2019 NIB Knights

Bren wrote:I know he isnt really a Fantasy prospect but just read a comment about Levi where he was compared somewhat to Isaac Luke. I only watched him a handful of times and wasnt THAT impressed by him, what did I miss?

He's going to be very good. He's quick out of dummy half, always gets the set rolling quickly. Just needs to get his reads of the play right and make sure it's into the hands of the right person. That will be made easier with Mullen and Hodkinson drifting across field and not being stuck on one side.

Did someone say Justin Hodges signed with the Roosters ?

Why should the Knights play him? Fuck him! They ain't going to be competing for the 8 I don't think so they should be playing people committed to the team, this isn't just a case of the Knights being spiteful just because he signed for another team, they stck by Tapine when he wasn't even a first team regular through a court case when he assaulted someone and broke their jaw, most teams with young guy doing that would of been dumped, they stuck by him, looked after him and then progressed his career for him to turn around at the first opportunity and say cheers guys but fuck you I'm off....I have no affiliation to the Knights I just don't get all I can't believe Brown did that stuff! Got to train on your own after accepting a $500,000 contract ohhhh the agony

Honeysett wrote:

He's going to be very good. He's quick out of dummy half, always gets the set rolling quickly. Just needs to get his reads of the play right and make sure it's into the hands of the right person. That will be made easier with Mullen and Hodkinson drifting across field and not being stuck on one side.

Club bias aside do you rate him higher then Cook?

Welshy wrote:Why should the Knights play him? Fuck him! They ain't going to be competing for the 8 I don't think so they should be playing people committed to the team, this isn't just a case of the Knights being spiteful just because he signed for another team, they stck by Tapine when he wasn't even a first team regular through a court case when he assaulted someone and broke their jaw, most teams with young guy doing that would of been dumped, they stuck by him, looked after him and then progressed his career for him to turn around at the first opportunity and say cheers guys but fuck you I'm off....I have no affiliation to the Knights I just don't get all I can't believe Brown did that stuff! Got to train on your own after accepting a $500,000 contract ohhhh the agony

If your boss tried to make you sit in the corner with a dunce hat on it wouldn't hurt you either, would be pretty humiliating though and make you wonder wtf is wrong with him. Might make others look at him in a different light as well. Obviously we will have to agree to disagree here, but I just can't see anyone from the Knights thinking "oh I better not accept heaps more money from that other club because Brown might have a tanty if I do". As such I'm not sure what it accomplishes at the end of the day other than setting yourself up to either have action taken or look a little silly. Anyway as I said, we are looking at it from two completely different POV's, agree to disagree I suppose.

On another topic, I've heard lots of good things about Levi as well, though I've not seen much of him myself. If he goes well and Mullen stays on the park for more than 1/3rd of the season you might start forming a pretty strong spine. At the moment the scary thing would be the lack of experience and combinations but I think Hodkinson and Mullen should fit each other well and you don't lack talent to play at the back.

Archer wrote:

If your boss tried to make you sit in the corner with a dunce hat on it wouldn't hurt you either, would be pretty humiliating though and make you wonder wtf is wrong with him. Might make others look at him in a different light as well. Obviously we will have to agree to disagree here, but I just can't see anyone from the Knights thinking "oh I better not accept heaps more money from that other club because Brown might have a tanty if I do". As such I'm not sure what it accomplishes at the end of the day other than setting yourself up to either have action taken or look a little silly. Anyway as I said, we are looking at it from two completely different POV's, agree to disagree I suppose.

On another topic, I've heard lots of good things about Levi as well, though I've not seen much of him myself. If he goes well and Mullen stays on the park for more than 1/3rd of the season you might start forming a pretty strong spine. At the moment the scary thing would be the lack of experience and combinations but I think Hodkinson and Mullen should fit each other well and you don't lack talent to play at the back.

In the wise, wise words of Ron Burgundy, i agree to agree to disagree

and TBH my MD would 100% do that, he is an absolute cunt, my manager however would not!

Bren wrote:
Club bias aside do you rate him higher then Cook?

Nah I rate Cook better so far from what I have seen, although I rate Cook very highly.

Bren wrote:I know he isnt really a Fantasy prospect but just read a comment about Levi where he was compared somewhat to Isaac Luke. I only watched him a handful of times and wasnt THAT impressed by him, what did I miss?

You didn't miss anything mate. He's not that special imo.

