I would be if he got less minutes and took a paycut. He hasn't added to his game he's actually simplified it too much. Rather Shuster at lock personally.
-
We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
You forgot to mention the 50 tackles but hey what do they matter
Ryan
Journey Man
Love that take, and me too. Perfect shape, speed and size to be a dominant lock.
We could slot Weekes, or Croker in at 5/8 then. Remember , Croker was an Australian representative half coming through.
double hoops
First Grader
Is that worth 800k a year though? For that money I guarantee the extra STAR player in the squad can find the mark.
The issue with our big 3.
Tom when firing is worth a mill he is probably the best player in the league. DCE when firing behind forwards who go forward, isn't that far behind. But Jake his skills in that link man role. He is costing us games not winning them, and that even accepting he will tackle all day and try and slow the ruck.
What the club paid Jake hurts twice as much as DCE over inflation IMO.
Last edited:
He is overpaid, no doubt about it.
And must move to prop imo.
Des has stifled his game to the point it is at right now, so he may as well dumb it right down and go back to making metres.
You could swap Jake and Josh Jackson and not notice a lot of difference at the moment.
And must move to prop imo.
Des has stifled his game to the point it is at right now, so he may as well dumb it right down and go back to making metres.
You could swap Jake and Josh Jackson and not notice a lot of difference at the moment.
Jake should be at Prop
Ethan Bullemor should also be at Prop.
Not convinced on Keppie
Marty has been a little better the last two games but think he’s clocked off.
Paseka , well could be anything but is more like a fluffy pillow at times
2023 could see a major realignment, maybe !!
Ethan Bullemor should also be at Prop.
Not convinced on Keppie
Marty has been a little better the last two games but think he’s clocked off.
Paseka , well could be anything but is more like a fluffy pillow at times
2023 could see a major realignment, maybe !!
Rafferty
Mug punter
I don’t think anyone has said Jake is flying high or worth his price tag, but his 100% effort and commitment every game, his 100% born and breed maroon and white, defends his guts out and never goes MIA, if anything he plays himself to a stand still week in week out. Its probably more a case of how his used as opposed to how he plays.
NRL Premiership Players Statistics | FOX SPORTS Lab
Players Statistics Table for NRL Premiershipwww.foxsports.com.au
T
HERE ARE THE STATS!!!!! 53m a game!
Keep on ignoring them and think Jake is flying high and worth his 800k. Ben Treb will get 500k to keep Tommy happy by the end of the year....lol.
Its hard to dish on Jake and I won’t, but sadly with the speed of the game, the nature of mobile packs and ball playing 13’s, it seems Jake’s future is under pressure, if his not a 13 then what? I know people say in the front row you go and as a defender his fine, but your props are also your yardage and go forward, unfortunately that’s just not Jake, he’ll hold his own in the rotation no doubt, but he won’t be an explosive power playing front rower and we need one of those badly. I don’t know what his future is and it hurts to say but sadly it doesn’t look good for Jake or the MWSE moving forward.
double hoops
First Grader
The Thread Mr Inbetween was apptly named.
Rafferty
Mug punter
Sadly, but maybe correctly, I just wish there was an obvious solution, that would be both good for Jake and the side.
Haven't we got a bundle deal going with the Fainu's as well..
Remy
shuu
I think the simple fix is to cut down his game time. 60 minutes max he should play. And if he's off the field, Crocker has to be on, because he's another tackle bot that doesn't really offer anything in attack so we need one of those defensive strongholds on the field throughout the game.
If the other forwards did as much work as Jake and showed as much commitment and for the full 80 mins in the middle you might find some comparisons . Jake has a role to play which Des sets him
Is he paid too much maybe but the team gets 80 mins out of his pay compared to others who rotate off the bench
Is he paid too much maybe but the team gets 80 mins out of his pay compared to others who rotate off the bench
Rocky
Bencher
First time ive read the Croker back to 5/8 on here. It's food for thought
double hoops
First Grader
Agree. If Zerotackle is accurate Jake's on $900 K till at least 2026. So in 5 years time we not be screwed.
Our structure playing style just needs an entire make over. In my mind Jake is at his best, ball playing short, once he could bend a line and hole run. We haven't seen it in years.
Is DES not using Jake correctly. Hard to say no. Not impossible to find another tackling machine on the cheap. But attack wise Jake currently offers zero. Is so predictable, and that the b and C defender is never sucked in hurts the rest of the field.
Last edited:
Rocky
Bencher
Yep they did overpay Jake to keep the two. But if they didn't someone else was (Bulldogs were going to pay more from memory).
Imagine the blowups on here if we didn't keep them, and Tommy put in a year like he did last year at another club.
Brisbane Tragic
Bencher
Agreed @The Who I am another one that WONT agree that he is overpaid - not a hope. Those people saying anything like that are on drugs - seriously. He is Mr 100% all game every game. Last night they were all whinging about the lack of effort from just about every player which I totally agree with and yet... Jake was probably THE only player to have his normal 100% game and tackle his arse off and play his normal game. As I have said club's need great club men to build a club and a culture around. Clubs need players who do the 1%ers that others dont. Jake is THE player to do the 1%ers that the others don't and Jake is the one that does all the mopping up that most on here don't notice and would have no idea about. Is Jake your flashy player who normally gets $800k not a hope.. He is an in the trenches player that you absolutely must have to build your club around. Is he worth $800k or whatever he is on based on player skill/performance - maybe - he would be close... is he worth $800k to set the standard and to be that face to attract sponsors absolutely without a doubt. There is so much more to your value than just being a flashy player. He is Manly.... if you asked every player in the Manly club who is the one player that has to be on the field every game all game... I would have no doubt just about every one of them would say Jake followed by Tom. If some on here were the CEO (when we get one) and decided to cut his contract or offload him.... there would be a complete walk out at Manly by all players. To the rest of the team... Jake and a fit Turbo are THE most important players in their side... that says it all.
madmax
Bencher
Then everyone should stop moaning about Marty, Keppie not being worth the money they’re on! Many on here carried on about Suli….he’s killing it at the dragons. I for one wish we kept him & let other players go.
JenEagle
Bencher
It’s incredible to think that Harper was so good last year he kept Suli out of first grade. This year Harper can’t make forest grade over Tom T and Suli is on fire at the dragons
How much do we pay Froggy?
Rafferty
Mug punter
Just heard the commentary say Suli has the 3rd most runs in the comp and his averaging 139m a game this season.
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
5 | 4 | 1 | 23 | 10 |
|
5 | 4 | 1 | 14 | 10 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 48 | 8 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 28 | 8 |
|
5 | 3 | 2 | 25 | 8 |
|
5 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 8 |
|
6 | 3 | 2 | 38 | 7 |
|
6 | 3 | 2 | 21 | 7 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | 37 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | -13 | 6 |
|
5 | 2 | 3 | -15 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | -36 | 6 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -5 | 4 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -7 | 4 |
|
5 | 0 | 5 | -86 | 2 |
|
6 | 1 | 5 | -102 | 2 |
