Briers was on their rosta for 2014 so he was part of the salary cap so thet will most likely have the cap needed for sammut

'Sammut's stature'???...... Don't want to be patronising, but he's been playing for 2 bottom half of the league (and mediocre) sides for the last few years, without actually setting the Super League world alight - If (and its a big if) he got a move to a so called bigger club, then he would be no more than a squad player and with it would be on a relatively average wage.

If you have been paying the likes of Sammut a high end wage then, its little wonder that your club is in the mess it is, both on and off the pitch.... I wouldn't be disappointed if he ended up at Wire, but I wouldn't be putting the bunting out either.

4th top tryscorer in the league whilst playing in a mediocre team isn't bad going, especially considering he spent a bit of time injured. I'm not saying he's one of the best players in the league, but I do think that he's a tad better than you're giving him credit for. I think that he'd suit Warringtons high risk style of play too. He gets on the end of off-loads very well. I'm sure he'd score a bucket load in such in environment.

Having said all that I'd much rather the Bulls keep hold of him!!

I'm not saying he's a bad player, I just don't think he'd be any improvement on what we presently have available.

Its a difficult one for Sammut, he can be a well paid (and highly rated) fish in a small pond, or probably have to take a pay cut to join the bigger fishes... I'm presuming by that, that he is one of your higher paid players?

I think there was interest from parramatta when he resigned for second contract with us? Prob on an improved deal, but would doubt one of our top earners just better paid and not far off.
When he came he was one of the players who i thought was overrated, and a bit of a liability with a suspect temperament - Now I hope every coach in super league is that naive!! Defensively quite strong and eager, great step and hands and shown in past year or so that he can play to a game plan and organise as well.
Whilst I like ratchford a lot I do think you would be better with him at full back and sammut at 6. I get what you are saying about possible paycut but even to sign him at this time you would have to give him a decent wage or at least a reasonable length of contract, why would he give up a decent contract with a year left with possible good year could command a big fee.

Unfortunately for Bulls supporters, I think your board will wan't him out because he has to be one of your better paid players. But he is not a shoe in at Wire because of Ratch, Myler and the need to give GOB a decent run - to see if he can step up at SL level. The one possibility is as a replacement for Myler - his contract runs out in 2yrs, so if he want's to go to Oz, we would need to sell him end next year to recoup any monies. Having said that, TS is on record as saying he thinks "Briers replacement will be found from within the club".

I think there is a good case to be made here for the Bulls getting their full Sky monies for next year - we need to think about protecting the current clubs in SL, as there are enough financial problems as it is. Much better to have a financially viable Bulls with a squad that is competitive in SL, than a club with continuing financial problems sitting in the bottom third of the table and attracting low ST numbers (for me anyway).

Seems it's on from their end - [iindicated that England-bound super league players Enoch Maki, Francis Paniu (Hull) and Mark Mexico (Bradford Bulls) have shown up and are training intensively to prepare themselves.[/i


rlSourcerl

People seem to assume we automatically need to be looking to unload the higher earning players. But if these guys are scoring tries, winning games and bringing punters through the gates then their net cost to the club could well be less than some £20k journeyman who regularly prompts threads on RAB for their inept performances.

Spending what you "might" have in the future, as opposed to what "do" have, is what got you into this mess.

You need to cut your cloth for the here and now.

Given we are 650k behind everyone else due to the "agreement" which seems to have forged under threat we've not much cloth left to cut.

You were 650K behind because of your previous mis-management.

You were then mis-managed by OK.

Now you want to go down the same route again, spending what you don't have.

Crack on!

Don't bother to read anything before jumping in with both feet will you?

E must bey one of them nu fangled "knee jerkers" ?

dboy theres another thread for fatuous remarks about matching income and expenditure, this is about how to do it with the squad we have and what they are likely to be earning. Its called detail, any a***wipe can come out with trite truisms, THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAIL. OK did not start with a clean slate, he had to take on the contracts of the players which included their previous remuneration, not what they were worth to a new business. He has also paid cash into the business for those mistakes, which may be secured against the Bulls assets but phew I'm not sure those assets are worth anything. And it has taken a while to reduce that wage bill, eg Platt was on a three year contract that has just ended, Lulia has left and I would imagine that Henry the new centre will be on less and certainly more talented than Platt.

The new regime however have declared that they aim to match income and revenue this year - which will probably make us the only SL club to do so - the only issue is how do you do that? come on, tell us, otherwise keep your stupid remarks to yourself.

I haven't. You have.

My post was a direct response to Northern relic, who suggested marquee players would generate more money than they cost.