10 years. Is this the way forward? https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/ ... wboys-deal

10 years. Is this the way forward? https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/ ... wboys-deal

Everyone knows contracts are completely worthless. They mean nowt.

Watching the Cowboys perform without him last weekend you can see why the club thinks it's in their best interests.

Way OTT imo & id expect it to have numerous clauses for both sides.

Good discussion point - I can absolutely see the merit in it. He's only 23 years old and is the most damaging forward in the game - they've locked him down and got rid of any future bidding wars. It's particularly astute given the salary cap will increase over that time (though I'm sure there will be clauses covering salary cap rises or falls). Also gives the Cowboys a real base to start some real long term planning with their most valuable asset locked in. And for the player, it's long term security and allows him to simply focus on the job at hand.
However, there are some obvious and not so obvious risks. The biggest and most obvious risk is if he becomes injury prone, which given the position and style in which he plays, is quite possible, they're stuck with a very expensive lemon for a long time, and could ruin them for many a year (The Raiders are only just recovering now from the decision to tie in Campese on a very expensive 5 year deal they agreed when he was firing on all cylinders - the next season his body fell apart). Their only way out of this scenario would be to medically retire him, then insurance would pay out, but if he doesn't want that, they're screwed.
The other obvious big risk is that he simply does not hold his current form and status for that period of time - which again is quite possible.
Then then not so obvious risk is around his motivation - you often see players have their best seasons in the years that they're coming off contract - they know they're in the shop window and potentially without a job if they don't perform. With this type of deal, he can get real comfortable - it will take an enormous amount of self discipline for him to be 'on' for the full 10 years.
In summary; it's a big risk, but they have just secured a 23 year old beast - If I were a Cowboys fan, I'd be content with that and not too worried about the long term risks.

On the one hand it looks good business but we have seen enough players shine like stars early in their careers and either burn out early, or become crocks through wear and tear (which is very possible with a unit like him) like superted said.Seems more like a bit of a panic move to me as the superstar Thurston is coming to the end and they want to make sure they keep their other main man at the club when he does go.

Is it as daft as a job for life?

Try telling that to Segeyaro, he's just paid about £50,000 to get out of one.

Its an interesting one, you would think that Taumalolo has traded some earning power for security, but on the other side the Cowboys commitment will have got a good player on a lower wage. I think the risks are somewhat overplayed, yeah there is a chance that Taumalolo will fade as he ages and will be overpaid in the final years of this contract, but that is made up bu the discount they will be getting on him for the next few years.

I dont think we will see an awful lot of deals like this because the longer the contract the more difficult it is for both parties to judge its value. Taumololo doesnt know what the SC will be in 5-10 years time, not just in the NRL but in SL, in 5-10 years we could very well have 2 or 3 pro north-american sides. NCQ might be paying a large chunk of their SC to a reserve grade player.

Smells of offsetting short term costs. Probably an indication that NRL salaries are beginning to level off.

It's pretty impossible to offer any real comment unless you know the details. Who's to say there isn't a break clause or such after so many years or it being dependent on him playing x games a year. All that aside both sides must be happy so good luck to them.

I'll be interested to see if any other follow suit in the next couple of years.

A deal that must have more clauses in it than anyone other than the most astute sports orientated brief could imagine. A super player, from the games I've witnessed. Wonder if there's a clause that he could leave if Gary came calling.....I would imagine there is.

Are you imagining him playing for us for 8-10 games before getting homesick and going back to Aus for an undisclosed fee?

Please don't burst my bubble!