Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 113

Thread: Buddy hypothetical

  1. #25
    Ego alta, ergo ictus Ruck'n'Roll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Over here!
    Posts
    3,856
    I think we're operating on different paradigms Meg.

    Quote Originally Posted by Meg View Post
    But the implication that what the Swans offered was Buddy’s motivation to come to us is an assertion not backed by known facts.
    The question is: What known facts?

    Buddy's pronouncements as to his motivations are NOT facts, they are merely pronouncements. No more, nor less, factual than the pronouncements of any public figure.

    I am not suggesting that his pronouncements are false at all. Just that the only actual fact is the value and duration of his contract.

    I think you may be seeing implications where they weren't made. I make no comment on his motivation/character etc. or the value for money provided.

    He may have wanted to come to Sydney, in his shoes I certainly would have.
    And as has been noted, the Swans did need to top the Hawthorn offer.
    But by how much? I can't think of any free agent that's ended up staying at his existing club. Did we top the Hawthorn offer or did we over-the-top the Hawthorn offer?

    The $10 million needed to induce a move to Sydney, is hard to reconcile with the get to Sydney and win flags motivation ascribed to him.
    Last edited by Ruck'n'Roll; 30th March 2021 at 04:10 PM.
    Loose translation from the Latin is - I am tall, so I hit out.

  2. #26
    Go Swannies! Site Admin Meg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In the Brewongle
    Posts
    4,717
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruck'n'Roll View Post
    I think we're operating on different paradigms Meg.

    The $10 million needed to induce a move to Sydney, is had to reconcile with the get to Sydney and win flags motivation ascribed to him.
    The ‘win more flags’ is a quote from an interview with Buddy taken out of context. (Much loved and quoted by Hawthorn fans during their three-peat run.)

    Buddy gave that response in answer to a journo’s question about why he chose Swans over GWS (not why he moved). I suspect that was a polite way of fending off the question - rather than saying he didn’t fancy playing with the Giants.

    He also said that playing alongside Adam Goodes was a factor: that I do believe.

  3. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruck'n'Roll View Post
    I think we're operating on different paradigms Meg.

    The question is: What known facts?

    Buddy's pronouncements as to his motivations are NOT facts, they are merely pronouncements. No more, nor less, factual than the pronouncements of any public figure.

    I am not suggesting that his pronouncements are false at all. Just that the only actual fact is the value and duration of his contract.

    I think you may be seeing implications where they weren't made. I make no comment on his motivation/character etc. or the value for money provided.

    He may have wanted to come to Sydney, in his shoes I certainly would have.
    And as has been noted, the Swans did need to top the Hawthorn offer.
    But by how much? I can't think of any free agent that's ended up staying at his existing club. Did we top the Hawthorn offer or did we over-the-top the Hawthorn offer?

    The $10 million needed to induce a move to Sydney, is hard to reconcile with the get to Sydney and win flags motivation ascribed to him.
    I always thought the $10million etc was required not to entice Buddy, but to outbid the Hawks because he was a RFA

  4. #28
    Go Swannies! Site Admin Meg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In the Brewongle
    Posts
    4,717
    Quote Originally Posted by Markwebbos View Post
    I always thought the $10million etc was required not to entice Buddy, but to outbid the Hawks because he was a RFA
    This is also my understanding.

    (From memory) Hawthorn reportedly offered Buddy a six-year contract which was considerably more generous in the early years than the deal we offered (and paid) for the same years. Might have been more generous in total over the whole six years than our first six, can’t remember, not important enough to research.

    Swans couldn’t offer big money in early years because of some big contracts on our books at that time (Tippett in particular). (And take into account on a discounted rate of return dollars paid in early years are worth more than dollars paid later.)

    Given Buddy was a RFA and Hawthorn had the right to match, Swans needed to make an offer they were confident Hawthorn would not match. Had Hawthorn matched, Buddy’s only option would have been to go into the pre-season draft where the Swans were not well positioned to pick him - unless Buddy put such a high price on his head that we were the only club willing to pay.

    We circumvented that (risky) scenario by making the high offer in the first place. So both Hawthorn and GWS dropped out of the competition.

    Further, the contract was not as outrageous as was portrayed (other than the risk of an early career-ending injury). Remember Andrew Ireland had history in negotiating a long, high-paying contract (Alistair Lynch, 10-year contract).

    Ireland foresaw that over the years the salary cap would expand significantly as subsequent TV rights deals were negotiated and top player salaries would expand significantly. He was totally right with the Lynch deal - so much so Brisbane renegotiated and paid Lynch more along the way or else Lynch would have been financially disadvantaged compared to other top AFL players.

    And Lynch ended up playing one additional year beyond his 10-year deal.

    Swans were on a similar path with Buddy’s contract with significant expansion of the salary cap (and some top players at other clubs being paid similar money). Until Covid hit, the consequent financial problems for the AFL and the subsequent cut to player numbers and the salary cap.

    Covid has now made the last two years of Buddy’s contract a hefty weight on our salary cap. I for one am not going to criticise Ireland (or the then Board) for not predicting a pandemic.

    Swans knew they were taking a risk and judged the potential benefits made the risks worthwhile. I am happy about that - the joy we have got from having Buddy as a Swans player outweigh the cost for me.

