Page 2 of 3
Re: Jack Hughes
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2015 12:43 pm
by cpwigan
Somebody or all of SW, IL and KR made the decision. Hopefully it turns out okay but it is a big call.
Personally, I think Jack is much better than Connor Faz.
Re: Jack Hughes
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2015 1:31 pm
by AdamMac
Jack is much better than Connor at the moment, but both players are at different points in their careers.
Jacks wants to play often and needs too, he will also be on a different bracket in terms of a pay structure to Connor.
Can't keep them all and hopefully this doesn't bite us on the behind, but I don't see what choice we have here really. All of our back rowers play big minutes and need to imo, so Jacks game time is going to be limited, He won't want that. Its a shame because he would be a quality back up and someone you need in a championship winning squad as back up.
Tough call but probably the right one
Re: Jack Hughes
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2015 4:23 pm
by shaunedwardsfanclub
AdamMac wrote:Jack is much better than Connor at the moment, but both players are at different points in their careers.
Jacks wants to play often and needs too, he will also be on a different bracket in terms of a pay structure to Connor.
Can't keep them all and hopefully this doesn't bite us on the behind, but I don't see what choice we have here really. All of our back rowers play big minutes and need to imo, so Jacks game time is going to be limited, He won't want that. Its a shame because he would be a quality back up and someone you need in a championship winning squad as back up.
Tough call but probably the right one
Fair comment but two things don't add up here: 1. Why no offer to Jack? We should have tried to retain him from a team perspective. 2. Wane wants bigger forwards - compare Connor's build to Jack's.
If Jack had been given as much game time as Larne Patrick then I am sure he would have been happy. Or if Waney stuck to his promise of picking players in form then I am sure he would have been interested in resigning.
As things stand if we get two or three injuries in the back row next season then we are going to look very thin on the ground. Unless we can replace a player with a better one then we should be trying to stick hold of him.
Personally, I hope this decision does come back to bite us because I want Jack to succeed and if that is at the expense of Wigan then so be it.
Re: Jack Hughes
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:14 pm
by josie andrews
I feel we got the worse part of the swap deal. Huddersfield couldn't have thought too highly of Patrick to allow this deal to go thru in the first place.
Jack, meanwhile, when he came into our squad in the second row, was awesome in his first full season, so much so, he was given a five year contract, so the club must have thought he was worth it.
Then what do we do? Shove him at centre when Carmont left!
He wasn't then & will never be a centre, he will tell you that himself.
Centre is one of the hardest positions IMO, it takes years to become one. He wasn't comfortable playing there, he made mistakes, people called him lazy etc etc.
The following season we move him from the centre position but he's already lost his second row place. So he goes from being a second row, playing every game, to a centre, making mistakes, to a fringe player!!
He wanted game time like he had before but because he couldn't play centre, he wasn't getting it. So for a season & a half he was in the team off the bench, on loan, dual registration.
Then comes the brain fart of the swap deal!! He's given a regular starting place in the second row for the Giants so he's happy with the deal. He's played every game this season for them & done a great job.
His contract ends with us this season, so who would blame him if he decides to go somewhere else with a better chance of silverware than at the Giants, no offence.
What did we get?? Patrick! He's being released by us & is not going back to Huddersfield.
So we don't want him & the Giants aren't bothered about getting him back.
Says a lot about who thought of the deal in the first place!!!
Re: Jack Hughes
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2015 9:13 pm
by superleague
But Joel is kept on which baffles me he's a shadow of the player he once was and is a liability
Re: Jack Hughes
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:20 am
by shaunedwardsfanclub
superleague wrote:But Joel is kept on which baffles me he's a shadow of the player he once was and is a liability
He knows his place in the team is safe, he needs competition and at the moment that competition is going to play elsewhere.
Re: Jack Hughes
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 9:00 am
by Owd Codger
shaunedwardsfan​club​ wrote:superleague wrote:But Joel is kept on which baffles me he's a shadow of the player he once was and is a liability
He knows his place in the team is safe, he needs competition and at the moment that competition is going to play elsewhere.
Wrong, the 'competition' is having to fill in at Centre and thankfully unlike Joel before him, it has not affected his form as a Back Row forward like it has, in my opinion affected Joel.
Perhaps the reason Wane swapped them around!
Jack to Wire
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 2:53 pm
by morley pie eater
Re: Jack to Wire
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 3:29 pm
by medlocke
no big loss
Re: Jack to Wire
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 3:29 pm
by thegimble
medlocke wrote:no big loss
I agree but to some this will be the biggest lose since Sam left.