Re: Is the Pryce right? : Fri Oct 01, 2010 5:34 am  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

Is it just me or is anyone else getting a tad annoyed with players jumping ship early in their contracts? Burgess I can understand - going to the NRL was slightly different and he's a young man who was always going to give it a go at some stage.

But Eastwood at Leeds, Johnson at Cats and possibly Orford just seem to be saying 'I'm homesick, let me leave or I'll pout'. Players bleat about loyalty a lot. Some of them obviously believe its a one-way street.

Hear hear. Integrity is withering.

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Fri Oct 01, 2010 6:49 am  

Adeybull wrote:

Connor has established very considerable credibility amongst the fans since his arrival from the wet side of the Pennines a year ago.

I can't see him jeopardising that for a story without any foundation.

Also, didn't he make mention of a number of rumours he'd been asked about on twitter? Said something about most are rubbish and the reason he's not run stories on them is for just that reason

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Fri Oct 01, 2010 7:31 am  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

Is it just me or is anyone else getting a tad annoyed with players jumping ship early in their contracts? Burgess I can understand - going to the NRL was slightly different and he's a young man who was always going to give it a go at some stage.

But Eastwood at Leeds, Johnson at Cats and possibly Orford just seem to be saying 'I'm homesick, let me leave or I'll pout'. Players bleat about loyalty a lot. Some of them obviously believe its a one-way street.

I understand what you are saying, but at the same time I don't recall any of these players stating that they "won't come back / play".

OK - they might have the monk on, but Eastwood has still been one of your best players, even after all this came out about him wanting to go home.

Clubs aren't daft. It's rare that they can generate a transfer fee for a player, and by getting details into the open about a player not being 100% happy they lose a player 12 months earlier than planned, but at the same time receive a fee and move on.

I'm sure Burgess would have stayed at Bradford for that last year, but I can't see any way we'd have got him to stay beyond that. We needed the money to pay off other "debts" shall we say, but Leeds and Catalan probably don't have that problem.

It's all money into the coffers and an opportunity to refresh the squad or give healthy re-signing bonuses to ageing squad players (ie at Leeds)

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Fri Oct 01, 2010 12:17 pm  

Bradford Badger wrote:

It's all money into the coffers and an opportunity to refresh the squad or give healthy re-signing bonuses to ageing squad players (ie at Leeds)

Sadly any of their "ageing" players would walk into our Bulls side.

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:46 pm  

I would be surprised if Saints let Leon go to you guys.
This season at Saints up to his injury he has probably been one of our best performers.
If he did leave Saints I would imagine they would ask for around 100K minimum but that's my opinion.

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:57 pm  

cjhatesunion wrote:

I would be surprised if Saints let Leon go to you guys.
This season at Saints up to his injury he has probably been one of our best performers.
If he did leave Saints I would imagine they would ask for around 100K minimum but that's my opinion.

Even given his current injury, Saints emerging youngsters and Leon's six figure salary?

Hmmmm

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:21 pm  

Gurus_Beard wrote:

Even given his current injury, Saints emerging youngsters and Leon's six figure salary?

Hmmmm

I think we should stop using this logical argument. You're not alone in trying it and as clear as it seems, as valid as the points are, it just isn't sinking into the thick heads of some people

Perhaps a using a similar situation that happened at Bradford not 12 months ago would help? Wigan ask if Paul Deacon would be allowed to leave Bradford to join them in a player/coach role. Bradford say "Yes, but only if we are able to find a suitable replacement". In comes Matt Orford's agent "I've not been able to secure a favourable deal for Orford in Oz, would the Bulls be interested"

So, Bradford get Orford, Wigan get Deacon, everyone's happy. Do you see how that works?

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:55 pm  

Roofaldo wrote:

I think we should stop using this logical argument. You're not alone in trying it and as clear as it seems, as valid as the points are, it just isn't sinking into the thick heads of some people

Perhaps a using a similar situation that happened at Bradford not 12 months ago would help? Wigan ask if Paul Deacon would be allowed to leave Bradford to join them in a player/coach role. Bradford say "Yes, but only if we are able to find a suitable replacement". In comes Matt Orford's agent "I've not been able to secure a favourable deal for Orford in Oz, would the Bulls be interested"

So, Bradford get Orford, Wigan get Deacon, everyone's happy. Do you see how that works?

Yup.

Fans also often forget that a player is only "worth" what any buying club is prepared to pay. Failing that, he is worth zip.

Similarly, Leon cannot just leave as has been mooted. He can request a release but whether the Bulls would be prepared to offer any amount in return is open to conjecture. Given the cost saving Saints would make on not having him on payroll it may be an attractive option for them given the emergence of Lomax, Wheeler etc. Alongside having a player who would rather be elsewhere (for whatever reason) and it makes him moving to the Bulls a very realistic option.

As will become apparent methinks.

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Fri Oct 01, 2010 3:26 pm  

I think both sides are right.

There are plenty of reasons why Saints might decide to let Leon go before the end of his contract that are being highlighted by Bulls fans.
There are also plenty of reasons why they might want to keep hold of him which are being highlighted by the Saints fans.

If it was a key Bulls player that was being mooted at being wanted by another club (Orford maybe...?) we'd be coming out with the same arguements that the Saints fans are using. Two years on contract... Key player... Lack of alternative...

Re: Is the Pryce right? : Fri Oct 01, 2010 3:53 pm  

From what i got told today, to me it stands like, Pryce is wanting to come to Bradford, whilst both clubs are trying to come to some sort of agreement. Hope we get him, he can have the off day but who doesn't, but when he's on form i dont think there is a better player in Super League. He can win games for you on his own.