Author Topic: Schulz to Port  (Read 56470 times)

Offline Stripes

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4264
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #165 on: February 08, 2010, 11:56:28 AM »
The more we look back at the decisions made in that period the more I shake my head and realize TW and Miller screwed our future. I realize Miller was under resourced and TW was making judgments based on where he felt the game was heading but continued to trade away picks and make ill-informed decisions which has and will cost us.

Jackstar - I should have listened!  :banghead

Stripes

Offline wayne

  • Fame of Hall
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8464
  • In Absentia
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #166 on: February 08, 2010, 12:35:16 PM »
And to think Schulz still had a year left on his contract when we traded him!  :o

And you may not think I care for you
When you know down inside that I really do

jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #167 on: February 08, 2010, 12:58:15 PM »
The more we look back at the decisions made in that period the more I shake my head and realize TW and Miller screwed our future. I realize Miller was under resourced and TW was making judgments based on where he felt the game was heading but continued to trade away picks and make ill-informed decisions which has and will cost us.

Jackstar - I should have listened!  :banghead

Stripes

Mate , trying to explain strategies to Jay was like talking to a brick wall., he had no idea. man was a dill.
He also cost as the sponsorship deal as well.
No many people would know this  but nearly coast us another sponsorship deal. Motorola had give the players a free mobile in which they had to use, he gave his way and continued to use his Nokia, Motorola were filthy at the tme

Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #168 on: February 08, 2010, 03:48:25 PM »
Cant be that big of a dill, Giving away a Motorola and keeping a Nokia is a smart move.  ;D I'd have done the same.
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways my ways,” says the Lord.
 
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts."

Yahweh? or the great Clawski?

yaw rehto eht dellorcs ti fi daer ot reisae eb dluow tI

Offline WA Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14257
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #169 on: February 08, 2010, 04:41:00 PM »
Schulz always did shine at training so no wonder Port are getting excited.... but Port please hold that excitement until he is on the field...lol, because that is where he will let you down.
DIMMA - You will be held ACCOUNTABLE...

“We are really excited about what we have brought in. We have got great depth of players that can take us where we need to go. We are just putting some cream on the top at the moment,” he said.

"Rucks:
Shaun Hampson is the No.1 man"

Offline Infamy

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4426
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #170 on: February 08, 2010, 06:15:24 PM »
The more we look back at the decisions made in that period the more I shake my head and realize TW and Miller screwed our future. I realize Miller was under resourced and TW was making judgments based on where he felt the game was heading but continued to trade away picks and make ill-informed decisions which has and will cost us.

Jackstar - I should have listened!  :banghead

Stripes

Mate , trying to explain strategies to Jay was like talking to a brick wall., he had no idea. man was a dill.
He also cost as the sponsorship deal as well.
No many people would know this  but nearly coast us another sponsorship deal. Motorola had give the players a free mobile in which they had to use, he gave his way and continued to use his Nokia, Motorola were filthy at the tme
We ended up making money on losing the TAC sponsorship. He did us a favour!

jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #171 on: February 08, 2010, 07:03:57 PM »
The more we look back at the decisions made in that period the more I shake my head and realize TW and Miller screwed our future. I realize Miller was under resourced and TW was making judgments based on where he felt the game was heading but continued to trade away picks and make ill-informed decisions which has and will cost us.

Jackstar - I should have listened!  :banghead

Stripes

Mate , trying to explain strategies to Jay was like talking to a brick wall., he had no idea. man was a dill.
He also cost as the sponsorship deal as well.
No many people would know this  but nearly coast us another sponsorship deal. Motorola had give the players a free mobile in which they had to use, he gave his way and continued to use his Nokia, Motorola were filthy at the tme
We ended up making money on losing the TAC sponsorship. He did us a favour!

You would have to be the most idiotic poster on here,
We are paying a large percentage of his salary in 2010, how on earth can he be doing us a favor, Hey hold on, its not 1st of April is it,  :lol
You have proven what a complete and utter goose you really are.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2010, 07:57:18 PM by jackstar is back again »

1965

  • Guest
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #172 on: February 08, 2010, 07:47:28 PM »
The more we look back at the decisions made in that period the more I shake my head and realize TW and Miller screwed our future. I realize Miller was under resourced and TW was making judgments based on where he felt the game was heading but continued to trade away picks and make ill-informed decisions which has and will cost us.

Jackstar - I should have listened!  :banghead

Stripes

Mate , trying to explain strategies to Jay was like talking to a brick wall., he had no idea. man was a dill.
He also cost as the sponsorship deal as well.
No many people would know this  but nearly coast us another sponsorship deal. Motorola had give the players a free mobile in which they had to use, he gave his way and continued to use his Nokia, Motorola were filthy at the tme
We ended up making money on losing the TAC sponsorship. He did us a favour!

You would have to be the most idiotic poster on here,
We are paying a large percentage of his salary in 2010, how on earth can he be doing us a favor, Hey hold on, its not 1st of April is it,  :lol
You have proven would a complete and utter goose you really are.

Your last sentence makes no sense, you hitting the booze too hard again?   :cheers

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #173 on: February 08, 2010, 07:54:07 PM »

We ended up making money on losing the TAC sponsorship. He did us a favour!

