NEWS Truth about Bennett's involvement in Boyd's four year deal

BroncoFan94

BroncoFan94

BRL Player
Apr 26, 2017
75
145

Wayne Bennett has been blamed for a lot of things throughout his career, many in relation to the state in which he has left his old clubs.

But you can’t blame him for this one.

Contrary to one narrative that has been told, the four-year deal the Broncos offered Darius Boyd to keep him at the club until the end of 2021 wasn’t a gesture of goodwill from Bennett.

Bennett had nothing to do with the deal.

At the start of 2017, Bennett sat down with Broncos chief executive Paul White, recruitment manager Peter Nolan and board member Darren Lockyer.

Boyd, who was coming off contract that year, was the topic of conversation.

It wasn’t a long meeting. There wasn’t much to debate, really. Because all parties agreed Boyd – then considered a top 10 player in the game - should finish his career as a Bronco.

White who took the lead in negotiations with Boyd’s agent, George Mimis.

Bennett deliberately stayed out of the discussions about the length of the deal, how much money the club was willing to spend.

He simply told the club he wanted him around.

"Darius’s contracting at the time of negotiation was a matter between the CEO and myself," Mimis told NRL.com.

"Wayne’s involvement from my understanding was nothing more than to validate that he wanted to keep Darius at the club."

It took months for the deal to be reached. There were plenty of provisions and clauses in the contract that needed time to nut out.

While it was announced as a four-year deal, NRL.com understands there are conditions in the contract, including the fourth year of the deal being an option in Boyd’s favour.

However there are also believed to be some caveats underneath the terms.

Boyd is now in the second year of his four-year extension, however most clubs include certain provisions in the contracts in relation to ageing players to protect themselves in case of injury, form slumps and possible mental health issues.

There were also some discussions around life after football, and how Boyd could use his experiences to help the club in its programs with schools and the community, especially in relation to mental health.

In previous deals that Boyd had signed, he had a coaching clause put in that allowed him to leave if Bennett was no longer at the helm.

But this time around no such clauses were included. Bennett wasn't involved in discussions, and there was also a realisation from all involved that he should finish his career at the Broncos.

It’s why Boyd didn’t bat an eyelid when his career-long coach walked out the exit doors for South Sydney last year. The fullback was always staying.

In the pre-season he was running personal best times for sprints. His body was in the best condition it had been in years.

But his form during the opening two months of the season has left many wondering how many years he has left in him.

All those months spent working out clauses and provisions may prove beneficial for all involved in the coming months/years.
 
Last edited:
Still going to blame him. It's him that would have been on the other side telling those two what he was worth, what he thought would be approved etc. There is absolutely no way a coach is not involved in any aspect of the signing of your club captain.
 
Still going to blame him. It's him that would have been on the other side telling those two what he was worth, what he thought would be approved etc. There is absolutely no way a coach is not involved in any aspect of the signing of your club captain.

It says in the article how he was involved.

What gain would Boyd’s manager have in saying this?
 
Last edited:
What's with including final year options in the player's favour? I saw it mentioned this is the case for McCullough as well? Seems absolutely daft from the team's side, honestly. Hopefully there are sufficient clauses in the club's favour to counteract this.

I just wish he'd see the writing on the wall and end his career on his own terms, instead of getting what seems to be the inevitable boot...
 
Whoever agreed on a 4 year deal definitely fucked up. He wasn't gonna leave anywhere, 2 years would have been fine.
 
The perspective in the article is from the player agent. No quotes from White or from anyone at the Broncs.

I ninja edited my post, perhaps before you saw the second line. I just have no idea why the manager would come out and say that if it wasn’t the truth.
 
I ninja edited my post, perhaps before you saw the second line. I just have no idea why the manager would come out and say that if it wasn’t the truth.

Well he wouldn't know what the truth is, apart from the fact that his dealings were with White. Mimis works for Boyd, remember.
 
What's with including final year options in the player's favour? I saw it mentioned this is the case for McCullough as well? Seems absolutely daft from the team's side, honestly. Hopefully there are sufficient clauses in the club's favour to counteract this.

I just wish he'd see the writing on the wall and end his career on his own terms, instead of getting what seems to be the inevitable boot...

Three with an option in the clubs favour I think most could swallow. It mentions his standing in the game at the time of negotiations. I think top 10 is a stretch but he was one of the best in the game. Has been pus since though.
 
Well he wouldn't know what the truth is, apart from the fact that his dealings were with White. Mimis works for Boyd, remember.

What? He said the discussions were between himself and white. That’s why players have managers/agents, to help with all of this stuff.
 
It says in the article how he was involved.

What gain would Boyd’s manager have in saying this?

What gain would an NRL Manager, some of the most dishonest guys in the game, gain from lying? Player managers hold as much power as a player. If he talks shit about Wayne in the papers, getting favorable contracts from that club might be roadblocked.

He could be telling the truth too. What does he have to gain from defending Wayne?
 
He said the discussions were between himself and white.

That's what I said. And that's all he would know about the matter. He doesn't know who else White was speaking with on the matter.

Is it a normal practice for any coach to sit in on these discussions with player managers when it comes to signing\re-signing a player? Genuine question btw but I doubt it would be.
 
Last edited:
What? He said the discussions were between himself and white. That’s why players have managers/agents, to help with all of this stuff.

Do you reckon when a client calls you, they don't talk to anyone else?
 

It took months for the deal to be reached. There were plenty of provisions and clauses in the contract that needed time to nut out.

While it was announced as a four-year deal, NRL.com understands there are conditions in the contract, including the fourth year of the deal being an option in Boyd’s favour.

However there are also believed to be some caveats underneath the terms.

Boyd is now in the second year of his four-year extension, however most clubs include certain provisions in the contracts in relation to ageing players to protect themselves in case of injury, form slumps and possible mental health issues.

It would be interesting to know what these conditions etc actually are.
 
What gain would an NRL Manager, some of the most dishonest guys in the game, gain from lying? Player managers hold as much power as a player. If he talks shit about Wayne in the papers, getting favorable contracts from that club might be roadblocked.

He could be telling the truth too. What does he have to gain from defending Wayne?
If he lies to put the spotlight on White, I doubt that will help him in future negotiations with the Broncos.
 
If he lies to put the spotlight on White, I doubt that will help him in future negotiations with the Broncos.
Doesn't he already own us or something? Isn't this the guy who has us by the balls?
 

Active Now

  • broncsgoat
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.