This is what I dont understand...
Why is Peats seen as the only option when we literally have another 20 players off contract?... Danny Wicks, Isaac De Gois, Vai Toutai, Luke kelly, Kelepi Tanginoa, just to name a few...
I understand some of these guys may not be on enough, but id rather shed a couple of these guys, than Peats... I'm not able to connect the dots... WHY PEATS?
Replies
Also that apparently some people here reckon BA doesn't want him. I don't know the truth to that, just read it here a few times.
De gois isn't on enough
We have 4 hookers on the books- 2 of which are first grade standard
Wicks will be needed next year
Best option is to do it with one player - simply because every player released has to be replaced by another in the top 25
Interesting... I still can't see how keeping Wicks is more beneficial than keeping Peats... I get we have 4 hookers, but none are as good as Peats, in my eyes anyway, I just feel he will be a huge loss, dont you?
Use it to sign a cheaper hooker with Kaysa as backup and use other money to keep Norman and go towards a new prop
We need to keep wicks as we need 5 first grade props and we have already lost junior. We would be very skinny in the front row if we lost wicks
Apparently Peats not in BAs plan for next year. Must be going for Segayaro. Peats too injury prone and we really don't get value for money out of him, only plays on average half a season.
Is it worth it to play for points and lose Peats though?
Come on Ron, we got Rid of Morgs we can get rid of anybody.
LOL
This is why, the players you have mentioned are minimum wage players who will have to be replaced with another 85k player to come into the 25, base salary players cannot help our cause here.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next