Latu Fainu

[Will on the hill]

I've said this before:
If a player breaks a contract, leaves early the agent gets ZERO commission on the new contract.
If they ask for more money the agent does NOT get an increase in commission.

Where did you get this from? If this were true why would a manager ever be incentivised to get his client a better deal.

 

[manlyfan76]

Where did you get this from? If this were true why would a manager ever be incentivised to get his client a better deal.

It's my solution

 

[Will on the hill]

It's my solution

Ahh, that would definitely work. I read it incorrectly.

 

[47MVEagle]

Maybe the club doesn’t want Tartak having Saab, Schuster, Olakau’atu & Latu & Samuela all in our squad because he can use them as leverage to keep pressuring the club for upgrades?

I’m sure Tartak thought he had the club hamstrung for a few years over the 5/8th position, with both Schuster & Latu on his books. The club signing Brooks scuttled that though, so now Tartak spits the dummy & threatens to take Latu & Samuela elsewhere?

I don’t see how Latu’s $250-300k would help Seibold buy a player who can win him a premiership now? That’s a winger’s or green forward’s money, not a proven premiership winner’s money so I don’t buy the club are offloading them to free up salary cap.

 

[LeonardCohen]

It’s pretty obvious what’s happening with the Fainu’s. We can’t carry Latu’s $$$ on next year’s cap if he is not playing FG. It’s akin to playing with a smaller cap than the rest of the NRL. The deal wasn’t brokered by Mestrov and Seibs, it was something arranged with the Fulton clan a couple of years ago. They don’t think it’s smart business and want to assemble a squad that they believe will challenge for a premiership next year. Brooks is ready and Latu is not.

There are enough other deficiencies in the squad to address and we need money to do that. So Latu makes way and the money is spent elsewhere. Then you’ve got Sammy who is clearly ready to play firsts and can demand more coin. We are flush for edge forwards already signed long-term, thus he has to make way. It’s not a case of the club being blind to their talents, it’s a cap problem. The end.

 

[Pete W]

It’s pretty obvious what’s happening with the Fainu’s. We can’t carry Latu’s $$$ on next year’s cap if he is not playing FG. It’s akin to playing with a smaller cap than the rest of the NRL. The deal wasn’t brokered by Mestrov and Seibs, it was something arranged with the Fulton clan a couple of years ago. They don’t think it’s smart business and want to assemble a squad that they believe will challenge for a premiership next year. Brooks is ready and Latu is not.

There are enough other deficiencies in the squad to address and we need money to do that. So Latu makes way and the money is spent elsewhere. Then you’ve got Sammy who is clearly ready to play firsts and can demand more coin. We are flush for edge forwards already signed long-term, thus he has to make way. It’s not a case of the club being blind to their talents, it’s a cap problem. The end.

100% spot on re Latu, however I must disagree on Samuela.

Our only edge forwards are Ola'akautu, Tuilagi, and Trbojevic (and possibly Schuster as depth - although I think he will primarily be used as a ball playing 13 in the middle, especially when considering the exciting development of a combination with Burbo stationed on that left edge).

In any given Top 30 (+ avg. 4 Dev. Players), a club will need 6 edge forwards for an entire season. We have seen that Bullemor really shouldn't be on an edge (unless a temporary mid-game shuffle is urgently required). Parker has been mentioned also; Untested in the forwards and a little injury prone. Lawton maybe?

My point is that we are hardly flush for genuine 1st grade quality edge forwards. Given Samuela is already better than all of them (barring Ola'akautu), at his age, it seems absurd to be letting him go.

Furthermore, re our cap situation, he is technically listed as a middle forward. We are certainly short on quality in the middle, and have space monetary wise in this department. Samuela's signature should come before Bullemor if only for this reason alone. If Bullemor's salary is significantly less than what Samuela is asking (highly doubtful), then throw in any one of Fulton's (if he manages to be signed elsewhere), Woods', etc. Word is that he is happy at Manly, so any reasonable offer will likely be accepted.

There aren't many 19 yr olds that have the mental and physical qualities to mix it with the big boys at such a young age. Samuela is an absolute gem, with great instinct and skillset, and can play anywhere in the forwards.

This is the guy we keep.

Of all the juniors coming in from western Sydney (Schuster, Ola'akautu, Koula, Saab included), he is the best of all of them. If we never recruit another kid from Westfield Sports High School, or the Blacktown area, and we lose everyone just mentioned, I honestly believe keeping Samuela alone will turn the whole experience into a success for Manly.

As I said in an earlier post, only an already established gun forward (e.g. Origin-calibre) coming in can justify such a loss. Tuitavake, Fifita, even Keppie, and Latu, I can get on board with. But losing Samuela at this stage is madness. I can only hope someone is breaking contract in their last year for us, because of all the off- contract forwards available to be recruited for next season, none of them are as good as Samuela, or even close. Unless of course we land Tino - which is next to 0 chance of happening

 

[manly al]

It’s pretty obvious what’s happening with the Fainu’s. We can’t carry Latu’s $$$ on next year’s cap if he is not playing FG. It’s akin to playing with a smaller cap than the rest of the NRL. The deal wasn’t brokered by Mestrov and Seibs, it was something arranged with the Fulton clan a couple of years ago. They don’t think it’s smart business and want to assemble a squad that they believe will challenge for a premiership next year. Brooks is ready and Latu is not.

There are enough other deficiencies in the squad to address and we need money to do that. So Latu makes way and the money is spent elsewhere. Then you’ve got Sammy who is clearly ready to play firsts and can demand more coin. We are flush for edge forwards already signed long-term, thus he has to make way. It’s not a case of the club being blind to their talents, it’s a cap problem. The end.

