OFFICIAL ORIGIN: QLD WINS. HOORAY. NOW LET'S GET BACK TO THE FOOTY

Since we're coming into Origin season, we might like to think about how it's going to affect our playing roster and recovery time. Here is the schedule, and how it will impact us.

IMPACT	ROUND	DATE	OPPONENT
Missing players	17	Sunday, July 10	Dragons
	Origin 3	Wednesday, July 13
Backing up: 3 days	18	Saturday, July 16	Titans

We have 2 remaining games to be affected by representative matches:

Dragons in Round 17
Broncos missing
Kurt Capewell
Corey Oates
Selwyn Cobbo
Patty Carrigan
Tommy Flegler (replacement)

Dragons missing
Ben Hunt

Titans in Round 18
Broncos possibly resting
Corey Oates
Kurt Capewell
Selwyn Cobbo
Patty Carrigan

Titans possibly resting
Tino Fa'asuamaleaui

ORIGIN 3 SQUAD : QLD
Kurt Capewell
Selwyn Cobbo
Pat Carrigan
Corey Oates
Tommy Flegler (18th man)

NSW ORIGIN 3: NSW
No Broncos

 

[BooKhaki]

I'm not. My argument is, and has always been, that the players who command big money are the ones who contribute directly to the scoreboard in the form of scoring tries or setting up tries. You can only get paid so much to make hit-ups and tackle.

Haas is not good enough in attack to command the kind of money he's after. He's not worth it.

I think Patty is worth as much as Payne right now. If I had to choose between the two, I'd pick Patty every time. They're both worth around $700k. Give or take.

Here's my prediction: Patty will score at least two tries this season or at least have his hand in a few assists. He will outscore Payne. Patty's star is rising. Payne's has stagnated.

Patty is a future captain. Payne is a future ex-Bronco.

So a player can run for 200m a game, 35 tackles, but if they don't have a T or TA in the stats column for the entire year, you'd consider them a min wage player?

You don't consider field position as directly contributing to the scoreboard?

This is on level with using SC scores to determine how good a player is.

 

[McHunt]

So a player can run for 200m a game, 35 tackles, but if they don't have a T or TA in the stats column for the entire year, you'd consider them a min wage player?

You don't consider field position as directly contributing to the scoreboard?

This is on level with using SC scores to determine how good a player is.

Nope, but they're not getting top tier money. And no, I don't rate hitting up for field position. Any boofhead can do that. We have an assembly line of big kids who can bust the first tackle. We don't need to pay them a million dollars. Running metres is a massively overrated statistic, especially if you can't convert it to points.

 

[theshed]

I'm not. My argument is, and has always been, that the players who command big money are the ones who contribute directly to the scoreboard in the form of scoring tries or setting up tries. You can only get paid so much to make hit-ups and tackle.

Haas is not good enough in attack to command the kind of money he's after. He's not worth it.

I think Patty is worth as much as Payne right now. If I had to choose between the two, I'd pick Patty every time. They're both worth around $700k. Give or take.

Here's my prediction: Patty will score at least two tries this season or at least have his hand in a few assists. He will outscore Payne. Patty's star is rising. Payne's has stagnated.

Patty is a future captain. Payne is a future ex-Bronco.

Why are wingers the lowest paid players than?

 

[McHunt]

Why are wingers the lowest paid players than?

Because they're too unco to play anywhere else.

 

[BooKhaki]

Nope, but they're not getting top tier money. And no, I don't rate hitting up for field position. Any boofhead can do that. We have an assembly line of big kids who can bust the first tackle. We don't need to pay them a million dollars. Running metres is a massively overrated statistic, especially if you can't convert it to points.

So why aren't all props on the same money? Very flawed way to look at it, too many holes in the logic.

 

[McHunt]

So why aren't all props on the same money? Very flawed way to look at it, too many holes in the logic.

Age.

 

[theshed]

Because they're too unco to play anywhere else.

This is the most triggering troll I think I’ve seen on BHQ

 

[BooKhaki]

This is the most triggering troll I think I’ve seen on BHQ

Yeah I didn't think it was a troll until that post, as I'd seen him mention it a few times before. Not triggering, but lost interest in discussing.

 

[lynx000]

This place is fucked in the head? Forwards have never ever been measured on their try scoring capabilities.

Some of the delusional shit on here drives me crazy. Throw in a touch of toxicity and honestly I'm thinking of not bothering about coming on here

I think you will find that those posts are being made with a tongue firmly entrenched in a cheek, that is, they are taking the piss.

