Cronk/Pearce Watch

Honeysett wrote:Come on Browny let's ramp up the Pearce talks and get him in Newcastle colours asap

Can't talk to Pearce till tomorrow. Today he still has 2 years left on his contract.

Krump wrote:

I'd rather TPA info then club paid salaries. TPA's are where the major discrepancies in roster strength come from.

I've actually seen a TPA and what blew me away was that it included tax, the player had agreed to $100K and was being paid $144k or there abouts to cover the tax on $100K

No Worries wrote:

I've actually seen a TPA and what blew me away was that it included tax, the player had agreed to $100K and was being paid $144k or there abouts to cover the tax on $100K

Mate put this in the Accountancy thread.

Dip and the other bean counter's are all gonna need cold showers if they inadvertently stumble upon this kind of talk.....

Honeysett wrote:Come on Browny let's ramp up the Pearce talks and get him in Newcastle colours asap

Just out of curiosity HS, why do you want Pearce to sign with Newie?

Pieman wrote:
Just out of curiosity HS, why do you want Pearce to sign with Newie?

Premiership winning half in a consistently top team.

He's a marquee signing and one that if he signed with us other players would pay attention to. If Pearce can go there why shouldn't we give them a crack.

Sure we might pay a little more now but he's the burley to the other fish.

Fair enough.

I disagree with him being a good fit at newcastle. Pearce is great at club level because his side is consistently better than the other side. They arent better because of him IMO.

I disagree. He makes smart decisions in club games. He's a great defending 7 and his kicking game as well as organisational game is strong. He knows how to close out a game as well something we struggled with. We lead at half time a lot this year and didn't get the job done.

Has he forced a repeat set with a kick since 2013 ?

Pearce has gone on record saying he feels he would be a good fit at the Dogs. Although there are conflicting reports as to the exact wording, one media outlet quoted him as saying it feels like a good fit inside dogs...

Honeysett wrote:I disagree. He makes smart decisions in club games. He's a great defending 7 and his kicking game as well as organisational game is strong. He knows how to close out a game as well something we struggled with. We lead at half time a lot this year and didn't get the job done.

Whilst I agree HS, it always baffles me that this often appears to be the criticism of Pearce in the Origin arena.....like all of a sudden he forgets how to do all these things???
I've always thought the scapegoating of Pearce was completely unfounded and a lazy, simpleton's approach to understanding what the difference between the two sides is.....which IMO (and as proven since nearly the origin of Origin) has little to do with the actual team selected.

Anyway enough about that. From a club perspective, I would love for either Pearce or Cronk to come to my club but for differing reasons.

From an on field perspective, personally and taking into account age etc. I would probably prefer Pearce.
Cronk brings so much off the field though.

If I were the Roosters, I certainly wouldn't be swapping one for the other.....and it was an interesting discussion from Cronk last night suggesting something similar.

Honeysett wrote:I disagree. He makes smart decisions in club games. He's a great defending 7 and his kicking game as well as organisational game is strong. He knows how to close out a game as well something we struggled with. We lead at half time a lot this year and didn't get the job done.

I agree that he is a great defending 7. He generally also is a brilliant club level halfback - when surrounded by superstars. (The same could be said about Cronk too I guess).

I reckon that if Pearce is all of a sudden the Poster boy for a struggling side and he isnt in one of the top 2 teams on paper in the league, those end of set plays or lapses in concentration that he has pretty regularly become even more apparent. There were heaps of roosters games this year where Pearce went missing for like 30 minutes and then the roosters lose their lead.

I dont think Pearce is the chum to attract the other players at all too.

SBW, Maloney and RTS won them that comp, sure pearce played his role in it but jeez he was not the key figure. Also, his kicking game is not strong. His kicking game - especially his short kg is fucking terrible. His long kicking game is OK.

Look would I fucking hate it if he signed with newie? No, but connor watson or brock lamb might. The million or so bucks he wants too is just not worth it IMO.

