I think if there was a major issue, and some major player talent had to be moved on, then you'd think by now there would be massive rumours going around about the players who would be going. I can't imagine for example Simon Mannering negotiating with other clubs would be covered up and not all over the press. FFS when we were trying to punt Krisnan Inu and Feleti Mateo it was all over the news, they certainly don't have the reputation or respect of blokes like Mannering.
The only thing I can think of is if Ligi Sao was signed on the presumption that Feleti Mateo was being moved on by Manly and would be heading to Pommyland.
In a sense it doesn't back up Jim Doyle's version of events either. He was quick to point out that
Roger Tuivasa-Sheck basically came as a direct salary replacement for Sam Tomkins (seems plausible), and that Isaac Luke couldn't negotiate the big dollars given he wanted to come to New Zealand and that there is only one club here, so his bargaining power in a sense was down and in a sense heavily favoured the Warriors. Now I guarantee Isaac Luke is still going to the bank with a reasonably happy smile on his face, but it doesn't stack up that say he's on Inglis or Cameron Smith type cash.
There's no doubt some of the lads would have got fairly significant increases. Konrad Hurrell was well managed in that it was out there that he was considering other options, so I'm sure he demanded a higher price than last time. Tuimoala Lolohea, Ken
Maumalo, definitely they have had increases, but I doubt massive increases. It seems to me the Warriors strategy has been to move on top 25 players that aren't premier players (Sebastine Ikahihifo, Nathan Friend, Sam Rapira, trying to move on Sione Lousi and Matt Allwood, lost
Chad Townsend and Ngani Laumape), promoted players from outside the top 25 to top 25 contracts (Topafoa Sipley, Albert Vete, Sam
Lisone, Tuimoala Lolohea, Ken
Maumalo), and used the money saved to buy
Roger Tuivasa-Sheck and Luke. Would seem a fairly reasonable strategy that should be manageable under the cap.
If its a matter of the Warriors not being able to afford quality players, then I think the cap in itself is kind of flawed. If a top line player can sign for a consistently high flying club like the Roosters, Rabbits, Storm or Broncos for $350k, yet the Warriors, Tigers, Eels etc would have to pay $700k, it suggests to me that there is still some imbalance in the policy that would require review.