RUMOR: "Biggest signing in the club's history"

abashii said:
I still am. If he didn't want to come here because he was warned about Henjak then fair enough. But to come up with some bs about planes not flying in the rain was soft, why not just say he had concerns about the coach, or even just that he was having second thoughts, and that he wasn't going to sign or would need a few days to rethink his decision. Instead he fell back on something worse than "my dog ate the contract."
Click to expand...
Mate, what did you expect from someone that goes for a field goal in the last second when his team is down by two? We wouldn't be hiring him for his mental acuity... :wink:
 
abashii said:
There's a difference between being stupid and being a liar.
Click to expand...
No doubt.

Would you have preferred him to tell the truth by dobbing his Qld mates in?
I'm sure that would serve him and the Broncos well if that happened.

Did you expect him to come up with smart reasoning and a good excuse otherwise?
You would be giving him way too much credit.

I'm sure Rusty contributed with a few brown paper bags and/or boats, but that was well known before GI pulled the plug, so I doubt that was the determining factor.

More than anything I blame Henjak. Not only for the GI fiasco, but for everything we went through those 2 years under him. We may have been below average under Griffin, but at least it was never for lack of putting in, unlike what we saw too many times from the gnome's teams.
 
Porthoz said:
After Locky pretty much admitted it was the senior Qld players who told him Henjak was a basket case and he was better off somewhere else, I'm nowhere near as pissed off at him in the whole affair...
Click to expand...

For me it isn't about him burning us before ...

it is about us signing a 31 year old with a dodgy knee that will still demand marquee money and us having to lose several good healthy players (who are younger) plus some promising players to accommodate his wages under the salary cap.

IMO our money can be better spent elsewhere
 
Foordy said:
For me it isn't about him burning us before ...

it is about us signing a 31 year old with a dodgy knee that will still demand marquee money and us having to lose several good healthy players (who are younger) plus some promising players to accommodate his wages under the salary cap.

IMO our money can be better spent elsewhere
Click to expand...
I'm not making a case to bring him either. I wouldn't want him at the cost of some of our better players, but damm... he would do so fine instead of the ranga on that left centre position.
 
Re: RUMOR: "Biggest signing in the club's history"

Foordy you know hes 29. Turns 30 in January 2017. And hes only 1 yr older than Reed.

Also they would be signing him accordingly as a 30 yr old centre not a Gun Full Back.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Re: RUMOR: "Biggest signing in the club's history"

Daniel Dowell said:
Foordy you know hes 29. Turns 30 in January 2017. And hes only 1 yr older than Reed.

Also they would be signing him accordingly as a 30 yr old centre not a Gun Full Back.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

So is that suggesting that we could just say to the NRL, 'Come on guys we're signing him as a center, so let's just say he's worth 250k right? He's not a 800k a season fullback for us.' Would be awesome if we could.
 
Re: RUMOR: "Biggest signing in the club's history"

Daniel Dowell said:
Foordy you know hes 29. Turns 30 in January 2017. And hes only 1 yr older than Reed.

Also they would be signing him accordingly as a 30 yr old centre not a Gun Full Back.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

we can't just compare him to Reed though, because we will lose more than Reed to get him ... if we could get him for the cost of Reed and no-one else then i would be saying "HELL YES. sign him up" but at the cost of Reed + Gillett + possibly some outside backs, it just isn't worth it.

we all know that the NRL will never approve a contract for him to come to us that is under 500k (possibly higher) and considering out cap would be bursting at the seams ... and given that we will need to upgrade several guys to keep the wolves at bay ... he will come at way too high a cost.
[MENTION=2221]Porthoz[/MENTION], absolutely he will be better than the ranger we currently have at left center, but IMO, Kahu is a very fine replacement in the centers ( i have been a big fan of his for a very long time), and i believe that we have a couple of handy replacements for the wing in the lower grades, they just need an opportunity to show what they have got.
 
Haha Sproj Yes but maybe not that extreme.
Can anyone provide the 2016 Salary Cap Rule regarding players entering 30 yrs of age?

