Annoyed!
- Thread starter joshobro
- Start date
Pigskin
NYC Player
- Mar 5, 2008
- 217
- 106
its just utter stupidity that we let Hannant go ... I agree with the awards that he is pretty much the best prop in the game now and I can see him becoming as good as Webcke by the time he finishes ... very similar player in my view
Ennis is clearly a class hooker but maybe fits into the "can't keep em all" category ... hard to justify but losing Hannant hurts me more ... maybe because Ennis is not very likeable
I don't regret losing Stagg at all
Oink !
Ennis is clearly a class hooker but maybe fits into the "can't keep em all" category ... hard to justify but losing Hannant hurts me more ... maybe because Ennis is not very likeable
I don't regret losing Stagg at all
Oink !
Alec
International Rep
- Mar 4, 2008
- 19,413
- 12,537
Michael Ennis and David Stagg were both massive blows defensively early on - they were excellent at making cover tackles. Lately, we've done fairly well in replacing Ennis though. As for Stagg, I'd still like to see someone in the back row as just a tackler like he was. It would allow the rest of the forwards to have a greater impact in attack. Melbourne and QLD both made the best use of that with Dallas Johnson doing the tackling.
Bucking Beads
International Captain
- Mar 5, 2008
- 24,604
- 7,906
I am more annoyed with the fact we let Ennis and Stagg just walk away when they had a year left on there contracts. Hannant was always going to leave he isn't a freckle on Webcke or Petro's Arse.
Hannant wasn't exactly in the best form towards the end of the year when the Doggies signed him and what would of been stupid at the time was Matching or beating the Dogs offer. Based on his current form he would be worth what the Dogs are paying him though but it's not our fault that the Broncos management don't have crystal balls. Obviously it annoys me that we lost him but I can understand why where as most people can't.
I have a feeling that there is more to it than we just couldn't match the Dogs offer to Ennis. Just a little theory I have haha I can't back that up at all though. Ennis is obviously a class hooker and he would be wanted by any club who don't have Smith or Farah as their hooker but we have McCullough who is looking like he could be just as good, if not better in the future.
Plus wasn't there an article saying we had to let these guys go so we had enough $$ free to re-sign Hunt this year.
But that still is no excuse as I suppose it backs up your opinion that our management is bad.
Stagg wasn't the flashiest player at the end of last year either and didn't seem like a big loss at the time. Although I think if he played back row for the hole year instead of being used as 'Mr fix it' by Bennett we could of seen what we are seeing from him this year. We are pretty well off in the back row now anyway so it's not like him leaving has really made a big effect.
I have a feeling that there is more to it than we just couldn't match the Dogs offer to Ennis. Just a little theory I have haha I can't back that up at all though. Ennis is obviously a class hooker and he would be wanted by any club who don't have Smith or Farah as their hooker but we have McCullough who is looking like he could be just as good, if not better in the future.
Plus wasn't there an article saying we had to let these guys go so we had enough $$ free to re-sign Hunt this year.
But that still is no excuse as I suppose it backs up your opinion that our management is bad.
Stagg wasn't the flashiest player at the end of last year either and didn't seem like a big loss at the time. Although I think if he played back row for the hole year instead of being used as 'Mr fix it' by Bennett we could of seen what we are seeing from him this year. We are pretty well off in the back row now anyway so it's not like him leaving has really made a big effect.
Bucking Beads
International Captain
- Mar 5, 2008
- 24,604
- 7,906
I'd still trade Stagg for the likes of Te'o and Setu anyday.
- Mar 5, 2008
- 30,193
- 19,228
We couldn't keep Hannant, he wasn't worth the money the Bulldogs offered.
I think we were justified in letting Stagg go. He was a solid player for us, made a lot of tackles. Credit to him though, he's improved a lot this season.
Ennis was quite a loss IMO.
I think we were justified in letting Stagg go. He was a solid player for us, made a lot of tackles. Credit to him though, he's improved a lot this season.
Ennis was quite a loss IMO.
Bucking Beads
International Captain
- Mar 5, 2008
- 24,604
- 7,906
Foordy said:
I though he was contracted for 1 moe seasonbut we released him because the offer from the dogs was too good to pass up.
Nah, my understanding was that Stagg, Boyd and Ennis each had 1 year options for 2009 that were in their favour, however the Broncos suggested to all 3 that if they got an offer elsewhere they should consider it as there wouldn't be anything available for 2010.
Stagg had an option to stay another year at the Broncos or walk away and I would say he would of stayed but we told him there wouldn't be a spot for him in 2010 so he decided to take up the Dogs offer while it was there because he obviously had no future at the broncos.
Steve
NRL Player
- Mar 4, 2008
- 1,002
- 3
Coxy said:
Yep and Hannant's reaction after landing that contract was typical of the modern day player. There was no sense of sadness or thanks to the Broncos. It was all about the deal which set him up for the future.
Not having a go at him (must've been a good deal). It's just how players are these days. Players like Lockyer who bleed for their club are few and far between.
