List Mgmt. 2024 List Management thread - Trade Targets Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pretty sure Neale was on particularly low money by the time the end of his contract was approaching.
You could say, well he signed it, but it goes a bit both ways - we could have approached his manager and said “Hey Lachie - you’re performing way above your pay grade, how about we restructure and extend your contract to factor in your improvement.” This is what we did with Treacy recently.

Back then Bell and co thought it was clever cap management to have players on way unders - not factoring the inevitable whispers in the ears from other clubs. But yeah, from all reports there was other cultural stuff at play around that time as well.
You’re making the guy look like a saint.
His pimp went and found a club willing to fork out huge coin.
The front loading got it done and of course as soon as that was expiring his pimp fed out stories about his wife wanting to return home for support with children. Lo and behold the wife didn’t need the family support as soon as Brisbane found the extra money to reinstate the Front loaded amount.
 
Last edited:
You’re making the guy look like a saint.
His pimp went and found a club willing to fork out huge coin.
The front loading got it done and of course as soon as that was expiring his pimp fed out stories about his wife wanting to return home for support with children. Lo and behold the wife didn’t need the family support as soon as Brisbane found the extra money to reinstate the Front loaded amount.

I said very little about Neale's moral worth in my post - the post was entirely about the club being proactive about keeping talent.

But if you want to go there - yes, I can understand why Neale and his manager would end up looking over the fence when he's busting a gut every week, getting paid way unders, and there's blokes in the team taking the piss when it comes to professionalism - as there was at the time.
 
I said very little about Neale's moral worth in my post - the post was entirely about the club being proactive about keeping talent.

But if you want to go there - yes, I can understand why Neale and his manager would end up looking over the fence when he's busting a gut every week, getting paid way unders, and there's blokes in the team taking the piss when it comes to professionalism - as there was at the time.
I dare say if we were as stringent on our "No d1(khead" policy then as we are now, we might still have had Lachie.

Caveat being we would have to be paying him what he was quite clearly worth.

I hold no ill will towards Lachie, he went where he was quite clearly valued and I don't really want to dwell on what the team lineup might have looked like if he'd stayed.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I dare say if we were as stringent on our "No d1(khead" policy then as we are now, we might still have had Lachie.

Caveat being we would have to be paying him what he was quite clearly worth.

I hold no ill will towards Lachie, he went where he was quite clearly valued and I don't really want to dwell on what the team lineup might have looked like if he'd stayed.

Yeah I'm slightly weary of even contributing to the Neale discussion - that whole Neale/Hogan restump era has been done to death on here - and that path, warts and all, has lead us to where we are, which is a place I'm pretty happy with (potential looming disappointment with the end of this season acknowledged).

I guess my point was the interplay between contracts, clubs, players and agents is a pretty complex palette and it's usually never as black and white as player x is a mercenary etc.
 
Kirsten and McCarthy were more mediums rather than proper talls were they not?
Kersten and McCarthy were definitely more medium type forwards, I always saw McCarthy as a third tall, however due to Apeness being consistently injured and Lyon's refusal to play Taberner in 2017, Kersten and McCarthy were our two key forwards by default.
 
Personally I think the AFL and probably Australian sport in general and it's fans need to grow up a little bit.

Players getting transferred mid contract in most other major sports is just normal. It probably is in the AFL tbf but fans seem to think it shouldn't be. Why exactly?
The difference is players have no say where they go in other sports/leagues. In the AFL the player basically has 100% control over being traded. If it went both ways and clubs could trade whoever they wanted at any time it would be different.
 
The difference is players have no say where they go in other sports/leagues. In the AFL the player basically has 100% control over being traded. If it went both ways and clubs could trade whoever they wanted at any time it would be different.

There's no go home factor in England. Everyone hates their home towns as much as they hate the town down the road. Gloucester = shithole but better than that shithole Cheltenham etc. Probably because they all look the same. Gray with a crowd outside the pharmacy on a Thursday waiting for their methodone.
 
The difference is players have no say where they go in other sports/leagues. In the AFL the player basically has 100% control over being traded. If it went both ways and clubs could trade whoever they wanted at any time it would be different.
I'm more a fan of the big European football leagues than American sports tbh.

Good players don't generally come out of contract (occasionally it happens - see Messi few years ago) but players force transfers all the time. I've seen players ask for a transfer, sign a new contract after it doesn't happen and then get transferred a year later. Not sure anyone really thought much of it either.

It's a different environment and we're heading imo even if we're ten years behind. Got to get used to it.
 
There's no go home factor in England. Everyone hates their home towns as much as they hate the town down the road. Gloucester = shithole but better than that shithole Cheltenham etc. Probably because they all look the same. Gray with a crowd outside the pharmacy on a Thursday waiting for their methodone.
AFL players are a bit unprofessional when it comes to this. Plenty of regular people have to move to other states for work. They need to stop being entitled babies and put on the big boy pants. There are sacrifices in life for everybody. You want to live out your dream and play sport at the highest level well this is one of them.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I'm more a fan of the big European football leagues than American sports tbh.