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 
Re: RUMOR: "Biggest signing in the club's history"

Foordy said:
we can't just compare him to Reed though, because we will lose more than Reed to get him ... if we could get him for the cost of Reed and no-one else then i would be saying "HELL YES. sign him up" but at the cost of Reed + Gillett + possibly some outside backs, it just isn't worth it.

we all know that the NRL will never approve a contract for him to come to us that is under 500k (possibly higher) and considering out cap would be bursting at the seams ... and given that we will need to upgrade several guys to keep the wolves at bay ... he will come at way too high a cost.
@Porthoz, absolutely he will be better than the ranger we currently have at left center, but IMO, Kahu is a very fine replacement in the centers ( i have been a big fan of his for a very long time), and i believe that we have a couple of handy replacements for the wing in the lower grades, they just need an opportunity to show what they have got.
Click to expand...
Sure, but to get Kahu in the centres, we need a gun winger capable of doing a better job than him on the wing, and those don't come cheap either. How many wingers out there would you have ahead of Kahu?

On the other hand, Having Kahu and Oates on the wing is a pretty awesome proposition if we can have Roberts and Inglis next to them.
Besides, let's not forget that Inglis's name will carry a lot of weight to load up his salary on TPA's, and possibly not be that much more expensive than Reed.
 
Re: RUMOR: "Biggest signing in the club's history"

Porthoz said:
Sure, but to get Kahu in the centres, we need a gun winger capable of doing a better job than him on the wing, and those don't come cheap either. How many wingers out there would you have ahead of Kahu?

On the other hand, Having Kahu and Oates on the wing is a pretty awesome proposition if we can have Roberts and Inglis next to them.
Besides, let's not forget that Inglis's name will carry a lot of weight to load up his salary on TPA's, and possibly not be that much more expensive than Reed.
Click to expand...
I think that's fantasy land TBH, he's at least twice as expensive as Reed on the salary cap. Maybe that won't matter though?

It's worth remembering that we are still potentially paying Barba, Hoffman, Kennedy? I don't know the specifics but it's possible what we save from those no longer being on the books is enough to cover the gap, but that's also assuming all the players coming off contract next year won't want upgrades, but then the salary cap is potentially close to doubling too... So it's a bag of who knows.
 
Yes Inglis will attract a ton of TPAs but it doesn't change the fact he will have a set value by the NRL, that will undoubtedly be well over 500k a season, at least 2-3 times Reed alone. Another big name player would have to also exit.
 
Sproj said:
Yes Inglis will attract a ton of TPAs but it doesn't change the fact he will have a set value by the NRL, that will undoubtedly be well over 500k a season, at least 2-3 times Reed alone. Another big name player would have to also exit.
Click to expand...
I don't know if it's bullshit, but the rumours I keep hearing, is that Reed is on 300K+,, so not that big a difference.
The NRL player value doesn't determine it has to come out of the cap. He could be on a 700K with the Broncos paying only half of that, and the rest on TPA's.
 
Porthoz said:
I don't know if it's bullshit, but the rumours I keep hearing, is that Reed is on 300K+,, so not that big a difference.
The NRL player value doesn't determine it has to come out of the cap. He could be on a 700K with the Broncos paying only half of that, and the rest on TPA's.
Click to expand...

then you have more faith in the NRL administration than i do ... or have been smoking some good shit :tongue:

If we
 
Porthoz said:
The NRL player value doesn't determine it has to come out of the cap. He could be on a 700K with the Broncos paying only half of that, and the rest on TPA's.
Click to expand...

Really? I thought it was the other way, where no matter how little we could sign him for the NRL would work out a reasonable value and apply that to the cap. So even if he played for half a sandwich and whatever he found in the stands after games he'd still chew up several hundred thousand dollars of cap space.
 
Re: RUMOR: "Biggest signing in the club's history"

I will outline the contract Reed signed under griffin as did Copley
2015 350k 2016 400k 2017 500k 2018 550k.
So 1.8 mill over 4 yrs. Average of 450k a yr.
If you go back before that contract he was already on 250k
Figure into this that he was international centre and a long term starting centre option.

Also we are no longer paying for Kennedy and Hoffman. And this year the final year we are only paying 100k for Barba

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
New Posts

Unread

Watch

YouTube
0 0 856
1:20:59
NRL Qualifying Final, 2007 - Melbourne Storm vs Brisbane Broncos
View full media list »

Active Now

  • ivanhungryjak
  • KateBroncos1812
  • bert_lifts
  • Turky Murky
  • BroncosAlways
  • Lostboy
  • Foordy
  • Lazza
  • NSW stables
Total: 137 (members: 11, guests: 126)
Robots: 259
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.