What happens if the guy they promote instead of Tapine ends up leaving at the end of the season as well? With player movements so common these days, recruitment and development is a fairly short term thing IMO.

I have no problem with the club choosing to play Tapine in reserves. If he was clearly superior to other options the club would play him in firsts as no club would sacrifice short term results (well apart from perhaps the Tigers with Farah, but that just goes to show what a circus it is there in Tigerland).

Your Name wrote:Did someone say Justin Hodges signed with the Roosters ?

Yeah but looking back, I think most people (including Bennett) would say that ruling Hodges ineligible for first grade after he signed with the Roosters was the wrong move to make. Also the effect of it might not have been as bad as it might be for the Knights. In 2001 the Broncos were coming off a premiership and their outside backs were generally Lockyer, Tuqiri, Sailor, Chris Walker, and De Vere. Even Brent Tate could only get a couple of games, so it's not as if Hodges was significantly better (at the time) than the other available options. Last time I looked at the Knights back row depth, I didn't get the same impression of quality.

Dip wrote:What happens if the guy they promote instead of Tapine ends up leaving at the end of the season as well? With player movements so common these days, recruitment and development is a fairly short term thing IMO.

I have no problem with the club choosing to play Tapine in reserves. If he was clearly superior to other options the club would play him in firsts as no club would sacrifice short term results (well apart from perhaps the Tigers with Farah, but that just goes to show what a circus it is there in Tigerland).

Better to put development into someone that might stay than someone that isn't. At the end of the day it's about keeping the playing team building and working together.

What if some of the players are pissed at Tapine for taking the money and running? Instead of helping him with defensive cover they let him get smashed, it's not good for a teams perceptive.

This whole thing will most likely result in one of two positive things for the Knights. 1) young players won't sign elsewhere for other clubs due to fear of not playing football or B) they'll do so at the end of the year and it's not a distraction to the team.

Honeysett wrote:

Better to put development into someone that might stay than someone that isn't. At the end of the day it's about keeping the playing team building and working together.

What if some of the players are pissed at Tapine for taking the money and running? Instead of helping him with defensive cover they let him get smashed, it's not good for a teams perceptive.

This whole thing will most likely result in one of two positive things for the Knights. 1) young players won't sign elsewhere for other clubs due to fear of not playing football or B) they'll do so at the end of the year and it's not a distraction to the team.

or C) They won't sign with the Knights in the first place because they've seen how others get treated.

And who would be pissed at Tapine for taking the money? Half the Knights squad has come there from another club either for better money or better opportunity, so I don't know why they would have a problem with it.

I guess in all of this one of the main factors is what the difference in offers is. From what I read the Raiders have a $500K/season offer. If the Knights are offering him $450K, then you'd probably be right in saying that he should show some loyalty. If they're only offering him $200K though, I don't think any reasonable person would say he should stay. Even Nathan Brown supposedly said it was an offer too good to refuse. To me that indicates there is some gap between the Knights and Raider's offer.

Dip wrote:

or C) They won't sign with the Knights in the first place because they've seen how others get treated.

And who would be pissed at Tapine for taking the money? Half the Knights squad has come there from another club either for better money or better opportunity, so I don't know why they would have a problem with it.

I guess in all of this one of the main factors is what the difference in offers is. From what I read the Raiders have a $500K/season offer. If the Knights are offering him $450K, then you'd probably be right in saying that he should show some loyalty. If they're only offering him $200K though, I don't think any reasonable person would say he should stay. Even Nathan Brown supposedly said it was an offer too good to refuse. To me that indicates there is some gap between the Knights and Raider's offer.

The Knights offer, I'm lead to believe, was 500k less over 3 years. That's a lot of money, I get why from that standpoint he took the deal. However the Knights could have sacked him after his assault charge and thrown him to the wolves perhaps never to play again. We looked after him, gave him the support he needed and first chance he got he signs elsewhere. If he had any kind of loyalty he would have signed with for short term and perhaps then looked elsewhere. The point is from day dot he's only looked after himself and not the club, whereas the club had his best interest at heart and now they don't. The hate towards the Knights over this is insane.

As for him signing for a better opportunity, if we weren't playing him and he signed elsewhere then fair enough but he's signing for someone where the general consensus is he will struggle to get a first grade position - he's gone for the money. He's a disloyal mercenary that should be treated as such. Why show loyal and respect to someone that hasn't given you the same.

