Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 56

Thread: 2014/5 shopping list ...

  1. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by 707 View Post
    Only players we will be recruiting in the next few years will be cheap ones!

    Very important to lock in those you already have rather than chasing new ones and our cap will be at it's max until we have a few retirees.

    Remember that the Melbourne squad was paid almost as much as the other squads last year despite being a heap of spuds so some of them are on decent coin and Frawley would be one of them. Frawley therefore won't to be going anywhere for more money, just moving to play in a good side for similar money - money we don't have :-(
    Frawley is actually outside the top 25% earners list this year at MFC, hence why he is an unrestricted free agent. His contract was heavily front loaded.
    Ed Considine's day out - Round 3, 16th April 1995.
    11 Kicks, 13 Handballs, 8 Marks, 1 Goal, 1 Behind, 1 Tackle, 1 Hitout, 3 Brownlow votes (his only votes)
    Ed = God

  2. #38
    Just wild about Harry
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,833
    Quote Originally Posted by Chookbilly View Post
    Frawley is actually outside the top 25% earners list this year at MFC, hence why he is an unrestricted free agent. His contract was heavily front loaded.
    On SEN the other day they were saying that he 'may' go for $800k, even thought that will be overs.

  3. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Dosser View Post
    On SEN the other day they were saying that he 'may' go for $800k, even thought that will be overs.
    ............and they have the audacity to question us for paying Buddy 750K in each of his first two years.

    This FA will be fun to watch in the next few years while our young guns are getting signed. by the Swans.

  4. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt80 View Post
    McGlynn, Bird and Nick Smith, I think are a chance to return to Melbourne in the coming years.

    Quote Originally Posted by goswannies View Post
    Given Bird was a NSW scholarship player/recruit, why would he "return" to Melbourne? McGlynn just resigned until 2016. That's 0 for 2 so far. Hopefully Nick Smith will make it 3 strikes on your prediction on Swans' return to Melbourne
    Picked with Nostradamus like accuracy. Good work. Nay-Sayers be humbled
    Last edited by 0918330512; 18th March 2014 at 01:07 AM.

  5. #41
    Suspended by the MRP
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,802
    Quote Originally Posted by 09183305 View Post
    Picked with Nostradamus like accuracy. Good work. Nay-Sayers be humbled


    With the COLA ruling the Swans will have to trade out some players in the coming years to remain within the cap!

    As fans we all have this misguided notion that players at Sydney want to stay here so badly that they will work for sub standard wages!

    Players will look at Mummy's $650,000 wage figure at another club and the recent treatment of ROK to know that footballers have a short productive life span and have to get the best deal for themselves! Not all former footballers have the talent of a Leo Barry to transition well to another career and there is not the room in the commentary or football systems for all former footballers to remain in the game. Some will know this and will take the best deal to protect there later lives after football!

    I'm not a naysayer, but a realist. Why should a good Swans player cop $ 350,000 when they could get $650,000 at another club! It's a huge difference over three years! This will happen more with good Swans players if we are not a top four side and as the fallout to the treatment of ROK gathers momentum!

  6. #42
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt80 View Post
    With the COLA ruling the Swans will have to trade out some players in the coming years to remain within the cap!

    As fans we all have this misguided notion that players at Sydney want to stay here so badly that they will work for sub standard wages!

    Players will look at Mummy's $650,000 wage figure at another club and the recent treatment of ROK to know that footballers have a short productive life span and have to get the best deal for themselves! Not all former footballers have the talent of a Leo Barry to transition well to another career and there is not the room in the commentary or football systems for all former footballers to remain in the game. Some will know this and will take the best deal to protect there later lives after football!

    I'm not a naysayer, but a realist. Why should a good Swans player cop $ 350,000 when they could get $650,000 at another club! It's a huge difference over three years! This will happen more with good Swans players if we are not a top four side and as the fallout to the treatment of ROK gathers momentum!
    Matt80, your misunderstanding how the COLA is applied if you think we will have to trade players to 'remain within the cap'. The removal of the COLA has no impact on our cap situation (unless we have been doing dodgy things), as it is simply reflected in the fact we pay COLA on top of their actual contracted amount as required under the cap. It is not included as part of the Salary Cap per say. Therefore, the removal of the COLA will not force us to trade players to remain within the cap. If we want to trade players, or players can get better deals elsewhere, that is a different story.
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

  7. #43
    Suspended by the MRP
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,802
    Quote Originally Posted by mcs View Post
    Matt80, your misunderstanding how the COLA is applied if you think we will have to trade players to 'remain within the cap'. The removal of the COLA has no impact on our cap situation (unless we have been doing dodgy things), as it is simply reflected in the fact we pay COLA on top of their actual contracted amount as required under the cap. It is not included as part of the Salary Cap per say. Therefore, the removal of the COLA will not force us to trade players to remain within the cap. If we want to trade players, or players can get better deals elsewhere, that is a different story.
    Thanks for clarifying the COLA. Does that mean that if a club has a COLA allocation of 10% the number works as follows!

