Dixon to Salford : Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:11 am  

Andrew Dixon signed for Salford http://www.sportinglife.com/rugby-league/news/article/480/8238633/andrew-dixon-joins-salford With him and Jamie Foster off the books yesterday, does this mean that we have room under the cap for another signing?

Andrew Dixon signed for Salford http://www.sportinglife.com/rugby-league/news/article/480/8238633/andrew-dixon-joins-salford With him and Jamie Foster off the books yesterday, does this mean that we have room under the cap for another signing?

Re: Dixon to Salford : Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:39 am  

Was just asking on the Foster thread about Dixon. If it was necessary to release him to stay under the cap then fair enough, but I'm a bit disappointed in this, I think he's performed far better in the first team than Magennis who is the same age.

Re: Dixon to Salford : Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:56 am  

I liked Dixon, a quick mobile back rower, I think his chances would have been limited next season though.

Re: Dixon to Salford : Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:57 pm  

He has the makings of a quality player. Reminds me of Lee Gilmour. He runs quality lines and you can't coach that, you've either got it or you've not. Going to Salford will most likely mean he doesn't kick on and develop, but it's another player I'd have rather kept to be honest.

Re: Dixon to Salford : Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:14 pm  

No1 Saint wrote:

I liked Dixon, a quick mobile back rower, I think his chances would have been limited next season though.

Yeah, but at least we have space now for another undersized, slow back rower.

Re: Dixon to Salford : Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:24 pm  

I think the Dixon move had been accounted for months ago hadn't it???

He was off contract at the end of 2012, so his cap money was already spent before today.

I liked him he had some good games early on, but with Sia, TP, Manu, Wilkin, Flanaghan all ahead of him that puts him as 6th choice and frankly for the money he deserves there is no point paying good money to a 6th choice player, better to leave that option for a younger cheaper player. A 6th choice back rower is only going to average a handful of games each year and most of those will be from the bench.

Re: Dixon to Salford : Sat Nov 10, 2012 5:13 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

I think the Dixon move had been accounted for months ago hadn't it???

He was off contract at the end of 2012, so his cap money was already spent before today.

I liked him he had some good games early on, but with Sia, TP, Manu, Wilkin, Flanaghan all ahead of him that puts him as 6th choice and frankly for the money he deserves there is no point paying good money to a 6th choice player, better to leave that option for a younger cheaper player. A 6th choice back rower is only going to average a handful of games each year and most of those will be from the bench.

It seemed to be common knowledge but I held out a bit of hope for as long as it wasn't official. There is a lot of cover there but I would hope TP is used exclusively as a prop next year.

Re: Dixon to Salford : Sun Nov 11, 2012 4:30 pm  

No1 Saint wrote:

I liked Dixon, a quick mobile back rower, I think his chances would have been limited next season though.

They shouldn't have been though (that of course is assuming they would have been, which now we will never know). At the start of 2012 he was one of our best players and I never figured out why he was dropped. But then again, I never figured out why a coach with the supposed reputation of bringing through our young players basically dropped almost all our young players.

Actually, I did figure it out. I came to the conclusion that he's a naff coach but a good systems man, which presumably is why he is now general manager rather than coach.

That and he is Eamonn's poodle, of course.

Re: Dixon to Salford : Sun Nov 11, 2012 5:32 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

They shouldn't have been though (that of course is assuming they would have been, which now we will never know). At the start of 2012 he was one of our best players and I never figured out why he was dropped. But then again, I never figured out why a coach with the supposed reputation of bringing through our young players basically dropped almost all our young players.

Actually, I did figure it out. I came to the conclusion that he's a naff coach but a good systems man, which presumably is why he is now general manager rather than coach.

That and he is Eamonn's poodle, of course.

The results of his actions were woeful werent they, from what 10th to 3rd? Rush took the pressure off those kids and the immediate results worked so he stuck with it. You're gripe with individuals and obsession with others with a disregard for some fact and some comon sense is unreal

Re: Dixon to Salford : Sun Nov 11, 2012 7:53 pm  

southernsaint7 wrote:

The results of his actions were woeful werent they, from what 10th to 3rd? Rush took the pressure off those kids and the immediate results worked so he stuck with it. You're gripe with individuals and obsession with others with a disregard for some fact and some comon sense is unreal

I can see where SaintsFan is coming from here. Yep, we managed to get out of our rut and move up to 3rd, but at what cost to the possible development of the young players? Gaskell has effectively missed a season of development now, Foster was used as a scapegoat and bombed out, and it looks like Dixon has been discarded as well.

The one that rankles most is Gaskell, you have to ask yourself that if Gaskell was at any other SL side, particularly any other of the 'big clubs', would he have been treated like he was here under Rush?