As for half the Knights squad coming for money/opportunity

1. Jaelen Feeney, 2. Jake Mamo, 3. Dane Gagai, 4. Pat Mata'utia*, 5. Akuila Uate, 6. Jarrod Mullen, 7. Trent Hodkinson, 8. Kade Snowden, 9. Tyler Randell, 10. Jack Stockwell, 11. Robbie Rochow, 12. Korbin Sims*, 13. Jeremy Smith. Interchange: 14. Danny Levi, 15. Mickey Paea, 16. Sam Mataora, 17. Pauli Pauli.

5 players in our squad you could say that for and that's being generous. Hodko wanted to stay at the Bulldogs but was moved on for Mbye. Snowden out and out come for money. Stockwell was a fringe first grade at the Dragons and came over same as Mataora and Pauli Pauli was released by the Eels to make way for Jennings.

EDIT: You could throw in Gagai but he was sacked by the Broncos, came to us after we looked after him and then resigned with us.

Most of our side is homegrown so most would be loyal to the club. That's the way the Knights operate.

Honeysett wrote:As for half the Knights squad coming for money/opportunity

1. Jaelen Feeney, 2. Jake Mamo, 3. Dane Gagai, 4. Pat Mata'utia*, 5. Akuila Uate, 6. Jarrod Mullen, 7. Trent Hodkinson, 8. Kade Snowden, 9. Tyler Randell, 10. Jack Stockwell, 11. Robbie Rochow, 12. Korbin Sims*, 13. Jeremy Smith. Interchange: 14. Danny Levi, 15. Mickey Paea, 16. Sam Mataora, 17. Pauli Pauli.

5 players in our squad you could say that for and that's being generous. Hodko wanted to stay at the Bulldogs but was moved on for Mbye. Snowden out and out come for money. Stockwell was a fringe first grade at the Dragons and came over same as Mataora and Pauli Pauli was released by the Eels to make way for Jennings.

EDIT: You could throw in Gagai but he was sacked by the Broncos, came to us after we looked after him and then resigned with us.

Most of our side is homegrown so most would be loyal to the club. That's the way the Knights operate.

Of that team you listed, you'd have to include Paea, Gagai and Feeney, so that makes 8 of the 17 changed clubs for money or opportunity (not saying there's anything wrong with that). I'd probably have Tariq Sims in the team as well, so that makes 9 (of lets say 18, as he may come in for another bought player).

Looking at the profiles of Telstra Premiership squad players on the Knights webpage:
Manly - Pearsall
ESL - Paea,
Warriors - Bhana, Taylor
Dogs - Hodkinson, Feeney,
Eels - Pauli,
Broncos - Gagai,
Raider - Mataora
Cowboys - T Sims
Dragons - Sims
Sharks - Snowden
Tigers - Stockwell

Manly - Pearsall (won't play)
ESL - Paea (retirement fund)
Warriors - Bhana (Not in our 17, but will pay it) Taylor (who?)
Dogs - Hodkinson ($$$) Feeney (Unwanted)
Eels - Pauli (pushed out of the Eels, no choice)
Broncos - Gagai (Fired from Broncos, no choice)
Raider - Mataora (Yep)
Cowboys - T Sims (Yep, $$$ or playing with his brother)
Dragons - Sims (played with Knights under 20s for 2 years)
Sharks - Snowden ($$$)
Tigers - Stockwell (Dragons, but yep)

Gagai was fired from the Broncos he didn't have a choice whether to stay or not and then when the Broncos wanted him back he still stayed with the Knights. I wouldn't class him as the same as someone looking to sign somewhere else for more money or an opportunity.

I'm not saying guys can't sign elsewhere, that's the nature of the business. My point was if the club has gone over and above the norm to keep you happy and look after you and first thing you do is bail you're a mercenary.

Have no idea who this Feeney bloke is or his style of play, obviously if he is starting in round 1 he will slot into my Fantasy team as an NPR however would love a run down on the bloke. Honeysett? or any other Knights fans know much about him?

Bren wrote:Have no idea who this Feeney bloke is or his style of play, obviously if he is starting in round 1 he will slot into my Fantasy team as an NPR however would love a run down on the bloke. Honeysett? or any other Knights fans know much about him?

I'm sure @Dip will know.

Wahoo. Tagging someone finally worked

Krump wrote:
I'm sure @Dip will know.

Thanks Krumpy.