You would have to be the most idiotic poster on here,
We are paying a large percentage of his salary in 2010, how on earth can he be doing us a favor, Hey hold on, its not 1st of April is it,  :lol
You have proven would a complete and utter goose you really are.

You might have misread Infamy's post Jack.  He was referring to the money we 'made' from losing the TAC sponsorship.  AFG's deal was worth a significant amount more to the club, so even if we are paying some of his 2010 salary (which I hadn't heard or read by the way) we will still be a long long way in front.  How much of it are we paying?

Offline Infamy

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4426
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #174 on: February 08, 2010, 07:55:46 PM »

We ended up making money on losing the TAC sponsorship. He did us a favour!

You would have to be the most idiotic poster on here,
We are paying a large percentage of his salary in 2010, how on earth can he be doing us a favor, Hey hold on, its not 1st of April is it,  :lol
You have proven would a complete and utter goose you really are.

You might have misread Infamy's post Jack.  He was referring to the money we 'made' from losing the TAC sponsorship.  AFG's deal was worth a significant amount more to the club, so even if we are paying some of his 2010 salary (which I hadn't heard or read by the way) we will still be a long long way in front.  How much of it are we paying?
He didn't misread it, he just lashes out at me to avoid admitting that I'm right
That or he's just an idiot

jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #175 on: February 08, 2010, 08:00:50 PM »

We ended up making money on losing the TAC sponsorship. He did us a favour!

You would have to be the most idiotic poster on here,
We are paying a large percentage of his salary in 2010, how on earth can he be doing us a favor, Hey hold on, its not 1st of April is it,  :lol
You have proven would a complete and utter goose you really are.

You might have misread Infamy's post Jack.  He was referring to the money we 'made' from losing the TAC sponsorship.  AFG's deal was worth a significant amount more to the club, so even if we are paying some of his 2010 salary (which I hadn't heard or read by the way) we will still be a long long way in front.  How much of it are we paying?
He didn't misread it, he just lashes out at me to avoid admitting that I'm right
That or he's just an idiot

My last sentence should of read .***** You have proven WHAT a complete and utter goose you really are, and you are actually.
For us to be paying a large percentage of a complete duds salary is extremely BAD MANAGEMENT, considering he has played the majority of his games at Coburg over the past 2 years. ::)

jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #176 on: February 08, 2010, 08:02:12 PM »

We ended up making money on losing the TAC sponsorship. He did us a favour!

You would have to be the most idiotic poster on here,
We are paying a large percentage of his salary in 2010, how on earth can he be doing us a favor, Hey hold on, its not 1st of April is it,  :lol
You have proven would a complete and utter goose you really are.

You might have misread Infamy's post Jack.  He was referring to the money we 'made' from losing the TAC sponsorship.  AFG's deal was worth a significant amount more to the club, so even if we are paying some of his 2010 salary (which I hadn't heard or read by the way) we will still be a long long way in front.  How much of it are we paying?

Paying an extremely large percentage :shh ::)

Offline Infamy

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4426
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #177 on: February 08, 2010, 08:07:00 PM »

We ended up making money on losing the TAC sponsorship. He did us a favour!

You would have to be the most idiotic poster on here,
We are paying a large percentage of his salary in 2010, how on earth can he be doing us a favor, Hey hold on, its not 1st of April is it,  :lol
You have proven would a complete and utter goose you really are.

You might have misread Infamy's post Jack.  He was referring to the money we 'made' from losing the TAC sponsorship.  AFG's deal was worth a significant amount more to the club, so even if we are paying some of his 2010 salary (which I hadn't heard or read by the way) we will still be a long long way in front.  How much of it are we paying?

Paying an extremely large percentage :shh ::)
Stop changing the subject you twit. You are the one who mentioned that he cost us money losing us the TAC sponsorship when he actually made us money for doing that. End of story, nothing to do with his contract at Port.

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #178 on: February 08, 2010, 08:16:02 PM »

How much of it are we paying?

Paying an extremely large percentage :shh ::)

My guess is that he would have been on around the $250k mark?  That would mean that even if we are paying somewhere near 100% then it is still not even close to the increase in sponsorship we got per year, every year, by upsizing to AFG.  Thank you Jay Schulz.

jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: Schulz to Port
« Reply #179 on: February 08, 2010, 08:18:41 PM »

We ended up making money on losing the TAC sponsorship. He did us a favour!

You would have to be the most idiotic poster on here,
We are paying a large percentage of his salary in 2010, how on earth can he be doing us a favor, Hey hold on, its not 1st of April is it,  :lol
You have proven would a complete and utter goose you really are.

You might have misread Infamy's post Jack.  He was referring to the money we 'made' from losing the TAC sponsorship.  AFG's deal was worth a significant amount more to the club, so even if we are paying some of his 2010 salary (which I hadn't heard or read by the way) we will still be a long long way in front.  How much of it are we paying?

Paying an extremely large percentage :shh ::)
Stop changing the subject you twit. You are the one who mentioned that he cost us money losing us the TAC sponsorship when he actually made us money for doing that. End of story, nothing to do with his contract at Port.

Its amazing the positive spin the club puts on things to calm you Ferrals ::)