General Webb's future with the Warriors

warriors4life_old

Guest
From NZ Herald

By Michael Brown

Brent webb's Warriors future is in doubt with the club seemingly unwilling to stump up the cash needed to hang on to the Kiwis fullback.

The 25-year-old is off contract at the end of the year and, while the Warriors have had informal discussions with the player and his agent, he has not been offered a new deal. A host of NRL and Super League clubs, as well as two Super 14 franchises, have all expressed interest in Webb, which has served to push his price up.

Warriors chief executive Wayne Scurrah said they were not prepared to break the bank for any player.

"One thing we are not going to be doing, because we have made huge errors in the past, is pay unreasonably over for a player so that it affects the overall balance of the squad," Scurrah said. "We don't feel we have a balanced squad throughout critical positions. We get not too far down the list of 25 and find a huge gap of inexperienced players, and that comes down to money already spent on a top-heavy basis. The priority for next year is to get more balance in the squad."

Sources in Sydney have said Eels fullback Wade McKinnon is on top of the Warriors' hitlist if a deal for Webb can't be reached. It's understood the 25-year-old McKinnon, who has played more than 60 NRL games, would be offered a three-year deal.

"We are aware he's [McKinnon] coming off contract but there are probably three or four other NRL fullbacks coming off contract," Scurrah said. "We are looking at all fullback options and options in other positions."

The club have obtained a list from the NRL of all players coming off contract at the end of the season and are not ruling out bringing in two or three Australian-based players to plug the gaps. Although they can't negotiate deals with players before the June 30 anti-tampering deadline, they can express interest to a player's agent.

As well as McKinnon, Melbourne's Steve Turner and the Dragons' Clint Greenshields head a list of affordable fullbacks coming on to the market. Below that, Scurrah said they were also looking at a second-tier fullback who is not necessarily the No 1 at his club.

Webb's agent, Jim Banaghan, is bemused the Warriors had not yet tabled an offer but said he had received interest from five Super League clubs, two Super 14 franchises and a swagger of NRL clubs, which he'd look into after the June 30 anti-tampering deadline.

"I'm heading to the UK for the next couple of weeks and will speak with a number of clubs over there because the Warriors have shown no interest whatsoever in keeping him," Banaghan said. "In fact, the Warriors seems like the only club not interested in him.

"Brent is disappointed they haven't made him an offer but that's their right. If they're going to take a commercial stance, he's going to do the same and look elsewhere for his future. But he's still making himself available if they want to talk because he'd like to stay."

Webb isn't the only Warrior coming off contract. An announcement on Clinton Toopi's future is expected this week, with Leeds the most likely destination, while Awen Guttenbeil has been given permission to approach other clubs. The future of Epalahame Lauaki is also uncertain.
 

warriors4life_old

Guest
That doesn't sound very promising, the Warriors are showing no interest in him at the moment, yet they are looking at other off-contract fullbacks. They will definitely lose Webb at this rate.
 

LeagueNut_old

Guest
Warriors chief executive Wayne Scurrah said they were not prepared to break the bank for any player. - Very good decision, agree with this 100%. As he says, it's cost the Warriors big time in the past.

But why wouldn't you make him an offer at all??? At least let him know what's on the table. I might be naive, but maybe Webby's not one to chase the $$$ around. If we can offer him a "comfortable" deal, he might decide to stay at home.
 

AmeriKiwi_old

Guest
You have to spend money to make money... and to win championships. Just ask George Steinbrenner, owner of the New York Yankees. The Warriors don`t have his budget to work with, of course, but the principle`s the same in any type of small business wishing to become more successful and to compete with the big dogs.
The Warriors definitely need to think bigger than they`re currently doing, and finding investors willing to help turn the club into a 1st class operation is the solution to the problem. They can stay within the salary cap and still do a lot more than they`re doing now.
 

MarkW_old

Guest
Well, from what I've heard management did put an offer of sorts out there to Webb, but it was around 80k less than his current contract - apparently he just laughed at them. They obviously haven't come back to offer him something he considers 'reasonable'
 

Esoj_old

Guest
it would be great to keep webb for sure. there would appear to be at least some money leftover in the cap to buy a few players but maybe not enough to keep webb. hopefully some kind of deal can be reached without wasting all the extra money that is still left on just webb.
 

