I'd suspect that comes into it, along with all the other advantages, which aren't counted under the cap, but are available to teams with outside financial assistance.

If we had a rich owner, with lots of outside interests, he could doubtless organise a "consultancy agreement" for a player with one of his companies. Totally unreplated to his RL, of course. Or maybe the player's missus could be a very well-paid PA in one of his businesses? Or maybe he has a mate who is just DYING to pay the player's offshore personal service company megabucks for the guy's image rights? A mate who, just co-incidentally, would be the recipient of a nice lucrative supply contract from the rich owner's business?

And not a brown envelope in sight. Nor a concerned salary cap auditor.

But we don't.

I don't buy it. Not many players go anywhere "for less money" nor would I if I were one, so as it most certainly doesn't add up, I draw my own conclusions.

Secondly, you say "the likes of", but we ARE still "the likes of", barring our recent poor success rate; players the world over still see Bradford as one of the biggest clubs, as in deed it is. So while Wire or Wigan may be the top cards, it seems obvious to me that we'd by higher up most players' lists than the majority of SL clubs.

Unless they were made an offer they couldn't refuse. And brown envelopes are not necessary, there are many ways to skin a cat.

But I do think that, for a club playing by the salary cap rules, we have on the face of it used our money quite wisely this year, (just a pity about Lynch, which leaves us potentially a bit light and inexperienced in the pack) and we will be by no means fielding a team of mugs. On the QT Potter has assembled quite a tasty squad,

I think quite a lot of players, (probably most) when all other things are equal would choose to go where they perceive they have the best chance of winning silverware. Right now we are not one of those clubs, and why would we be given where we've finished the last few years? I think that fact, alongside all the things that Adey mentions, do impact on our ability to attract the very best, just as it worked to our advantage a few years ago.

It's fine, with fans hat on, to think we're still one of the 'big' boys, but realistically we're not, and until we get our 'mojo' back we'll just have to get used to it. I agree about the squad though and I'm looking forward to seeing if we [ihave[/i recruited as well as I [ithink [/iwe have....roll on Sunday!

But what record do we have of "attracting the very best"? Were we actually mopping up the best players in the world in our pomp? I don't think so.

When we finished top in 1999 we hadn’t signed any superstars. Henry Paul would be the biggest name, the rest were really pretty much all our own work in terms of having brought them on.

By 2001 when we were Champs, who had we bought? We were playing players like Withers, Lowes, Vagana and Gartner, NONE of whom were superstar signings. They became superstars with Bradford.


In 2002 we had Lesley Vainikolo. Far from being a superstar, he was widely derided as a waste of money in his first year. I think we also added Lee Gilmour, if memory serves, again no superstar signing.

By 2004 we had Shontayne Hape, a rookie who we signed as a crock having been out of the game for a year with a cruciate ligament tear. Who else? The journeyman Logan Swann, maybe, Lee Radford. Oh - almost forgot. An over the hill Union returnee by the name of Iestyn Harris.

In 2005 (unless you count Morley for the Final) I can only think of Brad Meyers, and he was a well known player.

But the common thread to me has always been much more about signing crocked, out of favour or unwanted players and making them very good, or even great. Not attracting superstar signings.

Unless I’ve missed some.

Oh almost forgot, our failing and spluttering team did manage to attract the superstar that was Matt Awford.


Heheh yep, the eternal optimist in me would second that!

Hang on there, Wakefield are paying in back handers?

Spot on, in summary its a team game. and as Caisley said, the Bulls are the Paupers Team. Talking of puns, however pathetic, this topic is a bit of a red web to an Adey bull.

Joe Vagana had 25 Kiwi caps and was in his prime. Swann something similar and Lowes was a big money signing out of Leeds

It was not my aim to knock or minimize the prior achievements of players, but to point out that we have not been in the habit of signing superstars. I wasn't saying we always signed apparent mugs or no-hopers on the cheap. So I don't know what point you're trying to make.

Whatever it is, if those are your leading 3 examples of our record of superstar signing, I don't need to do much more, really.

Big Joe was an international. albeit W.Samoa and NZ, and an established player in one of the NRL's whipping-boy sides. It was a bit like signing Wakefield's best forward. Auckland's league position sin the time he spent there were 10/11/7/15/11/13. In the year we signed him, they had narrowly avoided the wooden spoon.

Swann is a not dissimilar case, a versatile player and regular international, but he only played a season for us and we signed him when he was nearly 30.

As for the genius that was Jimmy, are you kidding me? He'd spent most of his years at Hunslet, Leeds had him only for a season and they only sold him because they decided that he wasn't as good as Mick Shaw! It was us that suspected he could be a genius, not Leeds! You're citing a reject from an underachieving northern hemisphere team as us buying an established superstar? Is that all you've got?

While the Warriors were doing badly I think that was more to do with the disarray the the club was in off the field. They still had some very good quality players like Vagana and Stacey Jones They would have been very good recruits for any NRL side.

If he only spent a year at Leeds how did he manage to get picked in the 94 and 95 cup finals ahead of (you guessed it) Mick Shaw? We paid a six figure fee which they accepted as they were in deep financial trouble.

