Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Got something to discuss about RL in general? Then this is the place to post it.
josie andrews
Posts: 24343
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:17 pm
Location: Wigan

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by josie andrews » Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:39 am

Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:35 am
fozzieskem wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:22 am
To me it’s the similarity of both clubs trying to renegotiate deals they’d agreed on,it’s always a gamble bring back or indeed handing a player a big deal after all the next tackle could be his last.

Yes Tomkins deal was running down whereas Watkins deal was fairly new it’s tgat both clubs tried and succeeded in getting both players of their books as a marquee player,though if it’s true Watkins was due to be the marquee player next season why did Leeds go out and find two to fill the spots?,is anyone’s guess.

To me it highlights the problem with this silly marquee rule,you can’t predict the future so you can’t or shouldn’t at least go giving big deals out like a demented Noel Edmonds,I’ve never hid my distaste for the cap it’s stifling our sport but if it’s to stay give clubs the 350 thou on the cap and do away with marquee rule,it singles out players when after all it’s none of our business what they earn
I agree i dont think the Marquee system works at all
Plus me three 😉
Anyone can support a team when it is winning, that takes no courage.
But to stand behind a team, to defend a team when it is down and really needs you,
that takes a lot of courage.

pedro
Posts: 4011
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:37 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by pedro » Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:44 am

Caboosegg wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:53 pm
Isnt the difference obvious?

Tomkins, the club had an option for a futher year. They didnt take it but instead offered him a longer contract but not on a marquee contract/Wage

Watkins signed a contract saying he WILL be Marquee and Captain next year and leeds are going back on it.

Although the theme of offering a lower wage is the same the contract side is different.
Tomkins was to be marquee again, It was more than what hes being paid at Cats but was offered after he had already signed for Cats according to Sam
http://www.speedtest.net/result/1857407490.png

nathan_rugby
Posts: 1677
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:12 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by nathan_rugby » Thu Jun 06, 2019 9:52 am

Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:35 am
fozzieskem wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:22 am
To me it’s the similarity of both clubs trying to renegotiate deals they’d agreed on,it’s always a gamble bring back or indeed handing a player a big deal after all the next tackle could be his last.

Yes Tomkins deal was running down whereas Watkins deal was fairly new it’s tgat both clubs tried and succeeded in getting both players of their books as a marquee player,though if it’s true Watkins was due to be the marquee player next season why did Leeds go out and find two to fill the spots?,is anyone’s guess.

To me it highlights the problem with this silly marquee rule,you can’t predict the future so you can’t or shouldn’t at least go giving big deals out like a demented Noel Edmonds,I’ve never hid my distaste for the cap it’s stifling our sport but if it’s to stay give clubs the 350 thou on the cap and do away with marquee rule,it singles out players when after all it’s none of our business what they earn
I agree i dont think the Marquee system works at all
Why does it not work?
Bomhead - "Lockers to prop."

User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 5168
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by Wigan_forever1985 » Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:16 am

nathan_rugby wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 9:52 am
Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:35 am
fozzieskem wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:22 am
To me it’s the similarity of both clubs trying to renegotiate deals they’d agreed on,it’s always a gamble bring back or indeed handing a player a big deal after all the next tackle could be his last.

Yes Tomkins deal was running down whereas Watkins deal was fairly new it’s tgat both clubs tried and succeeded in getting both players of their books as a marquee player,though if it’s true Watkins was due to be the marquee player next season why did Leeds go out and find two to fill the spots?,is anyone’s guess.

To me it highlights the problem with this silly marquee rule,you can’t predict the future so you can’t or shouldn’t at least go giving big deals out like a demented Noel Edmonds,I’ve never hid my distaste for the cap it’s stifling our sport but if it’s to stay give clubs the 350 thou on the cap and do away with marquee rule,it singles out players when after all it’s none of our business what they earn
I agree i dont think the Marquee system works at all
Why does it not work?
Because youre limited to investing a lot of money into 2 players however if you choose to sign players you have no idea if they are going to be worth said money. Also an injury can wipe out this extra spend. The extra spend cant be spread across the club therefore it cant be good for player morale either to know x player is on loads of money if they arent pulling their weight.

For me raising the cap would of been a better solution than just offering 2 players big contracts
Always be yourself - unless you can be Dan Bilzerian then ALWAYS be Dan Bilzerian!

josie andrews
Posts: 24343
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:17 pm
Location: Wigan

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by josie andrews » Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:18 am

Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:16 am
nathan_rugby wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 9:52 am
Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:35 am


I agree i dont think the Marquee system works at all
Why does it not work?
Because youre limited to investing a lot of money into 2 players however if you choose to sign players you have no idea if they are going to be worth said money. Also an injury can wipe out this extra spend. The extra spend cant be spread across the club therefore it cant be good for player morale either to know x player is on loads of money if they arent pulling their weight.

For me raising the cap would of been a better solution than just offering 2 players big contracts
This! I don't like it either. How many "fans" have questioned George Williams Marquee status?
Anyone can support a team when it is winning, that takes no courage.
But to stand behind a team, to defend a team when it is down and really needs you,
that takes a lot of courage.

nathan_rugby
Posts: 1677
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:12 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by nathan_rugby » Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:12 am

fozzieskem wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:22 am
To me it’s the similarity of both clubs trying to renegotiate deals they’d agreed on,it’s always a gamble bring back or indeed handing a player a big deal after all the next tackle could be his last.

