Replies

                    • Yes, that is true EA and possibly (I certainly dont know) a reason for Stephano not carrying through his potential with us.

                    • This is what Stefano said, October last year about leaving us: “Everyone had their say about it and what was going on with my brother, but it wasn’t that."
                       

                      “They told me that I wasn’t going to be a part of the rotation going forward and that I had to bide my time. As a young guy coming through, I knew my time would come, but I was eager to play in the NRL."

                      “If you want to improve, you need to play in the NRL and experience it. The best thing for me was to leave and it’s been one of the best decisions I made."

                      “I felt like I had the best opportunity to play at the Wests Tigers. I couldn’t blame Parramatta because they had ‘Reg’ and Junior and were killing it at the time."

                       

                  • I'd like to hear Chiefy's answer to Super's reality check. The irony of Chiefy's position is the myopic take on Stefano, if generalized, would see the club locking in very early on every green sprout and probably having zero recruitment room to move 

            • No you don't understand what i am saying. We could want to extend, but they might not want to. Reason being they want to test the market, with two new teams on in the market that is why their management say "hold back" on signing extensions. Why sign a deal worth $300k for two years, when you can get $500k for three years elsewhere? You test the market to get best deal. 

              • Exactly LB. People think you can force players to re-sign on favourable terms, as though they don't know they can get the best deal by having multiple clubs competing for them. That's why they wait until November. If you want them to sign early you need to give them an offer they can't refuse, which means paying overs. You can't do that for every player. You should only do it for the essential ones.

    • Petrus could easily be ready for the NRL next year in 2027. Don't need to look at 2028. As you said, sometimes we won't be able to do anything to keep him because we can't give him the money or honour of representing his heritage. But if we are relying on Jez and Guymer to be our backrowers for 2028 your setting yourself up for disappointment. They are both middles in the future and have no where near the potential of Petrus as backrowers. You would have to focus on the development of Nauer, Latu, Polley and Capovilla. But other than Latu those boys are only 18 or 16  this year 

      • We have Su'A til 2029 so only need one back-rower but surely it's Petrus. He could debut this year.

        • Yea Petrus if he stays with the club.

    • If this Petrus kid is from PNG then he's definitely going back, for money and country. Take that to the bank.

  • Jack Williams has been fantastic, such a great purchase & has surprised - I had doubts at first due to his handling.

    He is clearly a leader-type & likeable player at the club.

    I wonder if he might fit into the 'Shaun Lane' category though, where we’ve utilised his peak & he's returned great value, but 2028/2029, we’d likely be looking to move on anyway.

    It’s nothing against Jack, again he’s been great, but he might be the perfect example of a ‘type' of player you turn over when the juice is squeezed.

    There seems to be a really strange issue with R&R criticism on the site lately, a defence that interestingly wasn’t afforded to far worse criticism of players & coaches in the past.

    But for most of us with R&R concerns, it's about roster-balance, it’s about foresight & replacement, the Eels got Jack Williams right & likely have his replacement in-house (especially with Su’a on the way).

    I wouldn’t question them if they let Jack walk for 2028, he’s earned his pay-increase if it comes.

     

This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

Mitchy replied to Pato's discussion Jack Williams
"Agreed Anguillidae, but that is common sense and unfortunately will not win votes.....you only need to see how many people receive welfare and also how many govt jobs have been made in the last few years to see where $$$ go. And that is votes. NDIS…"
7 minutes ago
Clintorian replied to Roy tannous's discussion Jake Clifford?
"Agree, I'd go for them for sure."
23 minutes ago
Anguillidae replied to Pato's discussion Jack Williams
"Cut immigration and re-skill/upskill everyone on welfare - problem solved. We'll be rolling in revenue. But no, we can't expect everyone who is physically capable to actually contribute to society now, can we?"
26 minutes ago
Mitchy replied to Pato's discussion Jack Williams
"Thanks Daz, but again you have the wrong answer here but thats your view."
53 minutes ago
More…