Joe Vagana had 25 New Zealand international caps including the 2000 World Cup and was established as one of the best props in the world.

And whats with the 'Is that all you've got? Laughing emoticon thing.' Makes you look hysterical tbh.

Lowes was unwanted by the coach! ask him!!! we forked out on a player with some experience but who was by no means a top class signing. I am trawling through my memory banks for players who we signed as genuine "stars" before they came to us:

Paul Newlove
Shaun Edwards
Henry Paul
Brad Mackay
Lesley Vainikolo

we had some useful NRL players who'd been regulars at their clubs. The fact they became big stars over here shows more about the difference in standards between SL and NRL than anything else. I'd include on this list
Hape, Vagana, Gartner, Meyers, Bradley, Donougher, Boyle, Lestrange, Kearney, Henderson, Ben Harris

We also got some stinkers, who came with big reputations from down under, and ended up disappointing: Zisti, Orford, Hall, Rigon, Brooker

the key was taking unfancied British players, perhaps ones who'd gone stale at their clubs, had potential to be better as full time pros, or who had been relegated as a part of the advent of SL: Forshaw, Spruce, Anderson, NAylor, Graham, Mcnamara, Calland, Cook, Scales, Paul JOhnson, Pratt, KNox, Dwyer, Nickle, Loughlin

and i cannot believe some of the players ive missed off!!! Danny Peacock FFS - a legend! TV!!! Morro, McKenna

and of course we provided a decent crop of youngsters from our academy!!!

Leon Pryce
Stuart Fielden
Jamie Peacock
Paul Sykes
Rob Parker
Richard Moore
Stuart Reardon
KArl Pryce
CHris Bridge
Brett Ferres
Matt COOK
Jamie Langley
Ryan Atkins
Dave Halley
Sam BUrgess
plus the current crop

actually, this opens up another debate.... have we produced enough homegrown players compared to other similarly successful clubs in the last 15 years of SL???? I am thinking Leeds, Saints, Wigan

Lowes wasn't a star at Leeds but his departure was certainly a devastating blow as everyone there knew just how good he was - other than Dean Bell anyway.

He came to Leeds from an unmentionable abomination of a club in South Leeds after Leeds beat the abomination in the Yorkshire Cup in Sept or Oct 91, in which he was the best player on the park (playing at half back). He was Leeds' first choice hooker 92 to early 96 when, bemused by Bell's decision that he should, in fact, be playing second row, he headed west to find fame and fortune.

Ah! The good old days when Leeds recruitment policy was hopeless.

OK if you want I substitute the

with a

.

No, now you'll say I'm being patronising. I withdraw my

in favour of a

.

Oh no, {[size=85anguished cry[/size}, but maybe you'll see that as condescending. Cancel that, I'll plump for

and a request to try to stop being so bleeding precious.

What I was making was a rather obvious way of pointing out you haven't said anything, at all, to contradict my point. But tell you what, if I give you Joe Vagana, will you be happy?

Technically in this case the recruitment policy was exceptional; it was the retention policy that let us down

Wasn't that the season of the Hall for Cook swap too?

Actually (though I am not intending to start thread drift) wasn't it the coaching that let Leeds down here? Specifically, the rumours were strong that it was Dean Bell who didn't rate Lowes.

Clearly the Bulls' coaching setup must be given a great deal of credit for turning Lowes into the worldbeater he became. But maybe if he had come into a team with a different coaching setup, he might never have attained these heights? For example (just asking!) if he'd been signed by a McNamara, or a Potter?

I remember Lowes being solid, a bit nippy when we first signed him but after that pretty unspectacular. That said I was disappointed to see him go.

Jimmy was definitely 'solid', he was also a good acting half who seemed to know [iexactly[/i when to attack the line and he also had that winners mentality, that determination not to be 'bested', which from an opposing crowds viewpoint (I speak with experience) comes across as arrogance or even nastiness, but which all fans like to see in [itheir own [/iplayers.

I don't know why he blossomed at Odsal, maybe it was because he felt wanted (he said he didn't at Leeds), maybe it was having an ex GB hooker like Brian Noble as coach, maybe he was just the right man in the right team at the right time, I dunno to be honest. I do know that in his pomp he was one hell of a player.

Jimmy Lowes, joint best Hooker in the super league since 1995.

On his day he could rip teams to shreds and fight Barrie McDermott, Terry O'Connor and Wayne McDonald

Just wanted to add the late Terry Newton to the list of stars signed by the bulls in recent years. Highly regarded as one of the best SL hookers at the time a signed him.

Newton was a good servant for us but was past his best and mired in controversy. Wigan could have signed him but instead preferred Higham. But on the point we're discussing, "one of the best SL hookers" is damning with a bit of faint praise, isn't it? He would at that stage of his career have got nowhere near any NRL team, for instance. But anyway I really don't see though how you can class signing a player who can't even play for you for another 6 months due to being banned, as "attracting the top players". "Taking a punt" would be nearer the mark.

Talking about good signings. Best bit of business the Bulls ever did was recieve £250,000, Bernard Dwyer, Sonny Nickle and Paul Loughlin from St Helens for Paul Newlove.