Player Watch #6 Logan McDonald

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

I did on the weekends game

Said he was better in the ruck

Great mark in the thread once

Said he should do well against the giants week defence

Beat his one on ones in that game than he has all season , great game

Over to you Logan !!
 
The answers regarding Logans contract nearly always involves around years.

Does he want 2, 4, 10?
Does the club want 3, 5, 7?

What is the hard bit.

Logan wants 2, Club wants 7.
Logan wants 10, Club wants 3.

If It's the first, then the club can accept it eventually and negotiate in 2 years.

If It's the second, that's a very different situation.

Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk
 
The answers regarding Logans contract nearly always involves around years.

Does he want 2, 4, 10?
Does the club want 3, 5, 7?

What is the hard bit.

Logan wants 2, Club wants 7.
Logan wants 10, Club wants 3.

If It's the first, then the club can accept it eventually and negotiate in 2 years.

If It's the second, that's a very different situation.

Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk
If Logan wants to get to RFA 4 years is the logical contract length. Otherwise I would have thought the longer the better with inflation and TPP changes built in.
I can't see any real benefit to club or player going shorter than that unless Logan's manager can see a significant increase in value in 2 or 3 years.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

If Logan wants to get to RFA 4 years is the logical contract length. Otherwise I would have thought the longer the better with inflation and TPP changes built in.
I can't see any real benefit to club or player going shorter than that unless Logan's manager can see a significant increase in value in 2 or 3 years.
Manager will say go 4 to get to RFA and do it right around the next injection of the CBA so he could get a McKay type of contract but for the duration of the deal where he honestly earns well over 1m a year for many years.
 
If Logan wants to get to RFA 4 years is the logical contract length. Otherwise I would have thought the longer the better with inflation and TPP changes built in.
I can't see any real benefit to club or player going shorter than that unless Logan's manager can see a significant increase in value in 2 or 3 years.
Manager will say go 4 to get to RFA and do it right around the next injection of the CBA so he could get a McKay type of contract but for the duration of the deal where he honestly earns well over 1m a year for many years.
Indeed. 4 years is good for both, great for LM and fair for SMSS.

If so, why isn't it signed?

Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk
 
Whatever way it goes, the headlines will be polar opposite;
Re-signs with Sydney - how can they possibly have the cap to keep these players
Goes to Collingwood - incredible cap management by the premiers.

Does my head in

It's like a weekly merry-go-round this crap with Logan and Chad.

Take it as a compliment. It’s just that every other club wants a piece of our elite team and they are the biggest 2 left to re-sign.


Be surprised if Logan isn’t locked in with us soon & I’ll worry about Chad later next year after he’s got a matching pair of premiership medals. (yes, I’m lid free).
 
I was just reviewing some posts from earlier in the year, and 3 months later, it's the same thing. Years.

It is a possible negotiation tool, but it could also be a big deflection, with him leaving, diminishing any distractions.

If he doesn't sign, he can just say "We just couldn't agree on the terms of the contract, it's not about the money, we just couldn't agree on the years."

"I loved my time here blah, blah, blah" and avoids a Dawson kerfuffle.



Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Player Watch #6 Logan McDonald

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top