Yes Tomkins deal was running down whereas Watkins deal was fairly new it’s tgat both clubs tried and succeeded in getting both players of their books as a marquee player,though if it’s true Watkins was due to be the marquee player next season why did Leeds go out and find two to fill the spots?,is anyone’s guess.

To me it highlights the problem with this silly marquee rule,you can’t predict the future so you can’t or shouldn’t at least go giving big deals out like a demented Noel Edmonds,I’ve never hid my distaste for the cap it’s stifling our sport but if it’s to stay give clubs the 350 thou on the cap and do away with marquee rule,it singles out players when after all it’s none of our business what they earn
I suppose your point only stands if Wigan’s contract offer to Tomkins (3rd highest they’ve ever given out), wasn’t above £175k and he wasn’t a marquee player...

If they offered him more than £175k and he was still going to be marquee then it’s just simply a reduction in salary.
Bomhead - "Lockers to prop."

nathan_rugby
Posts: 1677
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:12 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by nathan_rugby » Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:17 am

Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:16 am
nathan_rugby wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 9:52 am
Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:35 am


I agree i dont think the Marquee system works at all
Why does it not work?
Because youre limited to investing a lot of money into 2 players however if you choose to sign players you have no idea if they are going to be worth said money. Also an injury can wipe out this extra spend. The extra spend cant be spread across the club therefore it cant be good for player morale either to know x player is on loads of money if they arent pulling their weight.

For me raising the cap would of been a better solution than just offering 2 players big contracts
The problem is the salary cap, not the marquee rule...

The problem becomes the marquee rule if clubs invest a large percentage of their money into 1 or 2 marquee players which therefore results in the points you highlighted.
From what has been posted on here, not every club uses the marquee option and of the clubs that do, some only use 1.

Looking at Leeds, Saints and Wire, having marquee players doesn’t seem to have affected the quality of signings they made to their starting 13 and squad.

I therefore respectfully disagree with you.

Out of interest, which clubs/players fit your rationale ?
Bomhead - "Lockers to prop."

nathan_rugby
Posts: 1677
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:12 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by nathan_rugby » Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:18 am

josie andrews wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:18 am
Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:16 am
nathan_rugby wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 9:52 am


Why does it not work?
Because youre limited to investing a lot of money into 2 players however if you choose to sign players you have no idea if they are going to be worth said money. Also an injury can wipe out this extra spend. The extra spend cant be spread across the club therefore it cant be good for player morale either to know x player is on loads of money if they arent pulling their weight.

For me raising the cap would of been a better solution than just offering 2 players big contracts
This! I don't like it either. How many "fans" have questioned George Williams Marquee status?
If the cap gets increased, marquee rule abolished, Williams still earns the same...
Bomhead - "Lockers to prop."

josie andrews
Posts: 24343
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:17 pm
Location: Wigan

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by josie andrews » Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:22 am

nathan_rugby wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:18 am
josie andrews wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:18 am
Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:16 am


Because youre limited to investing a lot of money into 2 players however if you choose to sign players you have no idea if they are going to be worth said money. Also an injury can wipe out this extra spend. The extra spend cant be spread across the club therefore it cant be good for player morale either to know x player is on loads of money if they arent pulling their weight.

For me raising the cap would of been a better solution than just offering 2 players big contracts
This! I don't like it either. How many "fans" have questioned George Williams Marquee status?
If the cap gets increased, marquee rule abolished, Williams still earns the same...
That's not what I said!
Anyone can support a team when it is winning, that takes no courage.
But to stand behind a team, to defend a team when it is down and really needs you,
that takes a lot of courage.

User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 5168
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: Kallum Watkins ready to leave Leeds over contract dispute – reports

Post by Wigan_forever1985 » Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:30 am

nathan_rugby wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:17 am
Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:16 am
nathan_rugby wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 9:52 am


Why does it not work?
Because youre limited to investing a lot of money into 2 players however if you choose to sign players you have no idea if they are going to be worth said money. Also an injury can wipe out this extra spend. The extra spend cant be spread across the club therefore it cant be good for player morale either to know x player is on loads of money if they arent pulling their weight.

For me raising the cap would of been a better solution than just offering 2 players big contracts
The problem is the salary cap, not the marquee rule...

The problem becomes the marquee rule if clubs invest a large percentage of their money into 1 or 2 marquee players which therefore results in the points you highlighted.
From what has been posted on here, not every club uses the marquee option and of the clubs that do, some only use 1.

Looking at Leeds, Saints and Wire, having marquee players doesn’t seem to have affected the quality of signings they made to their starting 13 and squad.

I therefore respectfully disagree with you.

Out of interest, which clubs/players fit your rationale ?
I see your point and i do agree the cap is the problem but i dont believe the Marquee rule is the fix though. I also agree that williams is on the same wage regardless of the rule but the fact he is classed as a "marquee" player somehow puts a mental separation between him and the rest of the squad that doesnt exist with him just being paid highly
Always be yourself - unless you can be Dan Bilzerian then ALWAYS be Dan Bilzerian!

Post Reply