MiXmasterreece_old

Guest
MarkW said:
Well, from what I've heard management did put an offer of sorts out there to Webb, but it was around 80k less than his current contract - apparently he just laughed at them. They obviously haven't come back to offer him something he considers 'reasonable'

i find that a little hard to believe
 

corey_old

Guest
also if webb does go (which we all don't want to happen) i hope he still makes himself free for NZ selection
 

JonB_old

Guest
He is a good player in so many ways. Good on the Feild, good off it. He plays smart and he plays with his heart on his sleve aswell..... Wade will be a lesser replacement.
We will miss him I will cry if he goes.
 

corey_old

Guest
if he does go it will be because his hand was forced..webby loves this place, so i can't see him trying to take off..give him some decent money wayne.

have to agree he is great on and off the field
 

Jesbass_old

Guest
It's hard to give him money if you can't afford it. One thing Wayne said was that heaps of people want the Warriors to re-sign Webb, and they want to, as well. But these people don't know A) how much he is currently on, and B) how much his agent is asking for.
 

AmeriKiwi_old

Guest
Jesbass said:
It's hard to give him money if you can't afford it. One thing Wayne said was that heaps of people want the Warriors to re-sign Webb, and they want to, as well. But these people don't know A) how much he is currently on, and B) how much his agent is asking for.

If they can`t afford to pay their good players, they need a cash infusion, and fast... time to run an "investors required" advertisement.
 

MarkW_old

Guest
The problem the current management have obviously stems from the fact that Mick and co. overspent in previous years. They are now in a situation where they are bound to paying out the 2 big contracts of Price and Wiki which is a huge chunk of the overall cap allowance. The Warriors will be wanting to spend what they have left as economically as possible, hence the re-signing of the up and comers such as Mannering, Vatuvei etc.
Webb I think was overpriced by Mick's lot when his contract was last up for renewel -but at the same time you can't blame the guy for not wanting to take a paycut... I bet there are few, if any people here who would be happy with taking a drop in wages given their job desciption hadn't changed.
 

Iafeta_old

Guest
AmeriKiwi, they can pay him financially. The club is owned by a billionaire. Its not an issue.

The issue is this - the salary cap. You can't put all your eggs into one basket. We've got I believe $3.9m to spend next year, I'm assuming a couple of hundred K is going to deferred payments for next year as it is. A lot of young players need upgrades, thats happened with Vatuvei, Taulapapa, Mannering, and so does Evarn Tuimavave.

If Brent is asking $100,000 or more above what Turner, McKinnon or Greenshields are asking, then yes, we can't afford to keep him. As much as I hate to say it, financially, thats the god honest truth. Those three players named are all brilliant fullbacks - Turner and Greenshields are both young, and even McKinnon has time on his side. Turner is hella-unlucky to have moved to the Storm to replace Robbie Ross, only for Billy Slater and Greg Inglis to come along who are freakish players. He'd be #1 at a lot of other clubs. He was brilliant coming through the Panthers ranks. So much so the club thought he could conceivably take over from Rhys Wesser without too many dramas. Clint Greenshields has allowed Ben Hornby to move forward to halfback when needed, and done a superb job. He's brave, and fast. He did a number on us a couple of weeks ago. And Wade McKinnon has probably been one of Parramatta's best the last few seasons. He makes a lot of breaks returning the ball.

Not all is lost, its the sad reality of salary cap restricted sports teams. I'm sure the Warriors want to retain him, but when all is said and done, we have to sum up the positives and negatives of all four prospective fullbacks, on field, where there isn't a massive difference, and financially which from reports there appears there is.
 

Skinny_Ravs82

Guest
As much as I love watching Webby meself, I always get the feeling it comes down to money. But, can you blame him? Not really, still thou it's annoying that is always the determining factor. If it's money he seriously wants then it's best he goes. But if its looking at loyalty (which I doubt at the moment) then money is never the issue.
 

AmeriKiwi_old

Guest
Iafeta said:
AmeriKiwi, they can pay him financially. The club is owned by a billionaire. Its not an issue.

The issue is this - the salary cap. You can't put all your eggs into one basket. We've got I believe $3.9m to spend next year, I'm assuming a couple of hundred K is going to deferred payments for next year as it is. A lot of young players need upgrades, thats happened with Vatuvei, Taulapapa, Mannering, and so does Evarn Tuimavave.

