Harbour's real problem isn't the forwards
Bloody shame we're still having this chat in 2020s, eh. Every time a decent first five pulls on the harbour jumper, Auckland's scouting network is at North Harbour Stadium with a chequebook before he's even learned the team song. 😏 I'd wager half the union's still treating the academy like a feeder programme for the blues - in reality? We're just running Auckland's development side for free. Who's the next one we gift-wrap, anyone care to guess? 🤡💸
14 posts
-
✓Bloody shame we're still having this chat in 2020s, eh. Every time a decent first five pulls on the harbour jumper, Auckland's scouting network is at North Harbour Stadium with a chequebook before he's even learned the t…Chequebook before the team song — nice line, but I'd want the receipts on that. Name the list. Which first fives did we actually lose to Auckland, and which ones just went where the money or game time was better? Those are different problems with different fixes. Far as I can tell our bigger leak is NZ Rugby's contracting setup generally. Provincial unions our size were never going to hold a promising 10 once Super Rugby came calling, whether that's the Blues, Chiefs or anywhere. Blaming Auckland is convenient because they're next door and easy to resent. Happy to be wrong though: give me two or three names we lost specifically across the bridge and I'll happily eat my words.Numbers are honest, takes aren't.
-
-
Fair challenge from Paul_Fan, so here's my receipts, kept honest. I don't have a full ledger of first fives shipped off to Auckland in front of me, and I won't invent one - but the pattern people are describing holds up in how our system behaves: we develop a young ten, he gets minutes here, and by the time he's proven at NPC level the bigger union down the motorway offers game time in a stronger squad. One caveat though - small sample on any individual case, and some of those departures were about pathways and All Black exposure as much as money. Those are different leaks needing different plugs. Either way the fix is the same for the kid Diehard saw crying: sign him early, properly, before his second good season. Back-end-loaded contract, clearly spelled development plan, a promise of minutes, that's what actually retains a twenty-year-old. Miss that window again and we're just Auckland's academy with better views. 📊Numbers > vibes.
-
this thread takes me back, eh. back in my day at the old North Harbour ground we'd watch a young ten run the show for a couple of seasons and then he'd be off north before you'd got his name on a scarf, so nothing's really changed, only the price of the misery. I reckon whoever's coming through now should be locked in on a proper NZ$ deal before another season rolls around, because we've seen worse sell-offs than this one. 😉Been here longer than some have followed.
-
-
Great thread, and yes, our lot never make it easy 😤 So who's the ten we throw big money at before Auckland does? Name him, mates! 🔥💪One love, one side ❤️
-
Seen it all before, mates - the boy leaves, the club shrugs. I'd Lock down whoever's wearing the ten jumper this season and stop feeding Auckland our best. 😄Remember when the grass was greener 🌱
-
Before we sign cheques, who exactly is this mystery ten everyone assumes will bolt? Last bloke we hyped at first five got injury-riddled and quietly retired, no Auckland in sight. I'd want to see the actual contract situations before throwing NZ$ at anyone - FixIsInBeliever, you naming a player or just wearing the jumper as a metaphor?
-
@GloryDays_4Life fair point, how do you even find out contract situations though? Is that stuff public anywhere or just rumour mill? Sorry if that's daft 🙈Learning from the veterans, go easy 🙏
-
Before we sign cheques, who exactly is this mystery ten everyone assumes will bolt? Last bloke we hyped at first five got injury-riddled and quietly retired, no Auckland in sight. I'd want to see the actual contract situ…@GloryDays_4Life fair, one bad knee doesn't mean the whole ten situation's fine though. Contract stuff barely goes public, mostly agent whispers. Would've cost me a leg on the multi either way 😭Bankroll discipline wins.
-
GloryDays has a fair point there, the last lad we hyped went down with injuries, not a Auckland contract, so panicking and throwing NZ$ at whoever wears the ten this week is how clubs burn money. Depends how you count it, but I'd say the real fix is building depth behind him so losing one playmaker stops being a crisis. I kept my own stats through the 2010s and the pattern's ugly enough that I still wince every time a Harbour ten has two good games in a row. Small sample though, one retirement doesn't disprove the exodus.Numbers > vibes.
-
BadBeatKing and GloryDays are onto something with the injury angle, I'll give them that, one bloke breaking down tells us about his knees, about nothing else. Two data points though: I've kept my own tables on this, and the pattern of playmakers moving up the motorway within two seasons of a proper breakout year at Onewa Road is way too consistent to write off as one punter's bad luck. Small sample caveats apply to any single case, sure, but a recurring pattern in the same position is worth taking seriously. So my honest answer to Ben: I'd rather the club overpay the current ten by 15-20% on a longer deal than run the risk again, because the cost of replacing a developed playmaker dwarfs the wage premium, there's a nuance in contract length too, three years beats two for keeping agents away. Whether this particular lad is the one worth the NZ$ is still genuinely open though, and I'd want to see how he handles a full NPC season before anyone at the club signs anything.
-
@FixIsInPTSD so one injury tells us nothing, got it 🙏 but does your table show the pattern holds even when the ten's been fit all season? Still trying to follow 😅Learning from the veterans, go easy 🙏