    Player earning $100,000 a year gets $110,000 ($10,000 extra living in Sydney costs)

    Player earning $200,000 a year gets $220,000 ($20,000 extra living in Sydney costs)

    Player earning $900,000 a year gets $990,000 ($90,000 extra living in Sydney costs)

    I would assume that its possible that a Sydney player on $200,000 a year will be uspset to lose that extra $20,000?

  8. #44
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,800
    That's my understanding of how it is supposed to work Matt80. That is waht bugs me most abotu the whole COLA argument - the players might get the extra $$$ on top, but their actual contracted amounts (i.e. before COLA) are still all within the Cap. You'd think, listening to the squeal from Melbourne based clubs (and that goose that runs Collingwood), that we have had the 10%ish extra in our cap to spend.


    I'm sure players in Sydney will not be happy losing the extra top up they recieve, and it may affect contract negotiations etc. But it doesn't mean we have to shed players to stay within the cap when COLA is gone, because we are already inside the cap anyway!
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

  9. #45
    On the Rookie List Jewels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Copacabana
    Posts
    3,258
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt80 View Post
    With the COLA ruling the Swans will have to trade out some players in the coming years to remain within the cap!

    As fans we all have this misguided notion that players at Sydney want to stay here so badly that they will work for sub standard wages!

    Players will look at Mummy's $650,000 wage figure at another club and the recent treatment of ROK to know that footballers have a short productive life span and have to get the best deal for themselves! Not all former footballers have the talent of a Leo Barry to transition well to another career and there is not the room in the commentary or football systems for all former footballers to remain in the game. Some will know this and will take the best deal to protect there later lives after football!

    I'm not a naysayer, but a realist. Why should a good Swans player cop $ 350,000 when they could get $650,000 at another club! It's a huge difference over three years! This will happen more with good Swans players if we are not a top four side and as the fallout to the treatment of ROK gathers momentum!
    What treatment of ROK? As far as I've heard he was not in the initial team selection because of match ups, its not like Longmire publically said that he needs to learn his place, or we're not happy with his attitude.
    Do you know something the rest of us don't or are you simply assuming?

  10. #46
    Suspended by the MRP
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,802
    Quote Originally Posted by Jewels View Post
    What treatment of ROK? As far as I've heard he was not in the initial team selection because of match ups, its not like Longmire publically said that he needs to learn his place, or we're not happy with his attitude.
    Do you know something the rest of us don't or are you simply assuming?
    I have no insider knowledge! The man is a Norm Smith Medallist and a Club Great, and he would feel shattered to be originally selected in the reserves for the last week?s game. He wants to play on in 2015 and earn another contract, and this will most likely not happen at the Swans if he is in and out of the team in 2014. His only hope then is to be picked up by another team in 2015, which is harder for him to do if he is in and out of the team and is turning 34.

    I don?t think ROK treatment is unfair, just the reality of AFL players in their mid-30s trying to keep pace with a game that quickens every year. This is why it?s important for players to maximise their earnings in their peak years, because whether ROK can play AFL in 2015 is now very much in doubt! Not playing in 2015 would probably cost him between $200,000 - $300,000.

    Other players who are in their peak years, who are playing for less than their open market rate, would be taking note of the ROK developments.

    Liam Pickerings negotiation of Lance Franklins contract is a master stroke because he will be earning good money when he is 35, despite injuries and the game potentialy quickening around him.

  11. #47
    Goes up to 11
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,326
    In these days of professional sportspeople being on very good coin, players in all sorts of sports are less enthusiastic to retire. In the olden days a player would retire and then go and get a 'proper job' so they could earn a living. Nowadays it's the other way round and as players age/slow down/become susceptible to injuries etc, they often have to be managed out. This is not always accepted by the players in question or the fans, but it's a fact of life in professional sport in the 21st century. ROK is in this situation now.

  12. #48
    We should be looking to pick up one of these young gun midfielders from gws or gc. Our midfield worries me.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

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