Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Salary for Burgess and Schoenberg for 2025 has already been paid? Surely not.
The money is guaranteed both in terms of salary and cap space.
We could cut Burgess from our list, however we still have to pay him out his full contact value and his salary is still counted in our salary cap.
Yeah and it worked for Richmond, what if it doesn’t work, it hasn’t worked for Sydney for two attempts.
Maybe they are the exception not the rule? How many sides went in with a stable ruck?
Geelong, Melbourne.
west coast and Brisbane would have, but for injury, collingwoods had been there awhile.
Don't believe so, hence why situations like Burgess and Harry happen all the time these days.Surely not the case. There are incentives which are part of the Cap.
You could cut Burgess - freeing up a list space - and then change around existing salaries to accommodate room for a new player.
Don't believe so, hence why situations like Burgess and Harry happen all the time these days.
It's an interesting question, would love to know the answerThats interesting to me.
Surely incentives, match payments etc are all fluid during the season?
Not sure there’s many calling for a heavy investment into one though.Well shit - Ruckman wasn't the issue for Sydney.
There are a million other things that need to work before we worry about our ruckman.
We have a pretty stable ruckman. Has played 84 of the 90 possible games across the last 4 seasons.
I am all for getting a stable ruck. Just not investing much into it. Happy with a ROB level ruckman.
Cooper Duff-Tytler looks the best pure ruck at this point. Louis Emmett a very competitive ruck/forward looks a ripper but recruiters may see him as more a KPF.Talent watchers, what is the ruckman talent like for this forthcoming years draft?
I'm happy for that.I'm in the team that thinks that this post will likely come back to haunt you.
Interesting.
If the salary cap is at $14.7 million. That makes a list average of 367k. You would think that players like Burgess would be on a fair bit less than the average?
Yes you can. You can shuffle the cap - the good teams do it. Kick the can down the road.
The Salary for Burgess and Schoenberg for 2025 has already been paid? Surely not.
No current season stats available
No current season stats available
To be fair, Vader has explained this more than a dozen times.Vader Is this true?
(Sorry, seems like a thing now that you have to explain this - and not a go at you latinoheat )
The Collective Bargaining Agreement dictates that the player's base and a certain number of match payments need to be paid out as a termination lump sum payment when a player is delisted.Surely not the case. There are incentives which are part of the Cap.
You could cut Burgess - freeing up a list space - and then change around existing salaries to accommodate room for a new player.
I feel like Scorpus needs to pin this post.The Collective Bargaining Agreement dictates that the player's base and a certain number of match payments need to be paid out as a termination lump sum payment when a player is delisted.
The AFL Rules document dictates that the termination lump sum payment needs to be included in the salary cap in the year of the delisting.
Essentially, his 2025 salary would need to be included in our 2024 salary cap.
The problem with this is that the 2024 cap is already full, as a result of players being paid and future payments brought forward to create space in our salary caps for future years.
On SM-X205 using BigFooty.com mobile app
The old, passionate Kristof would get angry if the club wasted a late pick on a mascotI'm happy for that.
I'm not hoping the kid doesn't succeed - I'm more saying that players at pick 53 rarely become game changers.
The Collective Bargaining Agreement dictates that the player's base and a certain number of match payments need to be paid out as a termination lump sum payment when a player is delisted.
The AFL Rules document dictates that the termination lump sum payment needs to be included in the salary cap in the year of the delisting.
Essentially, his 2025 salary would need to be included in our 2024 salary cap.
The problem with this is that the 2024 cap is already full, as a result of players being paid and future payments brought forward to create space in our salary caps for future years.
On SM-X205 using BigFooty.com mobile app
True, he was a high spirited bloke. Drafting Claude the Crow wasn't a highlight.The old, passionate Kristof would get angry if the club wasted a late pick on a mascot
We still have the ability to pay anywhere from 95 to 105% of the $15.8 million salary cap, depending on how we've structured it.