  5. #29
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Castlemaine, Vic.
    Posts
    8,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Meg View Post
    To the highest bidder?

    His motivation to move to Sydney (the city) was to be with his partner (now wife and mother of their two children).

    That gave him two choices: GWS who were very keen to get him; and the
    Swans.

    From various insights over the years since Buddy arrived HE was keen to come to the Swans. (And why wouldn’t he be given the choice between Giants and Swans). To make that preference a reality the Swans had to make an offer that knocked the competitors out of contention (GWS and Hawthorn who had the right to match).

    So it’s true that Swans made the highest offer. But the implication that what the Swans offered was Buddy’s motivation to come to us is an assertion not backed by known facts.

    And I believe my explanation is neither fanciful nor felonious.
    +1

  6. #30
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Castlemaine, Vic.
    Posts
    8,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruck'n'Roll View Post
    I think we're operating on different paradigms Meg.

    The question is: What known facts?

    Buddy's pronouncements as to his motivations are NOT facts, they are merely pronouncements. No more, nor less, factual than the pronouncements of any public figure.

    I am not suggesting that his pronouncements are false at all. Just that the only actual fact is the value and duration of his contract.

    I think you may be seeing implications where they weren't made. I make no comment on his motivation/character etc. or the value for money provided.

    He may have wanted to come to Sydney, in his shoes I certainly would have.
    And as has been noted, the Swans did need to top the Hawthorn offer.
    But by how much? I can't think of any free agent that's ended up staying at his existing club. Did we top the Hawthorn offer or did we over-the-top the Hawthorn offer?

    The $10 million needed to induce a move to Sydney, is hard to reconcile with the get to Sydney and win flags motivation ascribed to him.
    So your saying someone as motivated to play footy at the level Buddy plays, didn't give a rats about winning premierships....was happy to just turn up and do his thing, didn't matter if we won or lost, as long as his bank account was chockers?! Where's your facts to back up that implication? Every player plays to play in and win premierships.....it's why Buddy chose us over GWS, who also would have made him very rich.

  7. #31
    Pushing for Selection
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Bangor
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by stevoswan View Post
    If that were to unfold, I would love to see that. The Bud deserves a flag with us......and then we could all go and stand outside Mike Fitzpatrick's house and chant an expletive laden version of our club song through megaphones for days on end. That would be glorious!
    I think the AFL had plans for Buddy to lob at GWS. When he ended up with us in a somewhat secret coup I think it got us offside with the AFL, particularly one of the top dogs. Since then we seem to get the rough end of the pineapple both on and off the field

    The 2016 Grand Final free kick count of 23 to 9 is one we will never forget when our season average was close to 50/50.

    While I am not fully aware of the decisions hat went against GWS in their Prelim Final against the Dogs I think under no circumstances did the AFL want an all Sydney Grand Final knowing full well that GWS were a big chance of choking as they did in 2019. This would have handed the title and Buddy the flag.

    I doubt we will be allowed to win a flag until Buddy has retired.

  8. #32
    Ego alta, ergo ictus Ruck'n'Roll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Over here!
    Posts
    3,856
    Quote Originally Posted by Markwebbos View Post
    I always thought the $10million etc was required not to entice Buddy, but to outbid the Hawks because he was a RFA
    I'm sorry I mustn't be making myself clear. That's what I meant when I wrote "the Swans did need to top the Hawthorn offer." I then went on to pose the question "But by how much? . . . Did we top the Hawthorn offer or did we over-the-top the Hawthorn offer?"
    Last edited by Ruck'n'Roll; 31st March 2021 at 09:26 AM.
    Loose translation from the Latin is - I am tall, so I hit out.

  9. #33
    Ego alta, ergo ictus Ruck'n'Roll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Over here!
    Posts
    3,856
    Quote Originally Posted by stevoswan View Post
    So your saying . . . .
    You quote my post which suggests that people may be seeing implications in what I wrote, that aren't actually there - and then respond to that by telling me what it is I'm saying.

    Forget the Pilbara - that's some high quality irony right there.


    I think I'll back away from this conversation before some zealot accuses me of trying to barbecue a holy cow.
    Last edited by Ruck'n'Roll; 31st March 2021 at 09:19 AM.
    Loose translation from the Latin is - I am tall, so I hit out.

  10. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruck'n'Roll View Post
    I'm sorry I mustn't be making myself clear. That's what I meant when I wrote "the Swans did need to top the Hawthorn offer." I then went n to pose the question "But by how much? . . . Did we top the Hawthorn offer or did we over-the-top the Hawthorn offer?"
    Your implication is that the “over-the-top”ping of Hawthorn was driven by Buddy, not outbidding the Hawks. I’m
    Interested what evidence you have to support this?

  11. #35
    Ego alta, ergo ictus Ruck'n'Roll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Over here!
    Posts
    3,856
    Quote Originally Posted by Markwebbos View Post
    Your implication is . . .
    In view of my previous posts in this thread on ascribing implications where none are made, I can only assume you're pulling my leg by beginning your post with those 3 words. Very funny
    Loose translation from the Latin is - I am tall, so I hit out.

  12. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruck'n'Roll View Post
    Forget the Pilbara - that's some high quality irony right there.
    All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated, and well supported in logic and argument than others. -Douglas Adams, author (11 Mar 1952-2001)

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... 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