Rumour NRL Rumoured Player movements, Re-signings and Rumour mill 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.

tajhay

Negative Nancy
Mar 30, 2012
10,534
Sydney
Are we still paying for him for 2016???
There was an article last year about Mateo and mentioned that Warriors were not only paying for him in 2015, but also 2016. That is what the people are referring to.

Will try to dig up the article later, but if anyone else can find it please post it.

Found it i think. Cant recall if this is the article thats being referred of if there is another one.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-pre ... 7451396584

...

Horo has been linked with a moved to England, while Mateo and Luke Burgess have been offered to rival clubs.

“Mateo came cheaply because the Warriors are still paying some of his contract but this may surprise you, he’s on over $500,000,” Kent said.

“For a player to be taking up that much of your salary cap you need to be getting your money’s worth.”

---
Doesnt say anywhere in the article that we are topping up his contract for the amount of years he signed with us.
 
Last edited:

Blain

1st Grade Fringe
Apr 18, 2012
2,324
Wellington
Yeah we're still paying for Fateo, that's how he's still at Manly next season.. I thought that if he left Manly his contract with us would also void.

In 2013 some genius signed him for a further 3 years, was released mid 2014 so we have had to pay for 2 and a half years of his over inflated value.
 

Blain

1st Grade Fringe
Apr 18, 2012
2,324
Wellington
Mcqueen Confirmed to the Titans. I don't really rate him tbh, solid but nothing more. If I was the Titans I would have gone for someone else, and absolutely screw the Rabbitohs in their quest to clear cap for Burgess.
 

bruce

Warriors 1st Grader
Contributor
Sep 1, 2015
20,345
“Mateo came cheaply because the Warriors are still paying some of his contract but this may surprise you, he’s on over $500,000,” Kent said.
No wonder Dean Bell was sacked, and if Manly want to let him go it sounds like the Warriors will still be paying of him .
 

bruce

Warriors 1st Grader
Contributor
Sep 1, 2015
20,345
Our contract was with Manly to take him off our hands. Dont see how our contract with Manly could be transferred to another club. You'd think that it would be Manly clipping his ticket if he were released...
Assuming the Warriors are paying most of his wages why would Manly try and move him on? Unless it is going to cost the Warriors instead of Manly...otherwise there would be no financial gain for them. So either Manly are really sick of him or Bell let him go with no strings attached. Somebody will be paying the guy.
 

Miket12

Warriors 1st Grader
Apr 20, 2012
10,580
I'm guessing that Manly were willing to have him while the Warriors were also paying for him but have now decided he's not worth holding on too if either the amount the Warriors are paying has either reduced or now finished. That, or they've decided he's not even worth the "discounted" price they've had too pay him. I'm with MtW, I can't see how we could be held to a new contract with a third club in an agreement the Warriors weren't part off (i.e. our agreement to keeping paying part of his contract is with Manly and not whatever club may pick him up now).
 

Selector

1st Grade Fringe
Apr 2, 2015
2,280
Wonder what effect the signing of Hiku will have on Penrith's ability to retain its outside back talent in the future.


Moylan, Dallin Watene-Zelezniak, Mansour, Hiku, Whare, Blake, Smith, and the Jennings brothers are all on the books would doubt they'd be able to keep them all. Blake and the Jennings brothers will need a contract upgrade in the next few seasons. Wonder who they'll let go.

Hopefully they'll have to release someone like Whare, who I believe would be one of the missing pieces in helping the Warriors getting a premiership.
 
Last edited:

Murraytd

1st Grade Fringe
Sep 5, 2014
666
Brisbane
Our contract was with Manly to take him off our hands. Dont see how our contract with Manly could be transferred to another club. You'd think that it would be Manly clipping his ticket if he were released...
Can't fully understand this scenario. If we still have to pay for Mateo, presuming we pay the difference, why release any player ??? Where is the benefit if we are still essentially paying for him.
 

snake77

Warriors 1st Grader
Jul 12, 2013
10,096
Auckland
Manly haven't released Mateo; wasn't the scenario they wanted to?

Manly were in the middle of a clean up I presume either Fulton looking at their roster wanted to move him on or he wasn't in the plans of the incoming coach.

A poor reflection on Mateo when you have like explained above. We release him because he is bad for the culture of the club and we aren't getting a return on the amount we have spent on him. Manly were looking to move him on even with us paying a decent portion of his salary.
 

Murraytd

1st Grade Fringe
Sep 5, 2014
666
Brisbane
Getting rid of someone who was bringing a bad culture to the place???
Understand that, let him play club footy, remove him from the player environment. Seems to me Mateo gets the best of both worlds, be disruptive, but paid the same and moved on. Maybe in future it would be wise to be a more staunch and place them in the wilderness and clearly show we ain't going to tolerate that shit. Sent a very clear message that disruptive personalities won't fly and we won't let you just move on whilst we foot the bill for your shit attitude.
 

jonno

Warriors 1st Grader
Jul 13, 2014
9,803
Understand that, let him play club footy, remove him from the player environment. Seems to me Mateo gets the best of both worlds, be disruptive, but paid the same and moved on. Maybe in future it would be wise to be a more staunch and place them in the wilderness and clearly show we ain't going to tolerate that shit. Sent a very clear message that disruptive personalities won't fly and we won't let you just move on whilst we foot the bill for your shit attitude.
The ultimate disgrace. Getting paid 10 grundies a week to kick ass in front of 10 people...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Murraytd

fizurg

1st Grade Fringe
May 18, 2012
1,805
hamilton
Manly will be paying some of his contract. We won't still be paying all of it.
Releasing him to manly means we free up some funds to get a player like Robson who we wouldn't have been able to afford without letting Mateo go.
 

bruce

Warriors 1st Grader
Contributor
Sep 1, 2015
20,345
Manly haven't released Mateo; wasn't the scenario they wanted to?
I don't think they have released him but he was on the list they wanted to move on. Maybe nobody wants him. What an indictment that would be on him and Dean Bell.
 

Freddie Futler

1st Grade Fringe
Jun 10, 2013
2,235
Tauranga
BREAKING NEWS .... Warriors are bringing Mateo back to Auckland, as reported the Warriors are still paying his wages for 2016, so they have agreed with Manly Sea Eagles that they would rather have him on their books and have another line of backup for the Number 6 jersey.
Correction - we are only paying a portion of his salary, Manly are paying the rest.
If we brought him back here we would have to pay the whole salary which we cannot fit under the cap.
So, calling you out on this.
 

jonno

Warriors 1st Grader
Jul 13, 2014
9,803
BREAKING NEWS .... Warriors are bringing Mateo back to Auckland, as reported the Warriors are still paying his wages for 2016, so they have agreed with Manly Sea Eagles that they would rather have him on their books and have another line of backup for the Number 6 jersey.
Breaking Wind more like it...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Last Game

27 Aug

16 - 28
5.6 Total Avg Rating
0.0 Your Avg Rating

Highest Rated Player

Lowest Rated Player

Compiled from 5 ratings