We’re wining a game and playing great so let’s whine about Sam’s bridge deal.
I wanted Sam signed for 8 years but I can live with the bridge. Worst case scenario is we pay star money to a star. Oh noes.
No it won’t haunt us. Paying crappy players big money does, acquiring crappy players will. Paying a star money in line with his play will not.
It’s not about living with it. It’s about a wasted opportunity with such a small benefit as to be very stupid.
Cup teams don’t pay top rate for all of their top players.
I mean, coming from people who try to say the O’Reilly deal might have blocked Skinner getting picked up, let alone resigned, is mind boggling.
We might not be able to have 4 nice forwards because O’Reilly was paid market rate, but it won’t matter for Sam getting market rate??? Does the flaw in this logic seem to obvious or am I missing something?
Jack at 10
Jeff at 9
Sam at 8.5-9
Dahlin at 10
Risto?
Mitts?
Pilut?
Thompson?
Sure you can pay Sam market rate and not feel bad about him getting paid in a very narrow sense. But it means you have less ability to surround him and the rest with a team.
Back to the Game, wee might win.