Good players don't generally come out of contract (occasionally it happens - see Messi few years ago) but players force transfers all the time. I've seen players ask for a transfer, sign a new contract after it doesn't happen and then get transferred a year later. Not sure anyone really thought much of it either.

It's a different environment and we're heading imo even if we're ten years behind. Got to get used to it.
But European football is a bit of a joke when you consider that realistically in the top leagues it's just the same huge clubs year after year who have any real chance of winning anything. And so that's where all the best players end up, No parity, salary caps or draft so it's a bit of a free for all.
 
Of course go home factor is going to be more important the less you earn. Why bother even comparing to other sports. People are much more likely to live away from friends and family when they’re getting paid tens of millions a year compared to hundreds of thousands.

Not to mention the UK is as big as Victoria. Can’t complain of being homesick when the furthest city is an hour flight away.
 
Wouldn’t be against signing Luke Parker for a year or two.
 
But European football is a bit of a joke when you consider that realistically in the top leagues it's just the same huge clubs year after year who have any real chance of winning anything. And so that's where all the best players end up, No parity, salary caps or draft so it's a bit of a free for all.

I really don’t think it’s about where players are going when talking about AFL tbh. I will admit that they’re completely different environments and I think that creates some differences.

But I think the concept that a contract for x amount of years means you’ll play for a team for x amount years will soon be an outdated concept and realistically for clubs and players that is already recognised . Fans and media are probably 3-5 years behind seeing what’s happening naturally.

Longer term contracts in AFL have become more normal imo. I’ve seen in European football where it increases a player’s value and also where a contract of an underperforming players completely devalues them. We’ll see less and less uncontracted players moving clubs via trades and most out of contract players will be fringe players and/or guys about to be delisted anyway. Maybe free agency will stop that.

We’re almost at a point where we’re trying to find a medium between the system in American sports and the system in European football IMO. Things will change and they’ll be a bit from each system as we’re 10-15 years behind these sports in working out what’s best for the AFL.
 
A little birdy tells me the reason Bob Murphy is leaving Freo is because of who we are bringing in on trade.
It seems none other than the Bont & his partner are looking to make a life in the West.
Watch this space.


On SM-G960F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Quick, add the Bont to the poll. I want to change my vote.
 
A little birdy tells me the reason Bob Murphy is leaving Freo is because of who we are bringing in on trade.
It seems none other than the Bont & his partner are looking to make a life in the West.
Watch this space.


On SM-G960F using BigFooty.com mobile app
That is seriously the biggest rumour-mongering ever... There is no way..
 
Of course go home factor is going to be more important the less you earn. Why bother even comparing to other sports. People are much more likely to live away from friends and family when they’re getting paid tens of millions a year compared to hundreds of thousands.

Not to mention the UK is as big as Victoria. Can’t complain of being homesick when the furthest city is an hour flight away.

Or 5 hours and considerably pricier with multiple changes via train because UK.
 
I really don’t think it’s about where players are going when talking about AFL tbh. I will admit that they’re completely different environments and I think that creates some differences.

But I think the concept that a contract for x amount of years means you’ll play for a team for x amount years will soon be an outdated concept and realistically for clubs and players that is already recognised . Fans and media are probably 3-5 years behind seeing what’s happening naturally.

Longer term contracts in AFL have become more normal imo. I’ve seen in European football where it increases a player’s value and also where a contract of an underperforming players completely devalues them. We’ll see less and less uncontracted players moving clubs via trades and most out of contract players will be fringe players and/or guys about to be delisted anyway. Maybe free agency will stop that.

We’re almost at a point where we’re trying to find a medium between the system in American sports and the system in European football IMO. Things will change and they’ll be a bit from each system as we’re 10-15 years behind these sports in working out what’s best for the AFL.
Some good points. Just very different systems to compare. Transfers in football are usually teams just straight up buying players where in the AFL it's all about trading assets(mostly draft picks but occasionally player swaps).
 
Some good points. Just very different systems to compare. Transfers in football are usually teams just straight up buying players where in the AFL it's all about trading assets(mostly draft picks but occasionally player swaps).

There’s no draft picks in association football so the transfer system can never be the same.

Contracts can work in a similar way tbh. Players with one or less years left often get sold for less money than players with heaps of years left. Difference is seeing players everyone knows won’t stay signing long term deals and leaving 12-24 months later isn’t uncommon. It benefits the players current club whilst I believe players get a cut of the transfer fee so increasing their sale price also benefits them.

I don’t think we’re too far off players re-signing for 4-5 years and leaving after 1-3 years happening quite regularly tbh. I also don’t think the league would be any worse off for it - people will complain though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top