Rebuild The Knights

When Houston signed it was described as a depth signing on similar terms to Newton, who I believe is on 100k plus extra if he plays firstgrade.
 
Ethan said:
I seem to remember that $350,000 was the price and thinking it was way too much (cant remember where I heard or read it ) but now im thinking it could have been $250,000 because even that is way too much .
Still a decent amount if we got rid of these guys :
Houston Say $250,000 I would,nt think there are too many established 1st graders on less than this.
Roberts $385,000
Mcmanus Say $300,000 Cant imagine Jimmy on less than this when Uate is on 500,000.
Mullen $550,000 Im over waiting for him too step up permenantly .
Uate $500,000 No way in hell have we got anywhere near that out of him in the last 2 years.

Faalogo , Bj , Gids and Scotts money i imagine would go towards Hodkinson , Paea and the Matautias deals.
With Hodkinson here we can cover all these players accept Mullen and with nearly 2 mill to spend we could buy any 5/8 we wanted Foran would have been nice, maybe Carney if he pulls his head in or Albert Kelly.
Of course this wont happen but I think its what we really need . Oh and 1 BIG nasty prop that scares the opposition as we haven't had 1 of those for a while either .
Click to expand...

I have to repeat though, no other club in the comp is going to sign Houston, so we really have no choice but to keep him, now we've signed him. We can't just give him the sack and free up however much he's getting paid.
 
jamesgould said:
I have to repeat though, no other club in the comp is going to sign Houston, so we really have no choice but to keep him, now we've signed him. We can't just give him the sack and free up however much he's getting paid.
Click to expand...
An ESL club would be our only hope.
 
slotmachine said:
This is the club that is giving Roberts 400k, and swapping Fa'alogo/Scott/Gidley/BJ for Mickey Paea and Hodkinson.

Literally anything is possible.
Click to expand...

When will people realise Tyrone is NOT on 400k a year, but on 385k ONLY for next year? Clearly he is on a back-ended contract
 
jamesgould said:
I have to repeat though, no other club in the comp is going to sign Houston, so we really have no choice but to keep him, now we've signed him. We can't just give him the sack and free up however much he's getting paid.
Click to expand...
Yeah your right would be good though .

- - - Updated - - -

Tubby said:
When will people realise Tyrone is NOT on 400k a year, but on 385k ONLY for next year? Clearly he is on a back-ended contract
Click to expand...
If thats right then no matter what we do he's not going anywhere ...why would he .
 
Sign me for 300k ... I'd be a fair swap for Houston ....I promise I won't miss any tackles I'll run the ball up hard and won't drop it once ! And in turn Houston can sit on his arse and do nothing.
 
its funny how the knights are a reflection of newcastle. Novocastrians are so against changed the rail fiasco comes to mind
and there happy with mediocrity
 
member 2299 said:
Adainst change? Against change? I'll have you know young man Todd Lowrie is returning in 2016!
Click to expand...
I don't see what the problem is with us signing Lowrie? He is on a second tier contract and is replacing Newton who was a pack leader and I'm sure it'll be more or less the same role.
 
And like Newton he will be in first grade whilst Stone is the coach, and our young prospects stay in th Cup and get lured to other clubs with first grade offers. Just look at his comment about Jake Mamo.
 
Joel said:
I don't see what the problem is with us signing Lowrie? He is on a second tier contract and is replacing Newton who was a pack leader and I'm sure it'll be more or less the same role.
Click to expand...

Yeah Member sums up my views on it - fine if what you say is actually what ends up happening, but I'd be surprised if he doesn't end up in first grade.

That was one thing Bennett did do right, as much as it pained me to see Tahu drop down, there was no point in keeping Tahu/Quinn/Newton etc in first grade.
 
Happy to wait out and see what the board's plans are. They are not like Parramatta and Manly who fickle with each other rather try to work together to make the Knights a better club.
Kind of agree that Matt Gidley is not really apart of that future IMO, he had a job to do which he did to the best of his ability but I think it might be a bit above him now.
 
Part of it should also make it literally restoration of pride in the jumper. So in 2016 we should go back to the Henny Penny style one permanently. It might only be symbolic but to me as a kid growing up that symbolised the Newcastle Knights.
 
Last edited:
Our major problem is being tied the the apron strings of the NRL. Whilst we are we will always be a bottom four finisher. Does anyone here think it a mere coincidence three of the four NRL controlled Clubs are in 16th, 15th and 14th position? And with the Dragons going not that much better? Nothing can be done by the Boards of the four Clubs without getting the 'head office' stamp of approval and this concerns players recruitment, staffing etc. and no doubt we will get the coach the NRL wants us to have.

