Leo Re-signs ...

[WauchopeAnalyst]

DAVIS in 06 GF

Does anyone remember Banfield against Davis in the 2005 GF?

Well I certainly remember it from the end I was at every time the ball came into a one-on-one contest Banfield controlled the contest marked it or brought the ball to ground and then rebounded with Nick lagging well behind.

Not a Nick knocker but can only beat 3rd or 4th best back these days and simply applies no pressure in defence.

He will always be a legend for what he did, but most legends fade as time goes on, I thank him for his efforts and wish him good luck.. ( Met his Dad, Craig, and he is a super bloke, with him as a dad Nick must have some good qualities, maybe they don't relate to working as hard as he needs too.)

[hot potato]

It was only one moment in time of Leo's 08, but he had possession, thought he would cruise away with the ball, did no awareness checks, no subtle swerve just in case, not a even a slightly backwards glance (too bloody tired)and was mown down in a flash. It was only one elementary mistake, but it is so much a younger mans game now. I wouldnt think he will see out 09. The game is way too fast for Leo now. He's been terrific. Give someone else a go.

[swansrule100]

leo barry should of retired the end of 2007

He rarely takes an opposition forward and beats them anymore and he has no real dash off the backline, just runs backwards and forwards and gets caught.

He offers the club nothing that a young player could not offer while they develop, the fact that we are keeping him and crouch is just plain stupid if you ask me. So much for rebuilding or even rejigging the side at all.

I expect we will chip the ball sideways every week and try to slow the game up and get beaten by the top teams in 2009 then.

Ive enjoyed seeing the older guys play but time to move on, im sure we will delist somone like davis who has a few years list and a few younger players so we can keep leo and crouchy too. Waste of time

[liz]

You can have up to two "outside vets" but for each one you have, you are entitled to two fewer rookies.

(It has been rumoured that the size of the rookie list is to be expanded by two this year, but not sure if that is confirmed. Plus the Swans get their extra entitlement to 3 NSW boys as rookies. Plus Mikey the Canadian counts as an additional rookie I think - as a non-Irish international rookie.)

You can have as many vets as you like in total (inside and outside) but the salary cap saving is only equivalent to one player at most. So if you have one veteran, half his salary is outside the salary cap. With two vets, half of each of their salaries are outside the cap. But once you go above two, the amount per vet reduces. So if you have three, a third of each of their salaries counts outside the cap. With four it is a quarter. So the marginal benefit becomes close to nil - it only becomes an advantage to add more players to the veteran list if the contracts of the new vets are larger than those of the existing vets. Also, once a player is a veteran, you can't "un-veteran" him so as to replace with another player unless you delist completely and chance your arm on redrafting.

[Industrial Fan]

Thanks Liz,
How does vets listing impact the make-up of the list?

Yes.

[Lucky Knickers]

no

Thanks Liz,
How does vets listing impact the make-up of the list?

[liz]

Thanks for confirming Liz.
I understand there is no limit on the veterans and they aren't counted in Salary cap or impact playing list numbers - seniors/rookies etc - is that correct?
.

no

[caj23]

I think the veterans list impacts on the number of rookies we can select (someone may wish to confirm)

[Lucky Knickers]

Yes.

Thanks for confirming Liz.
I understand there is no limit on the veterans and they aren't counted in Salary cap or impact playing list numbers - seniors/rookies etc - is that correct?
If so, I'm glad they signed Leo.

[Bear]

Leo will definitely be on a lower base payment. Firstly he's missed 5-6 games in each of the last two years through injury AND he's over 30.

The same should apply to all players in exactly the same situation if they re-negotiate at this point e.g. O'Loughlin should receive a lower base payment but still have good match payments if selected in the firsts.

Luckily for players like Crouch and Hall that although they've missed even more of the last 2 seasons than Leo and the MOL, they don't have their current contracts changed.

[Plugger46]

Thought it was way over the top myself Rob-bloods and I too, reckon Leo's probably going one season too many. Don't know why Bear got personal over a difference of opinion.

[Rob-bloods]

[QUOTE=Bear;415257]

That is very bad news. For those who think he had an OK year he gave away around the most frees in the league I understand, and what about all the goals he gave away from direct mistakes in possession.

QUOTE]

We have a winner for THE most ignorant, myth-based opinion re AFL football.

You clearly have never played the game (kick to kick after the game does not count).

The AFL key defender role is the hardest job in the team, and is a multi-dimensional role. Your guesswork and attempt to boil it down to one or two areas, and the inability to even understand those, exposes you.

Go and do some real research to back up that opinion next time

Well hotshot I don't actually get personal on the dribble that is served up on here, but your insulting rhetoric fits right in.

Yes, Leo is right up there in frees given away, actually I believe the stat in there that was reported in Melbourne was the most hands in the back decisions for the season.

And I stand by my assertion that he bled costly turnovers this season through dumb play, plain and simple. That is KPA for a defender, frees and turnovers.

Did I say the job was easy....and what's the excuse, it's tough being an old undersized defender so we forgive his sins. I'll wager your Brownlow medal, I presume YOU are of course so WELL QUALIFIED, he will be an embarrassment next year but I hope he proves me wrong, for I do make mistakes.

I daresay I have watched more games than you and had more football involvement, and you know what, even if I hadn't I'm still entitled to an opinion.

I don't bag the RWO "hated players of the month" but you know what, when I think a player is finished I'll say it. I always loved Leo, even when he was lattempting those stellar marks in the twos as a half-forward flanker and I'll be forever in awe of that mark.

[liz]

Is Leo on the veterans list?

Yes.

[Lucky Knickers]

Is Leo on the veterans list?

[Nico]

My gut feeling is that they re signed him for another year on a significantly lower package. The danger with giving him what he previously had is what many people have said on here: what if his form drops dramatically. Surely they couldn't fall for another Spida Everitt who it seems got a game regardless of form.

By putting him on the list for another year at a lower rate takes away the notion of list clogging and frees up some of the cap for other purposes.

At a lower rate Leo gets to play another year and we save on the cap: a win win situation. As someone said it's not as if he hasn't got a well paid job to go to after footy.