Player Movements & Rumours 2010

[ALH]

Smith to Sharks

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... -r2h4.html

 

[Meat77]

And so the BHQ pressure builds on Ben Hunt...

 

[jarro65]

Well hopefully now this means we can keep Hunt.

I'd be pretty pissed off if we lost both Hunt and Smith

 

[Ari Gold]

People like to refer to football as a business, and these days it is. So let me put it to you another way.

Ben Hunt has been in the Broncos system for 8 years. They would've spent upwards of $750K, probably over a $1 million on his scholarships, contracts, development time, travel, coaching etc etc.

Tim Smith has been in the Broncos system 6 months. They would've spent $50K on him, maybe, in terms of all the training, coaching, travel etc.

Losing Tim Smith means the Broncos lose bugger all investment. Losing Ben Hunt, they lose 8 years and a shit load of money invested in his development for some other club to benefit from.

I really don't see the relevancy.

Let's say you have a car. It's a piece of shit. You've spent $5000 fixing it up over the years. It's broken down again and it'll cost another $5000 to get it running again. Alternatively, You could buy a different car for $5000.

Show of hands who spends $5000 on fixing on the old car simply because you've invested more into it.

That's what I thought.

A smart, self-interest protecting business evaluates the benefits of each option and chooses accordingly and that's obviously what's happened here. Whether that decision was right or not remains to be seen.

The fear that someone else would benefit really should not come into play at all. So what if another club benefits from a player you've invested in? Afterall, the Broncos would be doing likewise with a player that Parramatta invested in. Tries from players you've invested more in are not worth more than 4pts. Goals they kick are not worth more than 2pts. Which is the better option moving forward should really be the only criteria -- the idea that past investments should count for much is really a bit mind boggling.

 

[Meat77]

Sounds like the theory of a sunk cost to me Ari Gold and you are 100% correct - no matter how much it would be great in a perfect world to nurture your own talent all the time.

 

[spoonbled]

Surely with the Broncs wanting to sign a prop 4 next year, we wouldnt have been able to pay Hunt and sign up Smith for the top 25? We have Norman and Hunt waiting in the wings. We'll be fine.

 

[GCBRONCO]

So then we both agree it was stupid to suggest he was found wanting after 3 games in 2008.

But then you have people crucify Hunt after a handful of games in his debut season.

 

[Renegade]

yeah but they're idiots too. and i agreed with not throwing him in the deep end against melb last year.

having said that, they do need to use him when possible this season because it's not gonna do him any good just playing q cup.

 

[Bucking Beads]

It would be silly of the Broncos not to choose Hunt over Smith IMO. Hunt is a Broncos junior and has been picked out at a young age as the one to be the 7 at the Broncos. If you don't choose your own juniors over others there is no real point developing them at all IMO.

 

[GCBRONCO]

yeah but they're idiots too. and i agreed with not throwing him in the deep end against melb last year.

having said that, they do need to use him when possible this season because it's not gonna do him any good just playing q cup.

I have nothing against using players like Hunt when required, it helps with their development but at the same time you need to maintain realistic expectations, this expectation held by some that every player who does well in the lower grades is going to make an instant impact in the higher grades is at best idiotic(at the sametime theres no certainty they will have the same success in the higher grades either, but at the very least they still need time), some of the attitudes that I have seen since his debut on the forum towards him have been extremely unfair and unwarranted considering the circumstances.

 

[Kimlo]

Well if he only signs for two years than we can get him back once Lockyer retires in 2 years.

 

[Flutterby]

So then we both agree it was stupid to suggest he was found wanting after 3 games in 2008.

And we both agree Tim Smith is a good player, has done it before, and has the skills to do it again.

And we agree that Hunt could be a good player, but has done nil thus far to justify the hype.

This has been a fruitful discussion.

Incorrect - I am not yet convinced that Tim Smith will again be able to achieve the heights of his initial NRL year, which was 2005. In 2006 he failed to live up to the hype, he started getting into off-field trouble (and contining on-field decline) in 2007 and was finally released after 3 games in 2008.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Tim Smith officially gone, lets hope Ben Hunt lives up to the hype.

 

[lyn]

Just read theres a rumour that we have released Steve Michaels and the Sharks are after him.

 

[ningnangnong]

Just read theres a rumour that we have released Steve Michaels and the Sharks are after him.

Lovely.

 

[Nashy]

Sharks are just picking up the players we don't want anyway.

 

[joshobro]

Just read theres a rumour that we have released Steve Michaels and the Sharks are after him.

haha bullshit really? Nice, farewell party at broncos leagues club I will bring the bubbly. What more could a shitty defensive team like the sharks want than a bloke who can't defend. This is up there with setu getting released. Good times at the broncos!!!

 

[Assassin]

still in all honestly we could so with michaels for the next month with all our center options depleated, after that... yeah probebly expendable.

Im hoping this rumour about tronc is true, now that could really swing things for us.