 

[ZTop]

I think you will find that those posts are being made with a tongue firmly entrenched in a cheek, that is, they are taking the piss.

The thing is it's not the first time tries have been used as a measuring stick on this forum in the last week.

If he wants to troll, go for it. But I'll just take it at face value. Mchunt complained last year about players (herbie for example) because they aren't scoring enough tries. So he's got history.

With that, mchunts whinged all last year about herbie not scoring enough tries, herbie then starting scoring tries this year but now he doesn't pass enough for mccunt.

 

[lynx000]

The thing is it's not the first time tries have been used as a measuring stick on this forum in the last week.

If he wants to troll, go for it. But I'll just take it at face value. Mchunt complained last year about players (herbie for example) because they aren't scoring enough tries. So he's got history.

With that, mchunts whinged all last year about herbie not scoring enough tries, herbie then starting scoring tries this year but now he doesn't pass enough for mccunt.

Mate, if he is detracting from your enjoyment that much, just put him on ignore and then you will not have to interact with him.

 

[Johnny92]

The thing is it's not the first time tries have been used as a measuring stick on this forum in the last week.

If he wants to troll, go for it. But I'll just take it at face value. Mchunt complained last year about players (herbie for example) because they aren't scoring enough tries. So he's got history.

With that, mchunts whinged all last year about herbie not scoring enough tries, herbie then starting scoring tries this year but now he doesn't pass enough for mccunt.

If you got paid by tries Alex Johnson would be the highest paid player In the game and Alex Twal from the tigers wouldn't even get a can of coke after the game.

This isnt under 8s where you get coin off your parents and a Macca's voucher off the coach for scoring the most tries.

Staggs has scored 3 tries 2 try assists this year
Herbie 8 tries 2 assists who's getting paid more..

 

[McHunt]

The thing is it's not the first time tries have been used as a measuring stick on this forum in the last week.

If he wants to troll, go for it. But I'll just take it at face value. Mchunt complained last year about players (herbie for example) because they aren't scoring enough tries. So he's got history.

With that, mchunts whinged all last year about herbie not scoring enough tries, herbie then starting scoring tries this year but now he doesn't pass enough for mccunt.

I wish you'd have said something.

 

[Fitzy]

So a player can run for 200m a game, 35 tackles, but if they don't have a T or TA in the stats column for the entire year, you'd consider them a min wage player?

You don't consider field position as directly contributing to the scoreboard?

This is on level with using SC scores to determine how good a player is.

That's not his argument. He literally said the figure 700k. Not minimum wage. You know exactly what he is saying and he is 100% right. 700k for Payne might be a bit low bump that up to 800-850 but the base of his argument is spot on. Forwards don't score tries, or at least aren't expected to. They get there value off hit-ups, run metres, offloads, tackles, etc. That whilst so important and can warrant you 850k if you're up there, which is Paynes real market value. But the end of the day Pat is on 500k. Are you telling me that 50 run metres a week difference between Payne and Pat is enough for us to give a shit about a player leaving if they are not conducive to our scoreboard. I'm not worried about it. People with the big money always have and always will be the blokes who create points and are conducive to the scoreboard. Kurt Capewell for mine is our most important player defensively (him and TMM), he is on 500k as well, doesn't mean I don't value, appreciate or respect what he does. Just isn't worth the money. Even he has a greater influence on both ends of the +/- column than Payne. Reality is metres is only worth so much and spine players are where money needs to be for anyone to win a comp. So whilst metres is a significant contribution, 50 extra metres means jack shit if you can't score points. Payne doesn't contribute to that column, thus, Payne doesn't get our money. Payne has been making metres for years and we haven't scored points. Get 1, 1! quality spine player in and we have won the same amount of games this year halfway through as the last 2.

So really I think either you need to fix your comprehension skills or don't comment on how much players are worth in the future. Cause it seems your concept of how a salary cap should be managed is how we got ourselves into the very large mess that was the Broncos 6 weeks ago.