Members still do not know how much whathisname left us in the hole to the NRL for, how much we still owe and whether or not we are likely to crawl out of it. Beware NRL and Knights. The twelve financially strong Clubs will start SLII if things do not improve. Whispers are starting to surface as all these Clubs have the identical licence renewal date, 2017, they will walk if they do not get a better deal. Committees come up with ideas for improving the game, get to HQ where they sink and vanish. How happy are the 12 with undisclosed slaries to NRL officials and a $50m surplus in 2014 not shared with the Clubs?
 
member 2299 said:
Our major problem is being tied the the apron strings of the NRL. Whilst we are we will always be a bottom four finisher. Does anyone here think it a mere coincidence three of the four NRL controlled Clubs are in 16th, 15th and 14th position? And with the Dragons going not that much better? Nothing can be done by the Boards of the four Clubs without getting the 'head office' stamp of approval and this concerns players recruitment, staffing etc. and no doubt we will get the coach the NRL wants us to have.

Members still do not know how much whathisname left us in the hole to the NRL for, how much we still owe and whether or not we are likely to crawl out of it. Beware NRL and Knights. The twelve financially strong Clubs will start SLII if things do not improve. Whispers are starting to surface as all these Clubs have the identical licence renewal date, 2017, they will walk if they do not get a better deal. Committees come up with ideas for improving the game, get to HQ where they sink and vanish. How happy are the 12 with undisclosed slaries to NRL officials and a $50m surplus in 2014 not shared with the Clubs?
Click to expand...

Nice post

I personally disagree with a lot of what the new administration (lead by Smith) has enforced upon clubs, players and fans. And it is all done without a shred of real consultation. Smith is making some great moves but he is also making some very poor moves too. The clubs hold the equity (the players and the stadiums) I'm sure they're becoming fed up with being told what is best for them

Take the outright ban of the shoulder charge as the lead example. How many players in the past 40 odd years have been left in a wheelchair because of a shoulder charge? Zero. Within 2 years of this rule change, we see throughout all grades, players being lifted and driven in a way which has lead to an unprecedented list of critical spinal injuries. Coincidence? Absolutely not Imo. The nature of the contact has shifted away from singular hits, towards the current style of grapple and twist, as a direct result of the rule change. The irony here is this: the shoulder charge was banned in order to prevent future law suits for negligence on the part of the NRL, in the event that players suffer from problems born of concussion - similar to what has occurred in the NFL (even tho its a completely different sport). However, in the 3 years since the rule change we have seen how many broken necks? And they have now created for themselves a trend of current and future litigation by players which far outweighs the potential costs they are trying to avoid, now and into the future. How many more kids need to become paraplegic before they recognize this as a trend and not simply a coincidence?

Aside from this, everyone loves the shoulder charge, players and fans alike. If Smith is lost for explanation as to why the value of the next broadcast rights deal is less than the one previous. He should perhaps be asking himself the question of why less fans are watching the game from week to week in 2015 than there were in 2011....

Forget bringing the biff back (I can understand that decision), but there have been some significant changes to the fabric of the game which I believe most fans have disagreed with. And the disturbing part is that the current admin seems unable to acknowledge that
 
Kenny Powers said:
Nice post

I personally disagree with a lot of what the new administration (lead by Smith) has enforced upon clubs, players and fans. And it is all done without a shred of real consultation. Smith is making some great moves but he is also making some very poor moves too. The clubs hold the equity (the players and the stadiums) I'm sure they're becoming fed up with being told what is best for them

Take the outright ban of the shoulder charge as the lead example. How many players in the past 40 odd years have been left in a wheelchair because of a shoulder charge? Zero. Within 2 years of this rule change, we see throughout all grades, players being lifted and driven in a way which has lead to an unprecedented list of critical spinal injuries. Coincidence? Absolutely not Imo. The nature of the contact has shifted away from singular hits, towards the current style of grapple and twist, as a direct result of the rule change. The irony here is this: the shoulder charge was banned in order to prevent future law suits for negligence on the part of the NRL, in the event that players suffer from problems born of concussion - similar to what has occurred in the NFL (even tho its a completely different sport). However, in the 3 years since the rule change we have seen how many broken necks? And they have now created for themselves a trend of current and future litigation by players which far outweighs the potential costs they are trying to avoid, now and into the future. How many more kids need to become paraplegic before they recognize this as a trend and not simply a coincidence?

Aside from this, everyone loves the shoulder charge, players and fans alike. If Smith is lost for explanation as to why the value of the next broadcast rights deal is less than the one previous. He should perhaps be asking himself the question of why less fans are watching the game from week to week in 2015 than there were in 2011....

Forget bringing the biff back (I can understand that decision), but there have been some significant changes to the fabric of the game which I believe most fans have disagreed with. And the disturbing part is that the current admin seems unable to acknowledge that
Click to expand...


I don't know how many were left in wheelchairs but there's been one who lost his life in the QLD Cup. Is that enough or do more people have to pass away for it to make sense to ban it.
 
http://m.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-p...e-on-sam-kasiano/story-fn2mcuj6-1227465722479

Freak accidents will happen from time to time, but a spate of unprecedented spinal injuries is a trend, not a coincidence and they aren't one-off freak accidents

Using Ackermans case as reason to justify the ban is akin to suggesting Cricket should ban the bouncer because of what happened to Phil Hughes... freak accidents can happen. My point us simply that the ban on the shoulder charge has led to a change in technique which has brought about a new trend of life threatening injuries... that is all
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top