There is no room for sentiment here. If we fancy a Bulls player and can afford him, get him and, that's exactly what may happen.

Trinity have to look out for themselves and to continue to do good business with whoever is under their radar, Bulls players or otherwise.

Maybe we should be looking at season long loans to help get who we need from Bradford, like we did with mathers. They pay half wages we pay half. We can then afford a top earner without the top wage and they get half a significant wage off the books??

What are you talking about its a fans forum you JOKER! Getting Bradfords players will help them out see it as a favour to cut their wages. No need for personal insult 3 pages people are debating. Get back to your dark room and rocking in your chair MR BORING

I think any Bradford player coming to us would expect the sort of wage that has got Bradford into trouble - and us previously. For that reason I think we should stay away.

Sigh. Don't critise someone for personal insults then proceed to insult them in the process.
You don't have a leg to stand on.

FWIW - lets keep the insults down, both. Thanks.

I'm not terrified of Wakefield's prowess now they've signed a couple of players, no. We will both win roughly the same amount of games no matter how many sub-standard players either team signs. And in reality, it can't be of an advantage to be the alst team to finish recruiting. That's just a silly notion.

I think it's poor taste, and a complete waste of a discussion. The bulls players have rejected a cut from their inflated salaries at their current club - why would they accept a pay cut from Wakefield? Or anyone else for that matter?

That's assuming MC isn't going to pay inflated and put you back in the same position again. Maybe he is, I dunno.

I really doubt that

Bradford players have been asked to take a pay cut, How do you go from this to the players that are been mentioned been on inflated wages ?

Obviously Bradford are running at costs that they cant afford, However so were we - And if our players were to reject a ten percent wage cut, would that mean the every player in the squad is on an inflated wage another club cannot afford ? - My feeling on this is that we have set out a decent amount of budget to recruit in the areas needed (Whereever this may be from)

We are starting to talk about whether we can talk about it now but it's close enough to say we are still on subject I think.

For me, no one has been having a go at the Bradford board or fans or poking fun.
But the players have been told they are free to talk to other clubs so what's the harm in speculating?
It doesn't mean they have to lose their best player, or a lot of players.

It means they are under financed, just like we were.
If they realligned the structure of the team it can work for them

They can't just let loads come on loan with half pay payments, because they still have to replace them and would be increasing costs.
The way forward is to reduce the whole wage bill (ie. the 10% cut) or to take some earners out of the list.

There will be players in that team we can afford to pay. I'm pretty certain we are not going to be able to sign Gareth Carvell or Jarrod Sammut just because they would be high earners in any team but I'm sure Adam Sidlow wouldn't be as much or Danny Addy or even Alex Mellor if we wanted young players.
It's more a matter of where they will fit if we do and how much that position is worth to us.

They have 3 wingers at the moment in Kear, Purtell and Foster. Logic says one of them will be the least paid. If we decide that player would be our best winger, we can offer more, without having more money than Bradford and without breaking our bank.

It's just inoffensive speculation.
I've mentioned Richard Horne a couple of times. I'm not suggesting we should stiff anyone at Hull or that we can even afford as I have no idea what he is on, I just like the idea. That's all this is to me.

Fair enough. I still think the OP was in poor taste no matter where it has led to

Although it is fairly obvious that Bradford have been paying over the odds, though with this being a specualtion page, this is also purely speculation.

Common sense says if I'm right, Wakefield will not overspend on recruitment like they previously have.

That being said, Kear and Sammut would be good signings I agree

Your point about the opening post is not lost. I'm quite surprised for a change we managed to make it a decent discussion. We usually start and go down rather than the other way.

In reality I can't imagine we will get anyone from Bradford. We will already have plans to fill roles and they will be in progress. To move quickly in this kind of situation you need ready cash and good prospects to get them to come.
I can't imagine anyone being let go from Bulls would really choose us out of choice for their next pay cheque. We may have turned a corner but if you've been burned already it will take more convincing.

They could. No one is making them bring in other players. They seem to have backed themselves into a corner by saying that. It would definitely help them out.

I think someone has touched on this already but the cockeyed way in which Bradford went about there admin last time, leaves me with little sympathy.
Wake had to bit the bullet in admin and lost players, the decision was made early this time to address the shortfall.
Bradford possibly think they are still a big club with clout but keeping up with the Jones'es has backfired.
London on the brink, Bradford struggling, starting to point towards no p+r.
Again as has been mentioned franchising can work but the body that introduces it has to enforce it.
You can't give a license to a club, then 3 or 4 months down the line financial problems come to light.
Got to be the same rules across the board.

I read somewhere that they'd said they would replace with cheaper. That's why I said they wouldn't but of course they may choose to on individual basis.

No offers for any players so far so they'd probably appreciate the offer right now.
Kear is my choice.
We should look for scrum half somewhere else

After the past few months, selling many of our own players, both to raise capital and to cut our wage bill, it would be a surprise for us to "buy" any player.
I think any new players would probably be OOC or on loan.
MC and his team have done exceptionally well to draw transfer fees for the players that have left.

I agree and have said so myself but Bradford could in theory make a player out of contract for us to take on if the deal fits.

I see Dave Parker is on about an exchange deal, Lee Smith for Jarrod Sammut (League Weekly)

Unless Sykes moves back into the centres that would leave Trinity short in the back line. Can't see it myself.

Why would anyone want that deal. If the objective of both teams is to reduce wage bill, a swap is not going to work is it.

It would if there need is a utility back and we are in urgent need of an half/back , obviously within the total budget rfa as at his disposal (no difference)

I can't imagine those two players are on the same salary but I don't see Smith being any better than what they have anyway.
Lulia certainly good enough and although Matty Blythe isn't perfect he's useful, with Purtell and Chev Walker as back up.

I wouldn't take that deal anyway but we'll see what happens

Unless we have a little bit of cash left which I assume we do and Smith is on less than Sammut thus we pick up the difference and save Bradford a few bob. Seems unlikely but Smith does have a certain utility value and I suspect is well know to cummins - who knows.

Be a good deal for us and I'm not really a Sammut fan.

West Tigers next year

Put yourself in Lee Smiths boots would you want to go to a club who are now in a position where we were three months ago? I wouldnt Let Smith go as he can cover various positions and is a potential match winner. Players like him can help us massively this season.