Unless we are forced into a 95% salary cap this year from a huge overspend in previous years, there would have been some flexibility.
A 2% swing (let's say 102% spend in 2024 and 98% in 2025) is $320k which should be more than enough to pay out one of our lowest contracts. And noting that we are forced to pay that total amount in 2025 anyway if they stay on the list, so the only thing changing is moving from a 100%-100% spend to accommodate that contract over two years, to 102%-98% to accommodate that in 1 year.
The only reason we wouldn't be able to do that is if we've forced ourselves into a position of zero cap flexibility due to overspending in prior years. Maybe that's the case, but our list has certainly not deserved it and there's little advantage to front loading to the degree it lowers our salary cap in future years.
I argued the same that we should have flexibility. Surely we haven’t gone to the 105% level YETWe still have the ability to pay anywhere from 95 to 105% of the $15.8 million salary cap, depending on how we've structured it.
Unless we are forced into a 95% salary cap this year from a huge overspend in previous years, there would have been some flexibility.
A 2% swing (let's say 102% spend in 2024 and 98% in 2025) is $320k which should be more than enough to pay out one of our lowest contracts. And noting that we are forced to pay that total amount in 2025 anyway if they stay on the list, so the only thing changing is moving from a 100%-100% spend to accommodate that contract over two years, to 102%-98% to accommodate that in 1 year.
The only reason we wouldn't be able to do that is if we've forced ourselves into a position of zero cap flexibility due to overspending in prior years. Maybe that's the case, but our list has certainly not deserved it and there's little advantage to front loading to the degree it lowers our salary cap in future years. The fact we have recontracted or restructured contracts very early suggests it's more likely we are struggling to hit the salary floor then being hard up on the cap limit
I'm suggesting we pushed as much of our 2025 & 2026 salary as we could into our 2024 cap, creating space for the offers we made to ANB/Cumming/Peatling.We still have the ability to pay anywhere from 95 to 105% of the $15.8 million salary cap, depending on how we've structured it.
Unless we are forced into a 95% salary cap this year from a huge overspend in previous years, there would have been some flexibility.
A 2% swing (let's say 102% spend in 2024 and 98% in 2025) is $320k which should be more than enough to pay out one of our lowest contracts. And noting that we are forced to pay that total amount in 2025 anyway if they stay on the list, so the only thing changing is moving from a 100%-100% spend to accommodate that contract over two years, to 102%-98% to accommodate that in 1 year.
The only reason we wouldn't be able to do that is if we've forced ourselves into a position of zero cap flexibility due to overspending in prior years. Maybe that's the case, but our list has certainly not deserved it and there's little advantage to front loading to the degree it lowers our salary cap in future years. The fact we have recontracted or restructured contracts very early suggests it's more likely we are struggling to hit the salary floor then being hard up on the cap limit
It probably happens a lot more with rucks that go late/rookie/MSD than most other roles, and maybe not gamechangers but way way above average ruckmen and many decent lead rucks like the current Tristan Xerri, Lloyd Meek, Jordan Sweet and ***Sam Draper and let's not forget Reilly O'BrienI'm happy for that.
I'm not hoping the kid doesn't succeed - I'm more saying that players at pick 53 rarely become game changers.
Yeah, that's fair.It probably happens a lot more with rucks that go late/rookie/MSD than most other roles, and maybe not gamechangers but way way above average ruckmen and many decent lead rucks like the current Tristan Xerri, Lloyd Meek, Jordan Sweet and ***Sam Draper and let's not forget Reilly O'Brien
Dean Cox #28 Rookie Draft
Aaron Sandilands #33 Rookie Draft
Jarrod Witts #67 National Draft
Rowan Marshall #10 Rookie Draft
Oscar McInerny #37 Rookie Draft
Shane Mumford #67 National Draft
Stefan Martin #3 Preseason Draft
Sam Jacobs #1 Rookie Draft
Darren Jolly #31 Rookie Draft