 

[McHunt]

That's not his argument. He literally said the figure 700k. Not minimum wage. You know exactly what he is saying and he is 100% right. 700k for Payne might be a bit low bump that up to 800-850 but the base of his argument is spot on. Forwards don't score tries, or at least aren't expected to. They get there value off hit-ups, run metres, offloads, tackles, etc. That whilst so important and can warrant you 850k if you're up there, which is Paynes real market value. But the end of the day Pat is on 500k. Are you telling me that 50 run metres a week difference between Payne and Pat is enough for us to give a shit about a player leaving if they are not conducive to our scoreboard. I'm not worried about it. People with the big money always have and always will be the blokes who create points and are conducive to the scoreboard. Kurt Capewell for mine is our most important player defensively (him and TMM), he is on 500k as well, doesn't mean I don't value, appreciate or respect what he does. Just isn't worth the money. Even he has a greater influence on both ends of the +/- column than Payne. Reality is metres is only worth so much and spine players are where money needs to be for anyone to win a comp. So whilst metres is a significant contribution, 50 extra metres means jack shit if you can't score points. Payne doesn't contribute to that column, thus, Payne doesn't get our money. Payne has been making metres for years and we haven't scored points. Get 1, 1! quality spine player in and we have won the same amount of games this year halfway through as the last 2.

So really I think either you need to fix your comprehension skills or don't comment on how much players are worth in the future. Cause it seems your concept of how a salary cap should be managed is how we got ourselves into the very large mess that was the Broncos 6 weeks ago.

The club is at a critical point right now. That 6 year offer they made to Payne last year is looking increasingly hasty, desperate and poor judgement. If that kind of money ends up happening, it could really **** the club. Players like Capewell and Carrigan are going to rightly ask why aren't they also on more than a million. That was the exact shitfest we had with Milford and Bird.

I don't know what Payne is "worth," but you can't have a situation where a player, like Payne, who is essentially a toiler is on over a million and a player like Te Maire, who has been a deadset revelation at the back is on $80k. Players can't laugh that kind of inequity off. You don't want half your team in the ghetto propping up the rich kid, and you certainly don't want that in your halves.

 

[Astro]

That's not his argument. He literally said the figure 700k. Not minimum wage. You know exactly what he is saying and he is 100% right. 700k for Payne might be a bit low bump that up to 800-850 but the base of his argument is spot on. Forwards don't score tries, or at least aren't expected to. They get there value off hit-ups, run metres, offloads, tackles, etc. That whilst so important and can warrant you 850k if you're up there, which is Paynes real market value. But the end of the day Pat is on 500k. Are you telling me that 50 run metres a week difference between Payne and Pat is enough for us to give a shit about a player leaving if they are not conducive to our scoreboard. I'm not worried about it. People with the big money always have and always will be the blokes who create points and are conducive to the scoreboard. Kurt Capewell for mine is our most important player defensively (him and TMM), he is on 500k as well, doesn't mean I don't value, appreciate or respect what he does. Just isn't worth the money. Even he has a greater influence on both ends of the +/- column than Payne. Reality is metres is only worth so much and spine players are where money needs to be for anyone to win a comp. So whilst metres is a significant contribution, 50 extra metres means jack shit if you can't score points. Payne doesn't contribute to that column, thus, Payne doesn't get our money. Payne has been making metres for years and we haven't scored points. Get 1, 1! quality spine player in and we have won the same amount of games this year halfway through as the last 2.

So really I think either you need to fix your comprehension skills or don't comment on how much players are worth in the future. Cause it seems your concept of how a salary cap should be managed is how we got ourselves into the very large mess that was the Broncos 6 weeks ago.

I started typing this exact argument back then just couldn't be fucked. So thank you sir.

 

[lynx000]

The club is at a critical point right now. That 6 year offer they made to Payne last year is looking increasingly hasty, desperate and poor judgement. If that kind of money ends up happening, it could really **** the club. Players like Capewell and Carrigan are going to rightly ask why aren't they also on more than a million. That was the exact shitfest we had with Milford and Bird.

I don't know what Payne is "worth," but you can't have a situation where a player, like Payne, who is essentially a toiler is on over a million and a player like Te Maire, who has been a deadset revelation at the back is on $80k. Players can't laugh that kind of inequity off. You don't want half your team in the ghetto propping up the rich kid, and you certainly don't want that in your halves.

I am hoping that the offer gets quietly withdrawn.

You would have to think that the entire approach from management has been to calm the farm so it does not sabotage the season and then utilise the time to explore our recruiting options to see who we can get for Payne's money and try do the deal. He will then get his release with us not contributing.

But I agree with you, it would be madness to pay him $1M or over.

If he was a clean skin who you could use as a marketing tool that might bump him up to $850K, but in really he is a 700K-800K player.

 

[Mustafur]

For Payne to be worth the figures he is asking he would need to be a ballplaying forward with a good offload, something that contributes to points on the board, with his existing run meters.

Sure he can run harder and longer then basically any other prop but at the end of the day that's all he is a prop, he isn't a superstar halfback or fullback that can break a game almost single handily.

As unfair as it may seem to the player there is a maximum value each position can provide and Prop isn't the highest.