If Brent is asking $100,000 or more above what Turner, McKinnon or Greenshields are asking, then yes, we can't afford to keep him. As much as I hate to say it, financially, thats the god honest truth. Those three players named are all brilliant fullbacks - Turner and Greenshields are both young, and even McKinnon has time on his side. Turner is hella-unlucky to have moved to the Storm to replace Robbie Ross, only for Billy Slater and Greg Inglis to come along who are freakish players. He'd be #1 at a lot of other clubs. He was brilliant coming through the Panthers ranks. So much so the club thought he could conceivably take over from Rhys Wesser without too many dramas. Clint Greenshields has allowed Ben Hornby to move forward to halfback when needed, and done a superb job. He's brave, and fast. He did a number on us a couple of weeks ago. And Wade McKinnon has probably been one of Parramatta's best the last few seasons. He makes a lot of breaks returning the ball.

Not all is lost, its the sad reality of salary cap restricted sports teams. I'm sure the Warriors want to retain him, but when all is said and done, we have to sum up the positives and negatives of all four prospective fullbacks, on field, where there isn't a massive difference, and financially which from reports there appears there is.

It`s a safe bet that all the club owners can afford to pay more then, I take it? In that case, the NRL needs to raise the salary cap more. The average career of a player is a relatively short one, and even shorter for those with career ending knew injuries, etc. The bottom line for all of us, players and the general public both, is financial security, and few of us work only for the love of our jobs. Raise the cap, NRL, and raise the level of quality for everyone involved.
 

Iafeta_old

Guest
No they can't AmeriKiwi. Infact, the last salary cap increase which will be for next season has taken a lot of time to go through.

In terms of operations finances, only one club in the NRL consistently operates at a profit. The Brisbane Broncos. The Warriors themselves achieved profits in seasons 2001-2003. No other club in the NRL makes a profit. They get grants from the NRL from television rights, and most are propped up by a league's club - basically an organised casino.

In the past, we've seen teams like Manly Sea Eagles, Wests Tigers and South Sydney Rabbitohs have to play at below the level of the salary cap because they financially could not afford it. As such, with the salary's cap design to make it even for all clubs in term's of the rosters they can put together, plus keep club's financially viable, its debateable if it is in actual fact achievable to go further ahead as they will for next season.

The problem is that the NSW Government is increasing taxes on league's club poker machine takings, which is significantly going to impact the amount of money they can provide to the football club's they represent.

The NRL, and the clubs, in my book can still look after player's interests without necessarily exploding the salary cap, through education schemes which gives a player a qualification to fall on once their career has finished. There is also of course the lure of Super League where a lot more money can be made for a player of significant quality.
 

AmeriKiwi_old

Guest
Iafeta said:
No they can't AmeriKiwi. Infact, the last salary cap increase which will be for next season has taken a lot of time to go through.

In terms of operations finances, only one club in the NRL consistently operates at a profit. The Brisbane Broncos. The Warriors themselves achieved profits in seasons 2001-2003. No other club in the NRL makes a profit. They get grants from the NRL from television rights, and most are propped up by a league's club - basically an organised casino.

In the past, we've seen teams like Manly Sea Eagles, Wests Tigers and South Sydney Rabbitohs have to play at below the level of the salary cap because they financially could not afford it. As such, with the salary's cap design to make it even for all clubs in term's of the rosters they can put together, plus keep club's financially viable, its debateable if it is in actual fact achievable to go further ahead as they will for next season.

"Won`t" seems like a better word than "can`t"... it`s certainly not impossible to do.

The problem is that the NSW Government is increasing taxes on league's club poker machine takings, which is significantly going to impact the amount of money they can provide to the football club's they represent.

The NRL, and the clubs, in my book can still look after player's interests without necessarily exploding the salary cap, through education schemes which gives a player a qualification to fall on once their career has finished. There is also of course the lure of Super League where a lot more money can be made for a player of significant quality.
 

Iafeta_old

Guest
In regards to?

Souths/Tigers/Manly? They financially couldn't afford to keep up with the cap in the past.
 

Similar threads

Replies
21
Views
1K
Fazz_old
Replies
47
Views
4K
JAH_old
Replies
27
Views
3K
jahc_old