Question , not statement.
It has since been confirmed that the option is in Brown's favour, with uncertainty over the salary cap and a need for flexibility over Brown's future the leading causes behind the decision.
According to The Sydney Morning Herald, the six years worth of player options are broken up into two segments. Brown will first decide whether to stay with Parramatta ahead of 2026, and then again ahead of 2028. It means the first player option is worth two years, and the second is worth four years.
It means Brown can elect to re-negotiate with the club or other clubs from November 1, 2024, or again from November 1, 2027 if he takes the first player option under the current contract rules, which could well change between now and then given the ongoing speculation around NRL trade windows and cleaning up the current system.
all I can say is , we better have got him cheap, because on the surface it seems as if Dylan's camp wanted the security of him being paid handsomely by us for a long time whether he kicks on or not , but wasn't willing to committ to playing for us for the same term should he infact kick on . This player option thing for the stated terms really is a head scratcher.
Replies
The options are always given in lieu of cash, on either side. So for a player option it means he is cheaper in the earlier years than if there was no option. For a club option the player is getting paid more than if there was no option at all.
So in this case Drown (via management) might've said he's got an offer of $1.2M x 4 from wherever, and we've replied that we can't match it for the next couple of years because we're trying to keep Moses. We might've countered with "How about $900k for two years followed by $1.4M x 2?" The player (via management) might've come back with something like $900k x 2 + $1.3 x 3 years player option + $1.5M x 3 years player option. Then we might've said okay. All the numbers are hypothetical but that's the idea I'm suggesting might've occurred. It means we get him for (hypothetically) $1.8M over the first two years when some other club was offering $2.4M. The downside is that we're over a barrel for the remaining three to six years. If he's worth more than the option then we'll have to renegotiate in the face of rival offers. If he's worth less then we're stuck paying what was agreed.
LOL yep i sniffed the rat with this as soon as it was announced, so did you Wiz, but we were told to shut up and be happy by the brilliant Brissy, oh sorry, Coral Hughes, who has covered himself in glory again.
And if we dont get Moses this is going to look even worse.
Shhh Snakey.
You aren't allowed an opinion that might be construed as negative.
If Parra made the decision it's the best and correct decision and there is nothing bad about it.
Steady Coryn, youre gonna blow another gasket before 9am.
To start with I would like to confirm that Wiz only smells Rats....he has never smelt a Rose in his life. Now Snakey sniffing is also not uncommon, I have been told from sources that he is a long term sniffer from way back.
So I am calling this a no trial because the facts are still unknown, you are responding to a media article who are still sniffing because that's all they have got, and are pissed off because all the "smellways" are blocked.
Everything else is just negative discussion from the Dyllan haters (Bem excluded).
Dylan certainly got himself a brilliant deal. Think the FO might have got this one wrong.
Nope I think it's the smartest thing the club has ever done because they knew the backlash would take all the heat of JA for a while at least. Which it has done so master stroke by the club.
Anyway back to the question.
If it's means we got him signed for less then others where offering then what's the problem.
If the club believes he is no pulling his weight when the player options come up then they play hardball by not giving him what he wants for the extension and off he goes.
Can't see that happening because Don't people always whinge about players only playing good when contracts are coming up? So essentially if his options are coming up more often then he will be wanting to prove his worth by playing well more often. So dont him fading.
We could have offered him a 10 year contract and watch him fade away. Ring any bells? JT
JT, still plays ok but can anyone say he is the player he was when given a 10 year contract, that's way dumber then what we have with DB. So no it's not the dumbest not even close, at least DB has to keep performing to ensure the club doesn't low ball during the extension negotiations.
So if we signed him on a 50 year deal worth 800k per year , by your theory that'd also be a great deal for the club.
We have committed to a guy who hasn't comitted to us anything remotley resembling a commitment. We gave him 8 years of security , he gave us 1 year.
If he doesn't improve dramatically over the next two seasons we will be stuck with a guy who will be lucky to be in the top 5 in his position by 2026. Let's not forget that in 2021 he was utterly pathetic. We are counting on him improving again in 2023 by the same amount he improved in 2022. Not saying it won't happen , just saying we've taken a massive risk considering he has taken 0 risk in this deal. I'd have been happy if he locked himself to us for 4+4 year option.
I actually find this current deal disrespectfull as a fan. We will be back renegotiating in a minute on his terms just like the current Moses dilemma.
Dylan Brown reminds me in some ways of Corey Norman.
What else reminds you of things Drooper, when you have no brains to begin with it must be difficult rrrrremembering things.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next