncos have revamped their offence to get right-centre Roberts more involved this season, as evidenced on Friday night as ‘The Jet’ ran riot in a three-try haul against the Titans.
Brisbane’s left-centre slot has been the club’s problem area since Jack Reed retired midway through last season.
Rookie Tom Opacic was deployed there during last year’s playoffs, while Cowboys recruit Tautau Moga is now attempting to cement his place at left centre.
But Bird is a vastly superior player to both and, in tandem with Roberts, could give the Broncos lethal points of attack on their left and right edge.
Former Broncos skipper Darren Lockyer, now a member of the club’s recruitment and retention committee, said Bennett was the trump card in securing Bird.
ec2a9bbe6c7de607f44a2c7481c4f4b1

Jack Bird celebrates a try for the Sharks against the Panthers on Sunday. Picture: Gregg Porteous
“The carrot of Wayne being the head coach, it was one of the big factors,” Lockyer said.
“Jack was one of those guys we knew was coming off-contract and it’s always hard to keep your premiership team together because everyone is worth more money.
“We didn’t offer him the most money but Wayne was a huge drawcard. Jack was keen to come to a strong club with a strong coach in a good system.
“Jack can play anywhere in the backline.
“Wherever he plays, he’s a winner and he will make the Broncos a better team.”
Originally published as Why Bird really wanted to quit Sharks
Click to expand...

Centre it may well be then.
 
New Posts

Unread

Watch

YouTube
0 0 606
1:20:16
2007 World Club Challenge - St Helens vs Brisbane Broncos
View full media list »

Active Now

  • Fatboy
  • marw
  • Locky's Left Boot
  • Spoon
  • broncsgoat
Total: 76 (members: 7, guests: 69)
Robots: 418
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.