Hodgson to Huddersfield
Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 5:27 pm
A site for fans of Wigan Warriors RLFC. News, views, statistics, profiles and more all contributed by supporters of Wigan RL.
https://www.wiganwarriorsfans.com/
Why? He must be 4 years younger than Paul Reilly and is a far better player. It all depends what he is being paid.Matthew posted:
4 year contract? They must be mad!
IMO you should only sign a player for more than 3 years if they are top drawer or you are planning on making them the core of your team. No disrespect to Hodgson (who I think is OK), but he is not set the world alight at Salford and he wouldn't get a place as a squad player in any of the top sides. 4 year contracts are normally reserved for youngsters like Penny at wire - players that have not yet reached their best - not people that are arguably past their peak.jinkin jimmy posted:Why? He must be 4 years younger than Paul Reilly and is a far better player. It all depends what he is being paid.Matthew posted:
4 year contract? They must be mad!
It's not really about whether I want him for four years at Wigan. He is replacing Paul Reilly at Hudds and I don't think it is necessarily a bad move by them. They probably had to offer such a long deal just to get him. I would be surprised if we didn't offer him a deal but would not have expected us to offer him 4 years.Matthew posted:IMO you should only sign a player for more than 3 years if they are top drawer or you are planning on making them the core of your team. No disrespect to Hodgson (who I think is OK), but he is not set the world alight at Salford and he wouldn't get a place as a squad player in any of the top sides. 4 year contracts are normally reserved for youngsters like Penny at wire - players that have not yet reached their best - not people that are arguably past their peak.jinkin jimmy posted:Why? He must be 4 years younger than Paul Reilly and is a far better player. It all depends what he is being paid.Matthew posted:
4 year contract? They must be mad!
Put it this way, would you have been happy if we had signed him for 4 years Jim?
Also the longer (and more lucrative) the contract the more chance of "effort fatigue"!
He is a pretty good player - however he is probably past his best now and he won't get any faster - that's for certain. 4 years is a long contract for someone like Hodgson - it can only mean that they have no prospective youngster in the academy who can play fullback/wingjinkin jimmy posted:
It's not really about whether I want him for four years at Wigan. He is replacing Paul Reilly at Hudds and I don't think it is necessarily a bad move by them. They probably had to offer such a long deal just to get him. I would be surprised if we didn't offer him a deal but would not have expected us to offer him 4 years.
It's all hypothetical but let's say he had a £60K 2 yr deal on the table from another club, possibly Wigan. The only options open to Hudds are to better the salary or lengthen the deal. It appears they have done the latter.
Personally I think he is a pretty good player. You say he wouldn't get a squad place in the top 4 but he is far better than at least 4 of Bradford's backs from this season IMO.