With so many off contact this year, do we let them go early if the Tigers Penrith Bulldogs Manly or Titans come calling.
Or do we make em see out the year in the Reggie's competition.
Will they be wanted.
Off Contact as I know.
Taka. Mennings . Smith. Alvaro. Please ad extras missed.
Replies
Michael Jennings just signed a 2 year deal.
Alvaro is signed until end of 2021 also. There are more than a few off contract end of this year but how they play and respond to the challenges will determine who goes and who stays, There are also some young players who are nipping at the heels of the top team as well.
Too early to make and definate calls on them though.
Brother
That is a good response Poppa. I would just add that it would come down to a player by player decision as well. A player like Stefano is unlikely to be let go whereby say Smith is a player where a deal could be done
It is not hard to see the benefits of this new administration especially in recruitment and retention.
As an aside I have always been opposed to options in the players favour. I notice with interest that it has been reported that Latrell Mitchell has a second year option but it is in the clubs favour. That is the only way it should be done.
If the player is worth it, then you give him the option. You don't really lose anything by giving the player an option, so long as you believe he is worth what you will be paying him in his option year. If he is and he exercises his option then you have him for another year, if he opts out, you're still in the best position to retain him.
Brett the issue is that when the option is in the players favour, the player and his manager control the contract
If the player comes off contract and he has had a good season with an option in his favour the only advantage to the club is that he may decide to sign again because he likes the club
If he is like the vast majority of players he will go to the highest bidder irrespective of the contract.
If the player has a poor season and the option is in the players favour the club is stuck with the player and often at an inflated value.
The option needs to be in the clubs favour so that they are in control of the contract. Do you think that Michael Jennings would have got the contract he had in 2019 had the option been in the clubs favour.
No question there is a risk involved, but if the club does its due diligence on the player that risk is mitigated. The reality is that the vast majority of players ask for player options when they change clubs, because they don't know the culture of what they are getting themselves in for.
I don't know what the numbers are, but I'd be willing to bet a day's pay that the vast majority of player options are for players changing clubs, not for players staying at their current club. In most cases, the only way clubs can induce quality players to change clubs is through the player option method, or by overpaying.
Personally I'd rather the former than the latter.
If there are good negotiators in the recruitment team it won’t happen. South Sydney and Latrell Mitchell the perfect example
Brett you are arguing against what a contract lawyer would want the club to do
Most clubs release players if they are sitting behind more established players as so they should. The window to play NRL is only opened a small time. Even contracted players like Ryan Matters was released by Roosters because he wanted a permanent spot which proved beneficial for him at Tigers. Unfortunately he could not wait for more success money wise and walked out on them. It can bsck fire moving on although I think he will make ordinary players look like super stars at Eels. He fitted so well at Tigers though
* Ryan Matterson phone changed the.name.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next