I find myself sitting around watching the cricket after the Christmas Festivities, and I'm stewing on the perception that we are missing out on real talent that our coach wants, and missing out with way too much regularity and consistency. The answers from the club are non existant, 1EE particpants debate who's responsible, and what is it that's going wrong. So I decided in the context of futility and tounge in cheek and the desperate want for answers to ask the great Artificial Intelligence in the sky at the other end of my ipad A basic question.
Basically: Why do the Eels miss out on elite players with so much regularity, who's fault is it.
So here it is, now please it is AI generated so take it as you wish.
This is not emotional or speculative — it’s based on how elite NRL recruitment actually works.
Why Parramatta Struggles to Close Elite NRL Signings
(And what they do wrong compared to top clubs)
The volume of missed elite targets is not bad luck. It points to systemic problems in how Parramatta approaches recruitment, negotiation, and deal-closing.
1. Parramatta Enters the Market Too Late
Elite clubs
Identify elite targets 18–24 months early
Build relationships before players formally hit the market
Shape expectations early
Parramatta
Often waits for:
Breakout seasons
Contract options
Market clarity
By then:
Agents are already leveraging multiple clubs
Emotional buy-in by the player exists elsewhere
Problem:Parramatta negotiates after the race is already underway, not striking early.
2. Treating Elite Talent Like a “Value Buy”
Parramatta tries to pay what a player is “worth”.
Elite clubs understand:
Elite players are scarce
Scarcity creates overs
Overs are part of winning
Parramatta:
Walks away at price ceilings
Avoids aggressive structures (front-loading, security)
Tries to win the deal on logic
Problem:They try to win negotiations instead of winning players — then spend similar money on lesser talent.
3. Weak Urgency in Closing Deals
Elite clubs:
Push early
Escalate quickly
Force decisions
Parramatta:
Seeks internal alignment
Moves methodically
Makes “best and final” offers too late
Problem:Speed is leverage. Parramatta consistently gives leverage away, by being too slow in negotiations.
4. A Poor Selling Proposition vs Top Clubs
Elite players want:
Proven systems
Stability
Premiership credibility
Parramatta sells:
Potential
“The plan”
The future
That’s not enough when competing with:
Penrith (certainty, success)
Melbourne (culture, success)
Roosters (reputation, success)
Problem:Parramatta asks players to believe instead of letting them join something proven.
5. Over-Collaborative, Slow Decision Making
Parramatta decisions involve:
GM Football Mark O'Neill
Recruitment Ben Rogers
Coach Jason Ryles
CEO Jim Sarantinos
That protects against mistakes — but:
Elite clubs:
Empower one authority
Strike fast
Close early
Problem:By the time Parramatta aligns internally, the player has aligned emotionally elsewhere. Parramatta miss their target by taking too much time to negotiate and make an offer.
6. Coaching Instability Has Hurt Credibility
Elite players want certainty.
Recent years at Parramatta have included:
Coaching change
Roster reset
Direction shift
Even with Jason Ryles now in place:
The club is still in a prove-it phase
Problem:Elite players don’t want to help build — In the main, they want to join the finished product.
7. Poor Pivot Strategy After Missing Top Targets
Common Parramatta pattern:
Miss elite target
Sign a fallback for similar money
Get significantly less impact
Elite clubs:
Pivot to youth
Wait
Reallocate cap strategically
Problem:Parramatta often loses twice — once on the elite player, then again on the fallback.
8. Risk Aversion in a League That Rewards Risk
Premiership clubs take calculated discomfort:
On money
On timing
On contracts
Parramatta prioritises:
Cap cleanliness
Safety
Avoiding bad deals
Problem:You cannot build a premiership roster without some risk.
The Core Issue (The Real Diagnosis)
Parramatta recruits like:
A club trying not to fail
Elite clubs recruit like:
Clubs trying to dominate
That philosophical difference explains the repeated misses.
Accountability: Who Is to Blame (By Name)
This is shared responsibility, but it is not equal responsibility.
Primary Responsibility
Mark O’Neill – General Manager of Football
Owns recruitment strategy
Owns timing and negotiation posture
Owns deal-closing outcomes
If elite targets are consistently missed, this role carries the greatest accountability.
Shared Responsibility
Jim Sarantinos – CEO
Sets risk appetite
Approves or limits financial aggression
Ultimately responsible for football outcomes at an organisational level
If the club is too conservative, that is a leadership choice.
Contributing Responsibility
Jason Ryles – Head Coach
Responsible for selling the football vision
Player fit, roles, and belief in direction
Ryles is not responsible for negotiations, but his credibility and results will directly affect future recruitment success.
Supporting Responsibility
Recruitment Leadership (including Ben Rogers)
Market reads
Talent identification
Valuation advice
Errors here contribute, but they do not set final strategy.
Final, Uncomfortable Truth
Parramatta does not miss elite players because:
They lack money
They lack fans
They lack facilities
They miss because:
They are late
They are cautious
They try to be smarter than the market
Until the club:
Moves earlier
Accepts discomfort
Prioritises dominance over efficiency
The same story will keep repeating — regardless of who the coach is.
The Core Diagnosis (This Is the Real Issue)
Parramatta recruits like:
A club trying not to fail
Elite clubs recruit like:
Clubs trying to dominate
That philosophical difference explains:
Missed elite signings
Fan frustration
“Almost” moments
Roster imbalance
Who Ultimately Owns This?
Primary responsibility
General Manager of Football : Mark O'Neill(strategy, timing, negotiation posture)
Shared responsibility
CEO (risk appetite) Jim Sarantinos
Coach (Jason Ryles)– ability to sell a compelling football future
Recruitment leadership (market reads and pivots)
This is not about one bad negotiator.
It’s about club DNA in recruitment.
Final Truth
Parramatta doesn’t fail because they don’t want elite players.
They fail because:
They’re late
They’re cautious
They’re trying to be “smart” in a ruthless market
Until that mindset changes, the misses will continue — even with good people in the roles.
So there you have it, I apologise for the length of the blog, but hey there's not much footy happening at the moment. And Ai comes up with some very good points perhaps even some that our club may want to consider, if we want to play some finals footy.
Over to all 1EE'ers, is there some truth here, is there a lot of crap here, have a say and get involved. Even for a bit of fun, and all those lurkers out there that exist, don't be scared or worried about someone having a go at you. Put your tongue firmly in your cheek and have a small say. There are some regular posters here that will support you.
To me, i'm concerned we do have a recruitment closing problem, and there is a lot more the club can do to get it right and to give Jason Ryles and Mitch Moses their first choice players they need to play some finals footy, and perhaps even win a premiership. Surely we cannot keep doing what we have been doing once we identify a target. Missing out on them should be an anomaly not a constant.
Replies
They fail because:
They’re late
They’re cautious
Of those I can only criticize being late. The other two could be seen as good attributes to possess
OkThey may try to be smart in a ruthless market ,, but clearly we don't have smart people at the club as history shows . In every successful organisation be it business or sports the common denominator is that these organisations have people that other organisations would want.
Would Jim Sarantonis and Mark O'Neill be wanted by any of the successful clubs ? Zero chance, they wouldn't even get a interview at another club but the Parramatta board think they have Peter Moore as CEO and Phil Gould as HOF , so they are also part of the problem.
Randy, on Face value you would be right, but i find it interesting that AI takes that one step further when trying to identify "what they do wrong compared to other clubs like Penrith, Storm and Roosters.
Ai identifies that being cautious and trying to be smart in a ruthless market are a hinderence in that the cautious approach allows the player to become available to other clubs during drawn out negotiations and they emotionally join another club whilst still negotiating with the Eels. The Eels lose out.
'Trying to be smart and outplay the market is normally a good trait, but once again Ai identifies game they are playing is wrong, they are trying not to lose, not to dominate and win. Different philosophies i'm thinking.
Do we have the option of dominating and winning? All signs are we need to scrap with what we can get (Kellt, JDB, 1yr pezet) or overpay in both yrs and $$$. The AI may have matched Dylboobs deal for fear of overcaution. That would be worse
there are suggestions there that indicate we might be able to rectify our issues by changing our structure by committee, up and down the chain, by acting faster with our final offer, by emotionally connecting with a recruit and by selling certainties not dreams.
AI makes some decent points especially in its conclusion. Galvin was a classic. That entire saga was instigated by Gus Gould and the Bulldogs well before it all blew up publicly. They orchestrated the entire process early to get their man, we were never in the fight merely used as a bargaining chip and to give the appearance of legitimacy.
Parra refuses to pay overs. This is a double edged sword. It prevents our cap from becoming unbalanced but it will never be enough for the Eels to land a big fish. The solution is TPA's and investment opportunities. I have no idea if the Eels have any of that at their disposal. Bottom line however is Eels will always be outbid.
This is extremely frustrating. The club does so much right off the field. Players know it's a good club which treats players and their families well. Great facilities, great fans, Sydney based. Plenty going for it.
I don't know what the answer is. But perhaps the executive need to consider an alternative strategy. Perhaps we need to play Moneyball with our recruiting. Pay slight overs for mid tier players with great attributes. Jack Williams being the model. Make sure we land those signatures and build a squad of high quality without paying for the finished elite product from elsewhere. Pay overs for young guns who haven't debuted but are physically undeniable. Perhaps.
Because one fact is for certain, we can't sign an elite, in-demand player if we were the only club in the NRL.
Good point Muttman, I think the club are doing so many things right as well. At the end of the day I don't know what the club is really doing wrong to miss out on their first choices at the last hurdle so to speak. I'm hoping that fans outrage might make them have a look at what is not working and try to rectify it now.
Good point BE, i mean we are not like Wests thank god with board drama's. We are doing a few things pretty well, particularly with the way news rarely gets leaked out of the joint which is quite impressive and financially we are doing well as a club.
There is something a miss and we need to work out what it is and either improve it or remove it.
yeah i think we are doing lots real well to be honest. Just that last likely hurdle of closing contracts seems to be a real issue to me.
That point on Galvin is wrong. I have mentioned here before connections to the Galvin decision and we were in it til the end. Luke Vella was the final sticking point. He went to Parramatta COE, met Ryles and MON and raved about both.
Though, yeah you are also sort of right that Dogs were in it much earlier than media knew about. James, his dad, told my mate Eels rang Moses and Ciraldo did as well but did say if interested or not to my mate. Then Dogs got announced much later on.
The year before Penrith wanted him and he nearly went but Wests refused.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next