Which one, ours or yours?

Not quite what I meant actually.If Ellis is happy with his deal then fair enough.
All I am saying is if somebody is offered better money,nobody could blame them for taking it.
Maybe Ellis is looking at the bigger picture?

Some of you should try living in some real [is[/ihitholes, like Yeovil or Stoke, Rotherham or Middlesborough.

When I lived in Cott I did most of my shopping in the village, simply because I spent most of me money in Tiger

Shall we get back on topic?

It's a dead topic, the blatantly obvious answer was provided in the first reply.

Sorry, I must've missed the announcement when Middlesbrough got upgraded to a hole

Whenever I come back to Hull I always shop at James Wrights.

What's this thread about?

Somebody was trying to understand why players are willing to sign long-term contracts with the most succesful SL team of the last 5 years. I presume their threads asking about the defecatory arrangements of sharks and bears were deleted for being too far off topic.

Yes it was about why people sign for the most successfull superleague team of the last 5 years. But it was trying to ask peoples opinions on whether that was the only reason or whether money and location came into it and whether we could compete with leeds in the future with signing players and if not then could anything be done about it to improve our player retention and signings from elsewhere

By and large, players will decide where to play based upon 3 things:

1, Chance of trophies
2, Money
3, The coach

Location and club loyalty are further down the list. The number one thing we need to do to compete with the likes of Leeds for players is to show we can compete with them for trophies, it really is as simple as that.

I agree there are other factors, as you say there's game time, and there's always some players who are genuine fans of a team and therefore don't want to play for another team. I still think it mainly boils down to the 3 factors I listed, though, and definitely in the specific case of long term contracts. I don't see any player committing to 5 years if he's in search of first team rugby, as it is surely a big gamble to think he'd be guaranteed his place for the duration of the contract, there are bound to be other players coming in during that time.

Whilst location does have an influence, I don't think it's as major as people might think in most cases, unless you're talking about London or Catalan. Football is also an entirely different case for 2 reasons: Firstly, there are literally teams all over the whole country, not just in 3 pockets across the M62 and a few other outposts, so players have far more choice and much more varied options; and secondly, there is a genuine transfer market, so the long-term commitment aspect is all but taken out of the equation.

losing players to a team like leeds/wigan/warrington may be explained by their recent successes but doesnt explain why players defect to the perenial bridesmaids saints.
agree with those saying hull(the city) isnt a big attraction.im born n bred here and think we the residents are quiet inward looking and although friendly we are difficult to please.couple this with our location at the end of the road and barring a few attractions its not the most entertaining of cities.
all that said if a player does do well here and is loyal he will be a given hero status second to none

Wigan have had a great couple of seasons and Warrington a couple of cup wins, over the course of SL Saints' record trumps both. We've won 1 trophy. It explains it very well to me.