john1420
It's Bronco Time
Contributor
- Aug 27, 2008
- 2,816
- 3,991
I think the Broncos should release Hoffman if he really wants to go and play fullback elsewhere and I am a Broncos fan. I have enjoyed watching him at the Broncos and think if he accepted losing the fullback he could end up replacing Hodges when he retires in the number 3 but that isn't what he wants and if he has a better offer to play in his preferred position as a fan I'd like him to be let go. Maybe in a couple of years he will realise he is a Winger/Centre and will come back.
The Milford situation is very different to the Hoffman situation and I don't think they should really be compared. I don't know Halo's situation as I am not his doctor and it seems no one seems to be able to confirm exactly what the situation is(nor is it really the general public's business to know).
What should happen with Milford depends on the wording of the clause in his contract. If he is in a situation where the clause should be available to him then he should be at the Broncos in 2014. But if the clause doesn't fit his situation he should complete his contract at the Raiders.
As a biased Broncos supporter I would love him to be at Red Hill in 2014 but as a general fan of the NRL contracts need to have some worth and teams shouldn't be bullied into letting any player go to another team just because they want to.
So the Broncos should release Hoffman, a player with no release clause, because he doesn't like the position he has been given
Meanwhile Milford, a man with a release clause who wants to return home to family, should stay with the Raiders and honour his contract (if the clause is worded poorly)
Are you Ricky Stuart?