Re: Sam Burgess : Tue Nov 03, 2015 11:31 pm  

Manly, Penrith and Souths have all declared their interest in signing Sam

Re: Sam Burgess : Tue Nov 03, 2015 11:47 pm  

As for Souths next year, I really don't think its a great idea to get Sam back at the expense of offloading the likes of Walker. The year before they won the comp they had virtually the same forward pack and poor threequarters and were completely one-dimensional as a result. If they have to offload outside backs to shoehorn Sam into the team they'll be likely to be just as imbalanced and one-dimensional.

That would be a really poisoned chalice for all concerned as expectations on how Sam and Souths perform if and when he returns will be astronomical. He'd only get a matter of weeks before the media would start to question his value if Souths aren't ripping up the competition. SBW would be used as a direct comparison - he comes to the Roosters and they go from no-hopers to champions in a single season. If Sam doesn't have a massive impact there will be all sorts of articles about how he's a waste of money.

If Sam does go back to Souths it might work a lot better for all concerned if its 2017 - it gives Souths more chance to rejig their squad in a controlled way, give Sam a chance to prove he can "make it" in RU, and make Ford and co at Bath look less silly for having taken a punt on him.

I still think he'll at least see out his contract at Bath. His future on RU will largely depend on who the next England coach is. If its Eddie Jones he will have a good chance of being picked again relatively soon, as Jones knows the quality of the NRL. If its an English rugger type then I'd be surprised if he got another sniff for some time.

Re: Sam Burgess : Wed Nov 04, 2015 3:11 am  

Souths should punt any one player to get Burgess back. Including Inglis.

Re: Sam Burgess : Wed Nov 04, 2015 7:28 am  

It's not easy. Think of the discussions and legal agreements that are needed to underpin any change - salary, transfer fee, sponsorship deals, options for the future etc.

For Sam himself, he needs to return to RL now. For him, best option is a one year deal at Leeds. The lad had his face smashed up in his last RL match and it is now full of metal pins and plates; I'm pretty certain he hasn't regained full confidence yet as a consequence. It would be asking too much to go straight back to the physicality and intensity of NRL just yet.

A year in Super League would be tough enough and would show up whether Sam can get back to being the world's best forward. The lawyers then need to get what if scenarios covered for subsequent years, whether it be stay at the Rhinos, go back to Bath or go to South Sydney.

No wonder the behind the scenes stuff is taking some time!

Re: Sam Burgess : Wed Nov 04, 2015 9:38 am  

Mr Churchill wrote:

It's not easy. Think of the discussions and legal agreements that are needed to underpin any change - salary, transfer fee, sponsorship deals, options for the future etc.

For Sam himself, he needs to return to RL now. For him, best option is a one year deal at Leeds. The lad had his face smashed up in his last RL match and it is now full of metal pins and plates; I'm pretty certain he hasn't regained full confidence yet as a consequence. It would be asking too much to go straight back to the physicality and intensity of NRL just yet.

A year in Super League would be tough enough and would show up whether Sam can get back to being the world's best forward. The lawyers then need to get what if scenarios covered for subsequent years, whether it be stay at the Rhinos, go back to Bath or go to South Sydney.

No wonder the behind the scenes stuff is taking some time!

going to leeds then back to bath is simply not an option. pointless exercise of going back to league for 1 year then going back to union!

he would get a ton of stick from league and union and it would be deserved.

Leeds for a year then back to South Sydney is the viable option if he decides to stay in england for another year.

Re: Sam Burgess : Wed Nov 04, 2015 12:25 pm  

He'll stay at Bath until May then back to RL.

Re: Sam Burgess : Wed Nov 04, 2015 10:24 pm  

Sam will have made his own mind up. As he did when deciding to go to RU - was a surprise to all his family.

He's obviously not staying at Bath as he would have come out and said so.

Wish the lawyers would get a move on and document Sam's wishes.

My bet is one year at Rhinos then off to Rabbitohs.

Get a move on and Sam could be on the bench for 3rd Test v NZ!!

Re: Sam Burgess : Wed Nov 04, 2015 10:41 pm  

Mr Churchill wrote:

Sam will have made his own mind up. As he did when deciding to go to RU - was a surprise to all his family.

He's obviously not staying at Bath as he would have come out and said so.
Wish the lawyers would get a move on and document Sam's wishes.

My bet is one year at Rhinos then off to Rabbitohs.

Get a move on and Sam could be on the bench for 3rd Test v NZ!!

It'jj be difficult as under that scenario Leeds would pay a big transfer fee that they would need be be sure Souths will then underwrite.

Re: Sam Burgess : Wed Nov 04, 2015 11:03 pm  

The fact that he's been back at Bath a couple of days and hasn't said anything publicly himself suggests he's at least strongly considering Souths, but I'm still not convinced he will not see out his contract at Bath. If he does there'll be the usual mealy-mouthed press release stating how happy he is to stay with Bath, never seriously considered RL etc.

As I've mentioned before, Ford helped cause some of Sam's problems by simply seeing him as a great RL player but having no clue as to how he'd be used in RU. These are quotes from when Burgess signed:

"Ford said he had not discussed potential positions with Burgess and had no preconceived ideas.

“First thing is for him to get over here and learn the laws; what he can do and can’t do in the tackle area. When he’s ready he might play a few games in our 2nd team. There’s no hurry, we’ve signed him for three years.

“England seem to want him at 12, and he might end up playing at 12 for us if that where he’s most effective. We’ll just throw him in and see how he goes.”

When you actually read the above its mind-boggling that they spent a small fortune signing Burgess. It's also clear that on the day he signed the potential conflicts with England were there - Ford talking in terms of Burgess learning his trade when England clearly wanted him fast-tracked, and England's coaches seeing him as a centre from day one. None of the RU coaches come out of that sounding particularly bright.

Re: Sam Burgess : Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:13 am  

Dally wrote:

Not sure what you mean by it's more damaging fir him to leave now? From what point of view? The way I see it if he wants to return to RL then now is the time to do it. Reasons - once he gets established in Union he'll stay if successful, the longer he leaves it the more the memory if the GF fades and so he'll be in less demand as time goes by, the longer he leaves it the more bad habits in RL terms he'll pick up, his body shape will change, the NRL will move on in playing terms and in a couple of years it may take him a while to adapt back, the longer he leaves it the more likely there'll be a new kid on the block, etc. If he doesn't return after all this hype then it would also show his heart really isn't in RL. That's my take on it all. I expect him to stay in Union as he's being used as a great political football by them and they won't want to give that up - probably chuck cash at him and promise him the Earth.

A few harsh words from some hacks and ex players with less talent and Sam jacks it in, I'd say what a fecking drip, get a grip of yourself, knuckle down to play for the team you signed for and honour the contract.
Reneging on his deal would make him look a bit of a soft arsed twunt, people in the RU world would rightly say, yeah, took the dollar, was hyped up and couldn't hack it, a few critical words and he's running back to the chippy northerners faster than you can say Iestyn Harris.
To my mind that would damage his stock more and him as a person too as he'd be deemed a failure.