Recruitment NRL Rumoured Player Movements, Re-signings and Rumour Mill 2023-2024

[The Falcon]

Surely Thompson or TPJ becomes available?

Both I think ..

 

[Noitall]

• 

Gaining a bit of momentum now this one, just the same source as the article I posted to be fair but would definitely be disappointing if he didn’t return.

 

[Canonball]

• 

Gaining a bit of momentum now this one, just the same source as the article I posted to be fair but would definitely be disappointing if he didn’t return.

I really doubt that - sounds like Sydney dream casting to me, if he heads back it’s not going to be to the Roosters

 

[Tianasnow14]

How the Hell can the Roosters afford Roger Tuivasa-Sheck. Utter fuckn bullshit.

 

[Toookey]

I really doubt that - sounds like Sydney dream casting to me, if he heads back it’s not going to be to the Roosters

If I was Roger Tuivasa-Sheck and considering a switch back to NRL I'd be thinking legacy. He probably only has 18 months - 2 years left in the game by the time he comes back.
Does he sign up for a team with no chance like the Warriors or Tigers for 5-700k? Or go to the Roosters on 3-400k and have the opportunity to win 1 or 2 titles?
Remember he already gave up several hundred k to leave the Warriors early - money isn't everything to the bloke. You can tell he's set up for life and would have made good decisions money wise

 

[Rick O'Shay]

If I was Roger Tuivasa-Sheck and considering a switch back to NRL I'd be thinking legacy. He probably only has 18 months - 2 years left in the game by the time he comes back.
Does he sign up for a team with no chance like the Warriors or Tigers for 5-700k? Or go to the Roosters on 3-400k and have the opportunity to win 1 or 2 titles?
Remember he already gave up several hundred k to leave the Warriors early - money isn't everything to the bloke. You can tell he's set up for life and would have made good decisions money wise

I would suspect that with him and his family settled in Auckland, that would have a big bearing on what he does next.

 

[Damo]

If I was Roger Tuivasa-Sheck and considering a switch back to NRL I'd be thinking legacy. He probably only has 18 months - 2 years left in the game by the time he comes back.
Does he sign up for a team with no chance like the Warriors or Tigers for 5-700k? Or go to the Roosters on 3-400k and have the opportunity to win 1 or 2 titles?
Remember he already gave up several hundred k to leave the Warriors early - money isn't everything to the bloke. You can tell he's set up for life and would have made good decisions money wise

I am 90% sure this is just an old rumour that Fletch has only just seen and is making resurface. I can't see Roger leaving before the World Cup, although he would be a long shot at being picked from what I hear.

 

[Noitall]

I am 90% sure this is just an old rumour that Fletch has only just seen and is making resurface. I can't see Roger leaving before the World Cup, although he would be a long shot at being picked from what I hear.

Someone made a comment about fletchers show not far from being back and trying to drum up a rumour to get viewers? Could be, but if he was ever first option of coming back to the Warriors the only way I would be happy is if he went to the roosters and we got a good prop in return.

 

[Miket12]

How the Hell can the Roosters afford Roger Tuivasa-Sheck. Utter fuckn bullshit.

What annoys me is that the NRL have, at times, refused to accept contracts where they consider players will be paid under their value but players at say the Roosters or the Storm etc. can get paid under their market value. Why doesn't the NRL say any player whose contract is up for renewal is placed on the open market and goes into a pool where all the teams that want that player bid on them and, if they choose to go to a team, that team can not contract them for less than 10% the average bid. If only one team is interested in that player, the NRL sets the minimum that they are worth.

Cue the restraint of trade arguments.... except no one is stopping Roger Tuivasa-Sheck going to the Roosters, it's up to them to offer him enough money and if that means they have to unload other players to get him, then that's what they have to do.

Finally, the salary cap would do what it's intended to do.... create a level playing field for all teams and not just benefit a few. And I wouldn't just fine or deduct points of teams who are found to deliberately break the salary cap rules.... I'd get them to lose their players on the highest contracts until they were below the salary cap.... none of this allowing to teams to renegotiate contracts to keep a squad together or get rid of a few fringe 1st grade players and replace them with juniors on slightly upgraded contracts.

 

[warriorsfan92]

I’ve got a connection close to Roger Tuivasa-Sheck. Will see if I can do some digging. Last week i mentioned him returning to warriors after not making World Cup squad and he seemed to think it wouldn’t happen, but I’d open to league return. Didn’t have the best experience with the warriors.

 

[warriorsfan92]

Which I find crazy considering we let him walk, accommodated him, gave him the skipper role, paid him a LOT of $ but that’s what my connection said. Didn’t want to return. This might change though?

 

[Defence]

What annoys me is that the NRL have, at times, refused to accept contracts where they consider players will be paid under their value but players at say the Roosters or the Storm etc. can get paid under their market value. Why doesn't the NRL say any player whose contract is up for renewal is placed on the open market and goes into a pool where all the teams that want that player bid on them and, if they choose to go to a team, that team can not contract them for less than 10% the average bid. If only one team is interested in that player, the NRL sets the minimum that they are worth.