Oz Sport Mad wrote:

Whilst I agree HS, it always baffles me that this often appears to be the criticism of Pearce in the Origin arena.....like all of a sudden he forgets how to do all these things???
I've always thought the scapegoating of Pearce was completely unfounded and a lazy, simpleton's approach to understanding what the difference between the two sides is.....which IMO (and as proven since nearly the origin of Origin) has little to do with the actual team selected.

Anyway enough about that. From a club perspective, I would love for either Pearce or Cronk to come to my club but for differing reasons.

From an on field perspective, personally and taking into account age etc. I would probably prefer Pearce.
Cronk brings so much off the field though.

If I were the Roosters, I certainly wouldn't be swapping one for the other.....and it was an interesting discussion from Cronk last night suggesting something similar.

The thing with the roosters is - they dont give a fuck about development. They want to win now and are happy to pay to do it.
What would you rather?

You dont really develop all that many juniors but you buy top flight players every few years. Just about every year you are close to winning the minor premiership, every other year you win it. You make the GF qualifier every year pretty much and once every 6/7 years you win a comp. If swapping an excellent local junior for an elite level, once in a generation halfback for 2 years wins you a comp in those 2 years, its justified. Also, your star players might get hurt or fuck a dog once every 5 years and you miss the finals those years.

Or

You develop your own juniors, you add the odd good young gun from here or there every couple of years but you value playing blokes you have developed. Every year you make the finals, sometimes you are a genuine chance of winning the comp - but you never win the minor premiership and you only win a comp once every 15-20 years.

I understand that the second scenario makes the success more valuable, but the success is also more rare. 

The roosters want to win now - they have seen that there is a better player out on the market and bought him. It might be at the expense of one of their fav sons but if it wins them the comp, its justified IMO (from the roosters management point of view).

Also, is there a single thing that Pearce does better than Cronk? Besides be younger lol? They have taken the better bet and picked up Cronk for 2 years, if it wins them a comp its justified. If they stick with Pearce for the next 6 years and dont win one, whats the point? 

If they dont win one with cronk, they will hit the market again and buy the best halfback they can, prob a Cleary, Morgan or Taylor.

Pearce staying is the best outcome for everyone IMO too. He gets to learn from Cronk, play a bit of 6/7/9 for 2 years which will only help his game and gets to take over again once Cronk leaves. I mean, its a fucking joke salary cap wise but its the best outcome for the roosters.

Also fucking LOL about the origin stuff. How many games does he need to play before you will admit that he isnt up to that level. This year was a perfect example of why he shouldnt be there too, the perfect chance win a series. Nope, couldnt do it.

Also, why cant they let keary go and keep pearce as the 6? Pearce has a good running game.

I don't value Keary at all to be honest and if I was the Roosters I would try keeping Pearce to partner Cronk. There will be other young players around in the future but Pearce has shown to be decent with a solid team around him and Cronk can help elevate others.

Friend, Cronk, Pearce and Teddy is an Origin level spine and one that can win the comp. Particularly with a forward pack of JWH, Napa and Cordner.

Random wrote:I don't value Keary at all to be honest and if I was the Roosters I would try keeping Pearce to partner Cronk. There will be other young players around in the future but Pearce has shown to be decent with a solid team around him and Cronk can help elevate others.

Friend, Cronk, Pearce and Teddy is an Origin level spine and one that can win the comp. Particularly with a forward pack of JWH, Napa and Cordner.

Absolutely agree
Keary is replaceable - A player like Pearce is much harder to come by.

Pieman wrote:
The thing with the roosters is - they dont give a fuck about development. They want to win now and are happy to pay to do it.
What would you rather?

You dont really develop all that many juniors but you buy top flight players every few years. Just about every year you are close to winning the minor premiership, every other year you win it. You make the GF qualifier every year pretty much and once every 6/7 years you win a comp. If swapping an excellent local junior for an elite level, once in a generation halfback for 2 years wins you a comp in those 2 years, its justified. Also, your star players might get hurt or fuck a dog once every 5 years and you miss the finals those years.

