List Mgmt. #4 Dustin Martin Contract Talk - 7 MORE YEARS

[tugga]

Lose Dusty and we will take a short term hit.
This club has had its fair share of hits, so we'll rise above it as we always do.
We get three first rounders, one which will get us Naish and the other two will hopefully will land us some very good players.
We then have the money to spend on Tom Lynch or Ben Brown this time next year.
That would be the ultimate irony. Getting Brown.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Was Dusty mates with Nahas?
Nahas loved it at North.

 

[biaseddustyfan]

They think Dusty is going to take them to their next flag.

by the time they're set for a flag tilt dusty will be cooked and they'll recruit shai bolton off us for $2.5mill a year over 7 years and **** their list again

 

[Groupie_]

Geelong posted a video on facebook earlier in the day with Aaron Black. Watch from about 25 seconds
#lolnorf

what he say

 

[Longmembrey]

Actually no, there's very very few options that high earners have to avoid tax (legal ones anyway). One of the obvious moves is donating to charities but the return is modest. That's why 3rd party deals are so important on top of the playing contract. Sports stars are high on the ato's hitlist as well.

You are joking right? Take a big loan, buy a big investment, interest above rent = tax deduction....

 

[Heisenberg_]

what he say

Just watch it.



He was asked how he's enjoyed the year so far and replied he rather be at norf then they both laughed hysterically.

 

[SavDog23]

what he say

lolnorf
To be exact, norflol

 

[wart101]

I think i might just try and get used to the idea of a post DM Richmond, if he stays then thats great but i started thinking about what we else we could get with 1.2 million and its kinda exciting.

 

[SavDog23]

I think i might just try and get used to the idea of a post DM Richmond, if he stays then thats great but i started thinking about what we else we could get with 1.2 million and its kinda exciting.

We could get Lynch or Ben Brown, or go for Kelly if we have enough time.

 

[_RT_]

At the end of the day, the Cats, Lions and Hawks players all took pay cuts to keep their group together so they could win premierships and enjoy sustained success.
If one of our players wants to take money, then that is his right.
But when it comes at the expense of other players' contracts etc, then we're probably better off without him in the long run.
Of course if he stays, then we can just keep on keeping on.
$1.2mill is fair. Anymore than that wreaks of selfishness (which, again, I will say is his total right to do so).
Unfortunately I don't think Carr cares about anyone other than his client, which again, is his right to do so.
I'll back the club in on this all the way.
He stays for $1.2mill which is fair.
He leaves for more then we, as a club, are better off in the long term.
I don't blame North for going after him. They have no obligation to us and want what's best for their club, even though I honestly believe it do a lot of long term damage.

Said about a week ago, not fussed either way if he goes or stays. Plenty of clubs have lost stars in the past and still been good enough to have success and sustained success at that.

If he stays we've got arguably the best player in the game about to enter the prime years of his career with some established stars and some quality kids to surround him as we push for a flag.

If Dusty leaves then we've got at minimum $1m to spend on bringing in a replacement or 2. Plus we'll have a decent draft position with 3 first round picks to either shop for ready made players or to bring in some younger talent that can be developed for the future success of the club.

It is a win/win situation for us as far as I'm concerned.

 

[tugga]

Said about a week ago, not fussed either way if he goes or stays. Plenty of clubs have lost stars in the past and still been good enough to have success and sustained success at that.

If he stays we've got arguably the best player in the game about to enter the prime years of his career with some established stars and some quality kids to surround him as we push for a flag.

If Dusty leaves then we've got at minimum $1m to spend on bringing in a replacement or 2. Plus we'll have a decent draft position with 3 first round picks to either shop for ready made players or to bring in some younger talent that can be developed for the future success of the club.

It is a win/win situation for us as far as I'm concerned.

Not sure if it's a clear cut win/win.
it's just a shame that as we seem to be on the verge of something very good, that this has to happen.
Sometimes you just have to lol about the bad luck we get.

 

[NaturalDisaster]

Not sure if it's a clear cut win/win.
it's just a shame that as we seem to be on the verge of something very good, that this has to happen.
Sometimes you just have to lol about the bad luck we get.