Cue the restraint of trade arguments.... except no one is stopping RST going to the Roosters, it's up to them to offer him enough money and if that means they have to unload other players to get him, then that's what they have to do.

Finally, the salary cap would do what it's intended to do.... create a level playing field for all teams and not just benefit a few. And I wouldn't just fine or deduct points of teams who are found to deliberately break the salary cap rules.... I'd get them to lose their players on the highest contracts until they were below the salary cap.... none of this allowing to teams to renegotiate contracts to keep a squad together or get rid of a few fringe 1st grade players and replace them with juniors on slightly upgraded contracts.

Players association would never allow it.

 

[Miket12]

Players association would never allow it.

Perhaps it's time for the players association to remember they should be working for the best interests of all the players and not just a few elites.

 

[snake77]

It would be interesting to see if his "didn't have the best experience" was in general or due to covid and being stuck in Australia away from family.

In general you can understand as it wasn't successful and there wasn't stability.

Auckland has been a factor for him with returning to the Warriors and his time in Union. Not sure how far he went into looking at other NPC or Super Rugby sides.

If he comes back to league there is a lot to it. Like position as he won't play fullback at the Roosters. Money as some clubs will fall over themselves especially the bottom clubs, some will be cap restricted. That then leads on to his goals, if he wants success etc.

 

[Wheels]

I think we should move on from Roger Tuivasa-Sheck. I thought he was a fantastic player but the game has moved on and if he was to return to the Warriors I don't think he will be the miracle worker we are hoping. I reckon we have enough talent, possibly short of a top tier signing and don't need to rely on resigning Roger Tuivasa-Sheck who has already left the Warriors for something different. If he was a cheap buy, say $400,000 or less, and was going to demand a starting centre spot then possibly yes. But for me there is risk involved and how much he will add to the Warriors outfit is a bit questionable.

 

[wizards rage]

If I was Roger Tuivasa-Sheck and considering a switch back to NRL I'd be thinking legacy. He probably only has 18 months - 2 years left in the game by the time he comes back.
Does he sign up for a team with no chance like the Warriors or Tigers for 5-700k? Or go to the Roosters on 3-400k and have the opportunity to win 1 or 2 titles?
Remember he already gave up several hundred k to leave the Warriors early - money isn't everything to the bloke. You can tell he's set up for life and would have made good decisions money wise

If it was his legacy and post game that he’s starting to think about them I would think the Warriors would be the best option.

At the Warriors he would stay a big name locally which opens post career options and could include an off field role within the club or media, all within Auckland. Back in Australia these options would be negligible. He would just be another retired player.

I think it’s the same reason Shaun Johnson, Blair, etc came back to finish their career here. No trophies but ingrain yourself as a local legend.

 

[Toookey]

If it was his legacy and post game that he’s starting to think about them I would think the Warriors would be the best option.

At the Warriors he would stay a big name locally which opens post career options and could include an off field role within the club or media, all within Auckland. Back in Australia these options would be negligible. He would just be another retired player.

I think it’s the same reason Shaun Johnson, Blair, etc came back to finish their career here. No trophies but ingrain yourself as a local legend.

Hmm I dunno...

With Roosters:
Will be paid less
Less work for him to do (in a team full of superstars)
Potentially another premiership or 2

With Warriors/Tigers other lower teams:
Will be paid more (my guess is about 300k more than what Roosters would pay)
Will have to do WAY more work - 200m+ a game
No chance of a premiership
Possible career opportunities after retirement

That last one - retirement career opportunities could be the big selling point. I'd be happy to have him back on upwards of $600k (new cap means that's around 450k by current standards).

 

[drake83]

What annoys me is that the NRL have, at times, refused to accept contracts where they consider players will be paid under their value but players at say the Roosters or the Storm etc. can get paid under their market value. Why doesn't the NRL say any player whose contract is up for renewal is placed on the open market and goes into a pool where all the teams that want that player bid on them and, if they choose to go to a team, that team can not contract them for less than 10% the average bid. If only one team is interested in that player, the NRL sets the minimum that they are worth.

Cue the restraint of trade arguments.... except no one is stopping RST going to the Roosters, it's up to them to offer him enough money and if that means they have to unload other players to get him, then that's what they have to do.

Finally, the salary cap would do what it's intended to do.... create a level playing field for all teams and not just benefit a few. And I wouldn't just fine or deduct points of teams who are found to deliberately break the salary cap rules.... I'd get them to lose their players on the highest contracts until they were below the salary cap.... none of this allowing to teams to renegotiate contracts to keep a squad together or get rid of a few fringe 1st grade players and replace them with juniors on slightly upgraded contracts.

Another method is have players rated 1-10 ten being super stars and 1 being bottom 30 players. Have a regulatory body who sets these ratings and have a cap where each team must have a certain x value in their team and can not go over said value. Another way of doing it.

 

[Five&Last]

It’s a rumour from Brian Fletcher…

 

[Noitall]

• 

Sounds like a return is on the table, just where he’ll go now?