Re: Is the Pryce right? : Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:55 pm  

Mick Gledhill wrote:

Not at all.

Leon has said to my friends who are respectable people, Matt will confirm (Hobby, Keith, Gilly etc)

That he's going to be a Bradford Bull in 2011, hence why I started this thread.

Mick i asked hobby when you started this thread and he denied any knowledge. He also said neither you,pryce or indeed any bulls players were in the pub on the night you claim.

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:55 pm  

Mick Gledhill wrote:

Not at all.

Leon has said to my friends who are respectable people, Matt will confirm (Hobby, Keith, Gilly etc)

That he's going to be a Bradford Bull in 2011, hence why I started this thread.

Jan 2011? or Nov 2011 when his Saints contract runs out?

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:56 pm  

mat wrote:

Mick i asked hobby when you started this thread and he denied any knowledge. He also said neither you,pryce or indeed any bulls players were in the pub on the night you claim.

Well he's having you on then (unless he was winding me up), speak to Baz or Gilly, they were there.

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:01 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

its just the usual local rag making a story out of nothing, a few questions:-
1) were would you get the money for it? (£150k + easily)
2) what incentive is there for saints to sell him?

£150k? for a player likely to be marginalized next season by the emergence of Lomax and Eastmond and who only has 12 months remaining on his contract? A contract which is probably a fair amount of Saints' salary cap and would possibily be better spent by Saints on tying their two home grown halves to long term deals?

I believe that answers both your questions

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:02 pm  

Roofaldo wrote:

£150k? for a player likely to be marginalized next season by the emergence of Lomax and Eastmond and who only has 12 months remaining on his contract? A contract which is probably a fair amount of Saints' salary cap and would possibily be better spent by Saints on tying their two home grown halves to long term deals?

I believe that answers both your questions

Someone on the St Helens board of this thread want's £250,000 for Pryce

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:03 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

its just the usual local rag making a story out of nothing, a few questions:-
1) were would you get the money for it? (£150k + easily)
2) what incentive is there for saints to sell him?

Is he on £150k+ at Saints? Because he's only got one year left at Saints, so we wouldn't be expected to pay over the odds for him, our new coach will know what the value of Leon is anyway.

Well, in terms of incentive, there's a chance he may miss the start of the season, which might put Simmonds off. Not even the most ardent of Saints fans knows what Simmonds wants when he comes here. Added to that the potentially exciting pairing of Lomax and Eastmond which worked very, very well towards the end of the season, and the fact Leon might want to leave, and you never know!

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:04 pm  

Roofaldo wrote:

£150k? for a player likely to be marginalized next season by the emergence of Lomax and Eastmond

do you seriously believe Leon Pryce would be marginalised by Jonny Lomax in 2011 if fit?

Roofaldo wrote:

and who only has 12 months remaining on his contract? A contract which is probably a fair amount of Saints' salary cap and would possibily be better spent by Saints on tying their two home grown halves to long term deals?

Possibly more accurate, but we've always managed to set aside cap space in the past without losing our best players at their peak.

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:07 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

its just the usual local rag making a story out of nothing, a few questions:-
1) were would you get the money for it? (£150k + easily)
2) what incentive is there for saints to sell him?

The "local rag" correspondant has been pretty spot on with trailing whats happening before it does, he's clearly in regular contact with the club. Hes got enough right that he does not warrant accusations of just making it up. Now it could be that we are interested, have spoken/speaking to saints but it goes no further, but I'd say its not just made up. And I can't remember the last time the T&A just made up a transfer story. (Although the timing is rather convenient with the pledge deadline looming)

1) Any money would probably come directly from resolving the Orford situation, and your guess is equally as valid as my guess of say... £25K

2) None if he wants to stay, but plenty if he wants to go back to Bradford and your new coach likes the look of your understudies or wants to bring a new half in from Oz. All of which is guesswork from both sets of fans.

It might well not happen, I'd still have it down as a very long shot, but it can't be just dismissed out of hand just yet.

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:09 pm  

At the end of the day, if Leon did want a return to the Bulls I expect Saints WOULD be willing to listen to a sensible offer. If one of our players was keen to be elsewhere then I would expect the Bulls to take a similar approach. Obviously they will be after some sort of compensation, but I doubt it would be in the regions that some Saints fans are quoting.

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:14 pm  

my point is that we dont need to sell and you want to buy, so we can ask whatever we want, again were is the incentive for saints to sell him? our young 6's arent ready for it fulltime yet, Leon would be our first choice 6 next year without a shadow of a doubt

I'd take Langley and £100k we need a fifth choice prop