AFL intervention for norf

they don't want us to be succesful

 

[Sol23]

I think i might just try and get used to the idea of a post DM Richmond, if he stays then thats great but i started thinking about what we else we could get with 1.2 million and its kinda exciting.

U can't get anything better than dusty

 

[Groupie_]

KiwiTiger 's silence is deafening

 

[the big lebowski]

I actually reckon it would be good to be able to discuss this with North posters without the usual shitfight that is occurring.
In the end, both sets of supporters just want what's best for their club.

I'll tentatively take that as an invitation.

I'd be amazed if we landed dusty, mainly because I would have thought you would match anything.

Re our $1.5 mill offer, I'm actually really proud of the club having planned for this type of offer for awhile now.

Last year we saw we weren't going to win it with the older senior players, so we cut and cut deep. In Petrie, boomer, dal, spud and especially wells we would have cut 1.5-2 mill.

Another thing the media love to not mention is that we have strategically front loaded contracts the last few years, so that gives us even more scope. We struggled to meet the min salary cap this year and have banked cap space for future use.

Lastly, we will have another cull in the next 2 years in swallow, Thomas, Thompson and Goldy. Freeing up more space. We can offer dusty, Kelly and resign brown without any worry cap issues.

If we don't get dusty or Kelly we will bank the cash and try again next year. If we got dusty but Kelly stays at gws we will front load dusty (which I think might also be a factor: dusty might get $2 - 2.5 mill next year in a front loaded contract) and go even harder at Kelly when he comes home.

Anyway. We will see what happens.

 

[LC_15]

As I said, Kelly would be a replacement, different but impactful player, take the 1.2 million and put it into him. I cant see how north think they can get both with the sort of money they are trying to outlay. Apparently I one of the mouth breathers on their board suggested front loading him 2 million a year, I can see that going bad if he decides to ask for a trade after the first 3 years at 6 mill. Oh well, you reap what you sow.

 

[Longmembrey]

Can't negative gear an employment contract.

Anyway you miss the point. The issue is the real after tax difference on the playing contract between Richmond and lolnorf.

Whatever savings he can get through tax breaks on investments are there irrespective of whether he is at Richmond or elsewhere.

Sorry mate but you negative gear personal investments which therefore reduces your personal tax bill.

If the investment is big enough, he could hypothetically pay $0 tax. Therefore the difference in gross income (ie $1.5 v $1.2) is still very real.

Those that say "oh half goes on tax" obviously don't have a decent accountant. People that earn this sort of coin have good accountants.

Personally, I think he stays. Richmond have done a hell of a lot to look after him & your offer is very fair. But, if he is all about $$ then $1.5 v $1.2 is still a significant difference.

 

[A Tiger 4 lyf]

Dan Butler and Lambert have both signed 2 year extensions, C'mon dusty

 

[ryza87]

Lol not really his loss if that happened.
We will throw that money at someone else.
I think he's coming though.

His loss?! BahahahahahahahahahahHahahahahababababababababababababahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahshahahahshahahshaha



















Hahabahahahajahajajajajsjajahahhahahhshs

 

[The Filth Wizard]

'Tis a shame, one of the things I like most is having opinions from both sides of the fence, this has just gotten nasty.
Regardless of what happens I just want it to end so we can move on and obviously hopefully we come out winners.
Still feel that we will.

I'm here all day for you Heisie.

 

[Gosha]

I'll tentatively take that as an invitation.

I'd be amazed if we landed dusty, mainly because I would have thought you would match anything.

Re our $1.5 mill offer, I'm actually really proud of the club having planned for this type of offer for awhile now.

Last year we saw we weren't going to win it with the older senior players, so we cut and cut deep. In Petrie, boomer, dal, spud and especially wells we would have cut 1.5-2 mill.

Another thing the media love to not mention is that we have strategically front loaded contracts the last few years, so that gives us even more scope. We struggled to meet the min salary cap this year and have banked cap space for future use.