But the cap is increasing by some 25 % , even though i know it is all relative in regard to general player contract adjustments or upgrades . Also Latu would represent better i st grade value all things normal next season then say Jacob Arthur and even on 300 k or so could definitely be considered a better proposition or to justify a position in the top 30 then
Not sure what Samual is on but better then obviously Boyle and with a bit extra could also definitely again warrant a top 30 spot . But conversely also , who is to say again that the more favorable opportunity else where is still not a factor .
Sure if Manly really want to keep both , it is feasible , just based on money and exiting contract basis and not re signing a couple of other very average forwards in particular

 

[mave]

It’s pretty obvious what’s happening with the Fainu’s. We can’t carry Latu’s $$$ on next year’s cap if he is not playing FG. It’s akin to playing with a smaller cap than the rest of the NRL. The deal wasn’t brokered by Mestrov and Seibs, it was something arranged with the Fulton clan a couple of years ago. They don’t think it’s smart business and want to assemble a squad that they believe will challenge for a premiership next year. Brooks is ready and Latu is not.

There are enough other deficiencies in the squad to address and we need money to do that. So Latu makes way and the money is spent elsewhere. Then you’ve got Sammy who is clearly ready to play firsts and can demand more coin. We are flush for edge forwards already signed long-term, thus he has to make way. It’s not a case of the club being blind to their talents, it’s a cap problem. The end.

Can I proffer an add-on to this....

If Latu is in the top 30, like he is this season, his salary cap hit is covered by the NRL grant, despite what dollar figure we are paying him.

If he is on biggish dollars, and now hypothetically new coach Seibold doesn't want him in the 30 for next season.....that means the biggish $$ contract then comes out of Penns pocket......not the salary cap grant.

Just something to consider.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

But losing Samuela at this stage is madness.

Yes - if this was supercoach.
But it isn't. Obviously on football ability we've all seen him play, which is why every person (and their dog and cat) have put up theories/reasons/speculation about what else is at play, because Samuela isn't being punted for lack of footy ability.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Can I proffer an add-on to this....

If Latu is in the top 30, like he is this season, his salary cap hit is covered by the NRL grant, despite what dollar figure we are paying him.

If he is on biggish dollars, and now hypothetically new coach Seibold doesn't want him in the 30 for next season.....that means the biggish $$ contract then comes out of Penns pocket......not the salary cap grant.

Just something to consider.

But doesn't the top 30 have to include the club's top 30 earners? Could be wrong

 

[mave]

But doesn't the top 30 have to include the club's top 30 earners? Could be wrong

I don't believe Latu has been in the top 30 for the last few years?

 

[Pete W]

Yes - if this was supercoach.
But it isn't. Obviously on football ability we've all seen him play, which is why every person (and their dog and cat) have put up theories/reasons/speculation about what else is at play, because Samuela isn't being punted for lack of footy ability.

Given the players in the forwards yet to be re-signed for next year, the club has decided to give contracts to Bullemor and Woods and not to Sammy. There is also talk that more money will be freed by releasing Keppie and Fulton. So let's all be honest for a moment, this isn't a cap issue. Even re-signing Parker at this stage shows that money is being allocated to almost everywhere but the Fainus.

Releasing Latu and Johns, and bringing in Brooks is certainly a reasonable move.

However, re Samuela, if it's not about talent, attitude, or the salary cap, what is it? If it is indeed purely political, then this is a big fail

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

if it's not about talent, attitude, or the salary cap, what is it? I

See the previous few hundred posts for all the possible reasons. I think every conceivable idea has been covered!

 

[Thewestisbest]

It's my solution

Very good!

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

I don't believe Latu has been in the top 30 for the last few years?

No but when he signed a 4 year deal the first year or 2 could have been at a much lower rate, given he was only 16, I think?

 

[tookey]

Does anyone have ANY quotes from Latu?

My brother is innocent

 

[Will on the hill]

Can I proffer an add-on to this....

If Latu is in the top 30, like he is this season, his salary cap hit is covered by the NRL grant, despite what dollar figure we are paying him.

If he is on biggish dollars, and now hypothetically new coach Seibold doesn't want him in the 30 for next season.....that means the biggish $$ contract then comes out of Penns pocket......not the salary cap grant.

Just something to consider.

Top 30 is the 30 highest payed players at a club. Even if a club wanted to they can't leave a 250k contract outside the top 30 unless they have 30 players earning more.

 

[Pete W]

See the previous few hundred posts for all the possible reasons. I think every conceivable idea has been covered!

I notice you have a habit of picking out a single line to reply to, without the context said line is contained within. A little cheeky, and quite frustrating to be responding to.

As you can see from the very next line, this is a hypothetical question. The answer is political. And that is my whole point.

Massive loss to the club for ego

 

[XV-1]

No but when he signed a 4 year deal the first year or 2 could have been at a much lower rate, given he was only 16, I think?

That sounds logical. The 4 year deal if you believe what was written could have has him earning 1.3 mill over the 4 years.

He would be getting a lot more than the minimum 150k for 24 and 25.

Could be as high as 1 million for those last two seasons.

Des must have been on the Dogs salary cap when he thought up these over the top figures.

 

[Heckenberg]

Top 30 is the 30 highest payed players at a club. Even if a club wanted to they can't leave a 250k contract outside the top 30 unless they have 30 players earning more.

Unless they are under 18 and not eligible for first grade on this basis ?