Originally Posted by
bloodspirit
The key to retaining Papley is that he is already contracted. We don't have to trade him unless we want to and it is in our interests to do so. Not this year, and not next. That said, we do want to try to keep him happy.
As far as salary goes, I'm not too sympathetic because:
1. He is being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to do something he loves. (Even if he could be earning substantially more elsewhere he's still doing more than ok.)
2. He voluntarily entered the contract among other reasons because he was at the time, I imagine, delighted to get the security of such a long contract and such a big show of faith in him as a player by the club.
3. During the contract negotiations he was, I presume, represented by an agent of his choosing (or if he had none that was his choice also) who was qualified and resourced to make sure he got a fair offer and made an informed choice about whether or not to accept it.
4. When things go the other way and a player is injured or falls out of form, nobody seriously suggests that the player should take a pay cut because now they are worth less and they wouldn't be able to get the same salary elsewhere. This is not hypothetical at all. Think of players like Alex Johnson, Sam Naismith, Sam Reid, who have been paid a lot of money even while missing entire seasons (as of course they should be).
Swings and roundabouts. You make your bed, you lie in it. Etc. Insert your own favourite cliche here.
Bookmarks