Lastly, we will have another cull in the next 2 years in swallow, Thomas, Thompson and Goldy. Freeing up more space. We can offer dusty, Kelly and resign brown without any worry cap issues.

If we don't get dusty or Kelly we will bank the cash and try again next year. If we got dusty but Kelly stays at gws we will front load dusty (which I think might also be a factor: dusty might get $2 - 2.5 mill next year in a front loaded contract) and go even harder at Kelly when he comes home.

Anyway. We will see what happens.

So your football department have masterminded a wooden spoon with an ageing list? Absolutely genius

Whatever way you spin it, $1.5m for seven years is stupid money. You're absolutely deluded if you think that contract won't bite your club on the arse in its latter stages.

There will be a time when you have players you need to pay and they will be poached because you won't have the space to retain them.

Your club isn't building towards a premiership, it's building towards relevance. Enjoy.

 

[tugga]

I'll tentatively take that as an invitation.

I'd be amazed if we landed dusty, mainly because I would have thought you would match anything.

Re our $1.5 mill offer, I'm actually really proud of the club having planned for this type of offer for awhile now.

Last year we saw we weren't going to win it with the older senior players, so we cut and cut deep. In Petrie, boomer, dal, spud and especially wells we would have cut 1.5-2 mill.

Another thing the media love to not mention is that we have strategically front loaded contracts the last few years, so that gives us even more scope. We struggled to meet the min salary cap this year and have banked cap space for future use.

Lastly, we will have another cull in the next 2 years in swallow, Thomas, Thompson and Goldy. Freeing up more space. We can offer dusty, Kelly and resign brown without any worry cap issues.

If we don't get dusty or Kelly we will bank the cash and try again next year. If we got dusty but Kelly stays at gws we will front load dusty (which I think might also be a factor: dusty might get $2 - 2.5 mill next year in a front loaded contract) and go even harder at Kelly when he comes home.

Anyway. We will see what happens.

my understanding is that Kelly will not be going to North and that we will not match North's offer for Martin.
i wouldn't have thought thomas would be on much but i could be wrong?

 

[prodigy]

All you campaigners are the worst. In the space of an hour there was like 85 extra posts since I last checked. Here I was thinking something happened but it's just idle bloody chit chat. FMD absolutely killing me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ryza87]

I'll tentatively take that as an invitation.

I'd be amazed if we landed dusty, mainly because I would have thought you would match anything.

Re our $1.5 mill offer, I'm actually really proud of the club having planned for this type of offer for awhile now.

Last year we saw we weren't going to win it with the older senior players, so we cut and cut deep. In Petrie, boomer, dal, spud and especially wells we would have cut 1.5-2 mill.

Another thing the media love to not mention is that we have strategically front loaded contracts the last few years, so that gives us even more scope. We struggled to meet the min salary cap this year and have banked cap space for future use.

Lastly, we will have another cull in the next 2 years in swallow, Thomas, Thompson and Goldy. Freeing up more space. We can offer dusty, Kelly and resign brown without any worry cap issues.

If we don't get dusty or Kelly we will bank the cash and try again next year. If we got dusty but Kelly stays at gws we will front load dusty (which I think might also be a factor: dusty might get $2 - 2.5 mill next year in a front loaded contract) and go even harder at Kelly when he comes home.

Anyway. We will see what happens.

So you cut a full forward, small forward and class mids and there combined salary is going to one player? Good luck with that. #lolnorf

 

[the big lebowski]

So your football department have masterminded a wooden spoon with an ageing list? Absolutely genius

Whatever way you spin it, $1.5m for seven years is stupid money. You're absolutely deluded if you think that contract won't bite your club on the arse in its latter stages.

There will be a time when you have players you need to pay and they will be poached because you won't have the space to retain them.

Your club isn't building towards a premiership, it's building towards relevance. Enjoy.

We have the youngest list in the league

Right now the Tigers presumably are near the cap limit. North are struggling to pay the minimum. And somehow 1.2 vs 1.5 is irresponsible from us but no issues for you?

I don't think you want to understand my points.