Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 49 to 60 of 103

Thread: Goodes puts buddy on notice.

  1. #49
    Senior Player ernie koala's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    northern beaches
    Posts
    3,251
    Quote Originally Posted by MightyBloods View Post
    The contract length was a way of putting our competition off matching the deal and also a very clever way of managing our salary cap over the long term knowing that the salary cap will substantially increase in future years (another TV rights deal is due in approx 3 years).
    Whilst I agree with you, regarding the financial and promotional value of Franklin, an increase in the salary cap will not help the club one iota.

    Every club gets the increased salary cap. It doesn't matter how much it is.....

    If we have $1 milion plus per year less to spend than the other clubs, due to paying out Franklins contract, we will be at a distinct disadvantage attracting and holding onto the best players. (ironic given our present cap situation)
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect... MT

  2. #50
    Proud Tragic Swan Primmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    On the Move!
    Posts
    5,970
    If Buddy does want 23 I doubt Lockyer will block it. But I hear number 19 is free......but that already has a 'name' attached to it. AND 23 to me is Matty Nicks, and he was a dead set favourite. 32 is taken.

    10 and 11 are free.

    Nah, I think he should take 24. Synchronicity, and form even though it has Jude's name attached for years to come.
    If you've never jumped from one couch to the other to save yourself from lava then you didn't have a childhood

  3. #51
    Can you feel it? Site Admin ugg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chucked into the ruck
    Posts
    15,929
    If I was Lockyer and Buddy wanted 23 that badly, I would ask for a little financial incentive to change. After all, we know that Buddy can afford it

  4. #52
    I wish we didn't sign up Lance. That way we could be still be a homogeneous and generic club with this over hyped culture. That way the majority of our fans can feel all smug when other clubs stars misbehave or sign up loud personalities. I wish the club continued on just being content in only having the small supporter base we have and not trying to break new supporters in by signing a very marketable player.

    In fact i liked it when we were old cortinas covered in "I vote greens I have a conscious" stickers with other sanctimonious slogans and vegetarian/vegan messages while we scoffed at others. Now we are starting to look like BMW and Porshe 4wd owners.

    I mean its just not fair!

    Seriously people get used to it, the game that he returns 10.1 and we flog a top 2 team all will be forgotten, such is the emotional craziness of all AFL fans.

  5. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by ernie koala View Post
    Whilst I agree with you, regarding the financial and promotional value of Franklin, an increase in the salary cap will not help the club one iota.

    Every club gets the increased salary cap. It doesn't matter how much it is.....

    If we have $1 milion plus per year less to spend than the other clubs, due to paying out Franklins contract, we will be at a distinct disadvantage attracting and holding onto the best players. (ironic given our present cap situation)
    In 5 years time when Buddy is getting 1.2 or 1.4 M, our main competitors will have a player or 2 demanding similar amounts from their club. What will Selwood of Geelong be on in 3 years for example? If prior to his next contract, someone comes knocking & offers him $8M for the final 5 years of his career, then the Cats are going to have to offer him at least $1M per year, don't you think? they also have Hawkins to worry about. So the one major positive out of this long term contract is the knowledge that it won't change & other contracts can be done accordingly. $1.4M could quite easily seem like a bargain in 4 or 5 years time in comparison to the contracts of the stars of the comp around that time.
    It's quite feasible that there will be another player or two on 1.5-1.8 M per year.
    5 years ago, not too many players were on 800K but that has increased significantly. It's only natural. Our main concern with Buddy is that he represents our club & his fellow team mates with respect & the respect will be returned ten fold.
    If he gets that, then we'll all get along fine, whilst rubbing Hawk supporters' noses in it!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by spiffy-dude View Post
    I wish we didn't sign up Lance. That way we could be still be a homogeneous and generic club with this over hyped culture. That way the majority of our fans can feel all smug when other clubs stars misbehave or sign up loud personalities. I wish the club continued on just being content in only having the small supporter base we have and not trying to break new supporters in by signing a very marketable player.

    In fact i liked it when we were old cortinas covered in "I vote greens I have a conscious" stickers with other sanctimonious slogans and vegetarian/vegan messages while we scoffed at others. Now we are starting to look like BMW and Porshe 4wd owners.

    I mean its just not fair!

    Seriously people get used to it, the game that he returns 10.1 and we flog a top 2 team all will be forgotten, such is the emotional craziness of all AFL fans.
    Here here!