Or

You develop your own juniors, you add the odd good young gun from here or there every couple of years but you value playing blokes you have developed. Every year you make the finals, sometimes you are a genuine chance of winning the comp - but you never win the minor premiership and you only win a comp once every 15-20 years.

I understand that the second scenario makes the success more valuable, but the success is also more rare. 

The roosters want to win now - they have seen that there is a better player out on the market and bought him. It might be at the expense of one of their fav sons but if it wins them the comp, its justified IMO (from the roosters management point of view).

Also, is there a single thing that Pearce does better than Cronk? Besides be younger lol? They have taken the better bet and picked up Cronk for 2 years, if it wins them a comp its justified. If they stick with Pearce for the next 6 years and dont win one, whats the point? 

If they dont win one with cronk, they will hit the market again and buy the best halfback they can, prob a Cleary, Morgan or Taylor.

Pearce staying is the best outcome for everyone IMO too. He gets to learn from Cronk, play a bit of 6/7/9 for 2 years which will only help his game and gets to take over again once Cronk leaves. I mean, its a fucking joke salary cap wise but its the best outcome for the roosters.

Also fucking LOL about the origin stuff. How many games does he need to play before you will admit that he isnt up to that level. This year was a perfect example of why he shouldnt be there too, the perfect chance win a series. Nope, couldnt do it.

I don't particularly care about the Roosters strategy.
My point isn't who has been the best player thus far into their career, it was taking a crystal ball and predicting who will be the best player in the Roosters team over the next two years.

If I was being biased I'd suggest Cronk but if I am being honest and if I were Trent Robinson, I think Pearce is hitting his peak as a playmaker and would be the better player in the next two years.
For all we know Cronk will be average without Smith guiding the team and Slater running of his shoulder......similarly for all we know he will still be a fucking gun.

As for losing a spine player, if they had to choose, losing Keary would be the Rooster's preference I image.....however the cheating bastards probably don't have to choose and will keep Keary as a back-up.

As for the Origin stuff, stop trying to look for a silver bullet and give credit to what has been the actual difference between the two teams....which isn't Pearce by the way.

Oz Sport Mad wrote:

I don't particularly care about the Roosters strategy.
My point isn't who has been the best player thus far into their career, it was taking a crystal ball and predicting who will be the best player in the Roosters team over the next two years.

If I was being biased I'd suggest Cronk but if I am being honest and if I were Trent Robinson, I think Pearce is hitting his peak as a playmaker and would be the better player in the next two years.
For all we know Cronk will be average without Smith guiding the team and Slater running of his shoulder......similarly for all we know he will still be a fucking gun.

As for losing a spine player, if they had to choose, losing Keary would be the Rooster's preference I image.....however the cheating bastards probably don't have to choose and will keep Keary as a back-up.

As for the Origin stuff, stop trying to look for a silver bullet and give credit to what has been the actual difference between the two teams....which isn't Pearce by the way.

Answer the question
Would you rather win a comp every 6/7 years or once every 10-15 years? Thats how the Roosters look at it. 

Why the fuck would you need a crystal ball? Cronk at the end of his career is a better player than Pearce at his peak. Was proven this season just gone too. The only thing that will change that is injury to Cronk. Everything Cronk does is transferrable to the Roosters, plus, everything he does is proven to bring success. There is literally no reason to think that Cronk will not be better than him next season - barring injury.

The difference is usually a Cooper Cronk FG. From Cronk, the better player. Wonder why the Roosters signed him to replace the bloke who consistently can not guide the NSW to a close victory? Ya know, getting your team home in a big game. Interesting that. Cronk is currently and will be a better player than pearce in the next 2 years. If the roosters win the comp next year - 100% the move is justified.

If you are losing a lot of close games, most of the blame certainly falls on the halves.

When he gets picked again next season and they lose again, will that be enough games to show that he isnt up to it? He is not at the level and never will be at the level that wins you games in origin like a JT, Cronk, Johns, Fittler. I would love to be proven wrong about this but it hasnt happened yet and he has had many many chances to do it.

Pieman wrote:
Answer the question
Would you rather win a comp every 6/7 years or once every 10-15 years? Thats how the Roosters look at it. 

Why the fuck would you need a crystal ball? Cronk at the end of his career is a better player than Pearce at his peak. Was proven this season just gone too. The only thing that will change that is injury to Cronk. Everything Cronk does is transferrable to the Roosters, plus, everything he does is proven to bring success. There is literally no reason to think that Cronk will not be better than him next season - barring injury.

The difference is usually a Cooper Cronk FG. From Cronk, the better player. Wonder why the Roosters signed him to replace the bloke who consistently can not guide the NSW to a close victory? Ya know, getting your team home in a big game. Interesting that. Cronk is currently and will be a better player than pearce in the next 2 years. If the roosters win the comp next year - 100% the move is justified.

If you are losing a lot of close games, most of the blame certainly falls on the halves.

When he gets picked again next season and they lose again, will that be enough games to show that he isnt up to it? He is not at the level and never will be at the level that wins you games in origin like a JT, Cronk, Johns, Fittler. I would love to be proven wrong about this but it hasnt happened yet and he has had many many chances to do it.

Ummm what the fuck are you on about?
Yes, I would really, really like for my team to win less premierships..... in fact I'd love for them to win as many spoons as the Knights while they are at it

You (and many others) may not necessarily agree with who out of Pearce and Cronk would play better at the Roosters over the next two years but what I am suggesting is looking at the short term....hence why I keep saying "over the next two years"???

The problem is firstly that you are a daft khunt....but secondly that you are simplistically looking for Pearce to produce a last minute FG or play to seal an Origin match and hence provide the proof to satisfy your simple brain.
Maybe he will and maybe he won't but it's not a one man game mate, it's not even just about the 17 blokes that are in the team.

When he get's picked again and they lose next year, I will lay blame appropriately on the whole system....not just the bloke who wasn't able to (or wasn't put in the position to be able to) make the clutch play.

Oz Sport Mad wrote:

Ummm what the fuck are you on about?
Yes, I would really, really like for my team to win less premierships..... in fact I'd love for them to win as many spoons as the Knights while they are at it  

You (and many others) may not necessarily agree with who out of Pearce and Cronk would play better at the Roosters over the next two years but what I am suggesting is looking at the short term....hence why I keep saying "over the next two years"???

The problem is firstly that you are a daft khunt....but secondly that you are simplistically looking for Pearce to produce a last minute FG or play to seal an Origin match and hence provide the proof to satisfy your simple brain.
Maybe he will and maybe he won't but it's not a one man game mate, it's not even just about the 17 blokes that are in the team.

When he get's picked again and they lose next year, I will lay blame appropriately on the whole system....not just the bloke who wasn't able to (or wasn't put in the position to be able to) make the clutch play.

The point of that is - thats what the roosters do and are doing. They want to win now and Cronk at 7 gives them a better chance of doing it than Pearce at 7. And no, if you or anyone else think that Cronk wont be better wearing 7 at the roosters than Pearce would have been, you and these mystery others are absolute flat earthers.  What is long term about saying Cronk at the back end of his career is better than Pearce at his peak. What dont you get about me saying There is literally no reason to think that Cronk will not be better than him next season - barring injury. Or was that not short term enough for you? Cronk will be be a better player this weekend than Pearce will be. There you go?? derrrp

Cool. Nah thats not what I look for at all - would be nice if he did it once in his 17 goes tho. Or if he got the team into a position for someone else to do it because ya know, thats the halfback's job. Nurp. Or if he even just played well in a losing side once in a while.
Of course the blame does not fall entirely on his shoulders. But part of it most certainly does. Especially in close losses.