UFO Hunter
On MSE there is a thread about Dessy on 2YK this morning.

Apparently, monaghan wanted to extend his future with manly but we could not afford to keep him. So he asked for a release early to get the best option while he's playing well.

Considering we had the money to throw at O'Donnell, I find it hard to believe that we couldn't continue to afford him. Now that he is going I would imagine the $350,000 we had up our sleeves for Luke combined with Monas $240,000 I can't see it adding up to him having to leave unless he wanted more.

The NRL don't allow front loading now either. You can't pay 100K this year 200K next year and 400K the year after anymore.

My point being, if we can't afford Monas, but after his departure we will could have half a mill up our sleeves, is it any indication that talks are going on with someone that we are quite confident of luring?

Jatz Crackers

First Grader
Interesting Flip.

One thing worth noting is that the NRL would be ceasing front loading on future contracts. It wouldnt effect existing contractual arrangements. Dont know how that effects your scenario.

I am very curious as to how our next recruitment goes, as we do have issues with money at the moment. It could come from anywhere. if we did have $.5m to throw im sure it would go on muliple players for depth rather than a sole bluechip.


UFO Hunter
Yeah thats a point about the front loading. However looking at our current mod, most blokes have renewed contracts since the rule was brought in. The only bloke who I can think off the top of my head who could be front loaded is Orford. However I can't see him taking an extra half a million.

Also, that being said, monas was already contracted next season. Perhaps they said we can't afford you two years from now. Maybe that extra money he will free up next season could go to someone like Feleti Mateo and Greg Eastwood.

All in all, I think the club might have spun him some **** to get him to move on.


and its not a matter of affording him full stop, break it down into pieces, ie halves/hookers then outside backs then 2nd rowers and front rowers and split into three groups.

Mayby the club just feels we have too much investment in say the halves/hooker group and say not enough in 2nd row/front row group.

so they cut from one to ad from the other, this is wear Matas value for money arguement comes in. we really only need 4 out of Lyon/Orford/Burns/Ballin/Monaghs allowing for three starting and one on the bench, there is one left over . the "5th player" in this group should be a young rookie on 75K not 200+ like travis or Monaghs, this is why one will need to be squeezed out.

Canteen Worker

First Grader
Just ask yourself where we would be hurt most if we had a bad injury or two. Up front is the answer, considering that we didn't replace BK and Beaver is a dodgy proposition.

The Wheel
Premium Member
My thoughts exactly JK - its not a matter of not being able to afford him it is a matter of not being able to afford another half/hooker
Brett White just re-signed with the Storm.

Ben Cross is someone we should chase. A good hard-head of a prop. Would be great off the bench.


Journey Man
There was an article not to long ago which could also explain where some of the money has gone, a lot of players are being re-signed to new contracts this year, and when we are playing well. Hence they are would be demanding an upgrade through their form, especially guys like Glenn Stewart, Matt Ballin and even Michael Robertson. Hall is also playing for a better contract as he turned down a 2 year deal. In no time at all Monas Money is eaten up without any new players.


Journey Man
No doubt Monaghan wanted to extend on the same money and we rightfully capped his extension at a price closer to what he is worth.

The Wheel
Premium Member
Good point, I guess wiht Groom coming along and hopefully Burns re signing there was just no point in retaining his services beyond his existing contract. It was still his decision to leave early obviously monetary reasons only.

Members online

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
24 18 6 333 42
24 18 6 214 42
24 16 8 168 38
24 16 8 124 38
24 14 9 175 35
24 14 10 122 34
24 13 11 -24 32
24 13 11 -137 32
24 12 12 59 30
24 12 12 13 30
24 12 12 4 30
24 11 12 6 29
24 9 15 -111 24
24 9 15 -126 24
24 7 17 -331 20
24 5 19 -199 16
24 4 20 -290 14
Top Bottom