  6. #54
    Senior Player ernie koala's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    northern beaches
    Posts
    3,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Blood Tunnel View Post
    In 5 years time when Buddy is getting 1.2 or 1.4 M, our main competitors will have a player or 2 demanding similar amounts from their club. What will Selwood of Geelong be on in 3 years for example? If prior to his next contract, someone comes knocking & offers him $8M for the final 5 years of his career, then the Cats are going to have to offer him at least $1M per year, don't you think? they also have Hawkins to worry about. So the one major positive out of this long term contract is the knowledge that it won't change & other contracts can be done accordingly. $1.4M could quite easily seem like a bargain in 4 or 5 years time in comparison to the contracts of the stars of the comp around that time.
    It's quite feasible that there will be another player or two on 1.5-1.8 M per year.
    5 years ago, not too many players were on 800K but that has increased significantly. It's only natural. Our main concern with Buddy is that he represents our club & his fellow team mates with respect & the respect will be returned ten fold.
    If he gets that, then we'll all get along fine, whilst rubbing Hawk supporters' noses in it!
    Your talking about what may happen in 5 years time....I'm talking about what may happen in 7 - 9 years time...

    ie: When the Swans will still have to include his salary in their cap, even if he has finished playing......Big difference.
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect... MT

  7. #55
    Regular in the Side Velour&Ruffles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Fools' Paradise
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by Blood Tunnel View Post
    In 5 years time when Buddy is getting 1.2 or 1.4 M, our main competitors will have a player or 2 demanding similar amounts from their club. What will Selwood of Geelong be on in 3 years for example? If prior to his next contract, someone comes knocking & offers him $8M for the final 5 years of his career, then the Cats are going to have to offer him at least $1M per year, don't you think? they also have Hawkins to worry about. So the one major positive out of this long term contract is the knowledge that it won't change & other contracts can be done accordingly. $1.4M could quite easily seem like a bargain in 4 or 5 years time in comparison to the contracts of the stars of the comp around that time.
    It's quite feasible that there will be another player or two on 1.5-1.8 M per year. 5 years ago, not too many players were on 800K but that has increased significantly. It's only natural. Our main concern with Buddy is that he represents our club & his fellow team mates with respect & the respect will be returned ten fold.
    If he gets that, then we'll all get along fine, whilst rubbing Hawk supporters' noses in it!

    - - - Updated - - -



    Here here!
    Yes, It's quite feasible that there will be another player or two on 1.5-1.8 M per year.

    But the important difference will be that they will probably be taking the field and actually playing, whereas Buddy probably won't be. He'll just be taking up room in the salary cap.
    My opinion is objective truth in its purest form

  8. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by ernie koala View Post
    Your talking about what may happen in 5 years time....I'm talking about what may happen in 7 - 9 years time...

    ie: When the Swans will still have to include his salary in their cap, even if he has finished playing......Big difference.
    Ernie, I'm sure we will manage. It may mean Kinnear will need to continue with his smart recruiting of players not getting a regular game at their club.

  9. #57
    Goes up to 11
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,326
    As far as I understand that in later years, if Buddy retires, we are not required to pay out the remainder of his contract, which we would be of we delisted him. Is my understanding correct?

  10. #58
    Regular in the Side Velour&Ruffles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Fools' Paradise
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by spiffy-dude View Post
    I wish we didn't sign up Lance. That way we could be still be a homogeneous and generic club with this over hyped culture. That way the majority of our fans can feel all smug when other clubs stars misbehave or sign up loud personalities. I wish the club continued on just being content in only having the small supporter base we have and not trying to break new supporters in by signing a very marketable player.

    In fact i liked it when we were old cortinas covered in "I vote greens I have a conscious" stickers with other sanctimonious slogans and vegetarian/vegan messages while we scoffed at others. Now we are starting to look like BMW and Porshe 4wd owners.

    I mean its just not fair!

    Seriously people get used to it, the game that he returns 10.1 and we flog a top 2 team all will be forgotten, such is the emotional craziness of all AFL fans.
    The game that he returns 10.1 will be a red letter day, because his usual return from 11 scoring shots would be 4.7

    I hope you are right though. I will be cheering as loud as anyone.
    My opinion is objective truth in its purest form

  11. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by jono2707 View Post
    As far as I understand that in later years, if Buddy retires, we are not required to pay out the remainder of his contract, which we would be of we delisted him. Is my understanding correct?
    I believe that we don't have to pay him, but the amount would still be counted in the cap.

    177th Senior AFL Match - Round 4, 2009 - Sydney vs Carlton, SCG. This is obviously out of date. I suppose I'll update it once I could be bothered sitting down with the fixture and working it out....
    Des' Weblog

  12. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Velour&Ruffles View Post
    Yes, It's quite feasible that there will be another player or two on 1.5-1.8 M per year.

    But the important difference will be that they will probably be taking the field and actually playing, whereas Buddy probably won't be. He'll just be taking up room in the salary cap.
    Why the doom and gloom. The club knew exactly what they are doing and I am sure they know exactly well about his misdemeanour's and his 2 strikes that he has. But the club made a decision. Heck we have won 2 flags in under a decade and that hasnt even bolstered our supporter base, so they are banking on the 2nd best player in the AFL.

    We can go two ways, keep being that boutique club that has a very slow growth in new supporters and i mean slow in a market that WE now have to share with a club that no one cares OR we can attract a whole heap of new members just like Plugger did which saw the club move on and lay the seeds to our most successful period ever.

    I know personally the signing of Lance has reinvigorated my interest for the code as it was dwindling at a fast rate after last season with the bombers and all that. I was ready to leave the code as i was sick of how contrived and how manipulating the whole league had become.

    Now i cant wait until round 1 next year.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO