Mega Thread All Things Tom Scully - Part II: "We can't lose Tom"

[DaveyTrainxpress]

A history? Once? Come off it

And you do understand the notion of Front Loading / Back Loading contracts? Surely

You do realise that the majority of contracts in the AFL are structured this way

When they report contract conditions, they talk in the average over the span of the contract. The reality is, every (most) contracts would have a ascending / descending per year pay scale

We would not be paying Scully $600k, $600k, $600k, $600k, $600k

And you think Scully if he were to get $1.5m in the 1st season would blow that and then have to live on a "measly" $330k per year?

I'm sure plenty of that would be used to set up his finances for the length of the contract

Do you happen to remember the way Kouta's contract was structured??

Earnt a low wage (figuratively speaking) in the 1st few years and that increased to $1m in the last year

In respect of the others contracts you mentioned, Scully's would / could be structured in such a way that when he was down to $330k p.a, the likes of Tren / Watts etc. would be earning their "peak" amount

Seriously, if you believe that they get the flat averaged amount each year on the contracts, you're proving that you are unsure of how these structures work

Seriously, get your head out of your arse mate. I guess you know everything about contracts hey? lol

Did I say Scully would blow his 1.5m? No I didn't. If you had read any of my previous posts about this topic you would know that I think Scully getting 400-500k a year (at Melbourne) is more then enough to set him up for life so if he takes the GWS offer he is simply money hungry.

Stop talking like you know the ins and outs of a footy club, you and everyone else on here (including myself) knows jack all about how a footy clubs works. Unless you have worked in one (no being a volunteer doesn't count) then stop acting like you're top s***

If you actually think Scully is work 1.5 in one year then you know nothing about the game. Potential is a big word!

 

[Spirit of 39]

Viney, I would stop trying to reason with this bloke. He just doesn't get it. He has no concept of what front loading and rear loading contracts are, and how they can be used to fit players under a salary cap. Or the fact that MFC has been front loading existing contracts for 2-3 years now so that when Scully, Trengove, Watts etc. come out of contract we will have plenty of room to move.

How about giving our list management team SOME credit. Do you think that they would not have been preparing for these expansion team raids on our list many years ago??? Do you think that when we got these high draft picks they would not have been putting plans in place for the years to come when these players are worth a lot more???

 

[Viney]

Seriously, get your head out of your arse mate. I guess you know everything about contracts hey? lol

Did I say Scully would blow his 1.5m? No I didn't. If you had read any of my previous posts about this topic you would know that I think Scully getting 400-500k a year (at Melbourne) is more then enough to set him up for life so if he takes the GWS offer he is simply money hungry.

Stop talking like you know the ins and outs of a footy club, you and everyone else on here (including myself) knows jack all about how a footy clubs works. Unless you have worked in one (no being a volunteer doesn't count) then stop acting like you're top s***

If you actually think Scully is work 1.5 in one year then you know nothing about the game. Potential is a big word!

Wow, touch aggressive wouldn't you say?

It's nothing to do with working in a football department - it's simply understanding basic business principles

Have you not heard of front loading and back ending contracts?

Who said Tom Scully is worth $1.5m p.a.? Players are evaluated on their OVERALL contract, not on a per annum basis

Melbourne would be saying Tom is worth $3m over 5 years - not $1.5m this year, $500k next year etc.

I think it's you who is clearly showing a lack of understanding

Plus, I've said all along, we'll be paying overs to keep Scully

My opinion is if Scully leaves, he is not doing it for money, he is doing it for another reason

I still think he'll stay

 

[Viney]

Viney, I would stop trying to reason with this bloke. He just doesn't get it. He has no concept of what front loading and rear loading contracts are, and how they can be used to fit players under a salary cap. Or the fact that MFC has been front loading existing contracts for 2-3 years now so that when Scully, Trengove, Watts etc. come out of contract we will have plenty of room to move.

How about giving our list management team SOME credit. Do you think that they would not have been preparing for these expansion team raids on our list many years ago??? Do you think that when we got these high draft picks they would not have been putting plans in place for the years to come when these players are worth a lot more???

Haha fair enough

I guess the equation is a $3m over 5 year contract = $600 p.a. in salary cap no questions asked??

 

[CowboyFromHell]

Seriously, get your head out of your arse mate. I guess you know everything about contracts hey? lol

Did I say Scully would blow his 1.5m? No I didn't. If you had read any of my previous posts about this topic you would know that I think Scully getting 400-500k a year (at Melbourne) is more then enough to set him up for life so if he takes the GWS offer he is simply money hungry.

Stop talking like you know the ins and outs of a footy club, you and everyone else on here (including myself) knows jack all about how a footy clubs works. Unless you have worked in one (no being a volunteer doesn't count) then stop acting like you're top s***

If you actually think Scully is work 1.5 in one year then you know nothing about the game. Potential is a big word!

I fail to see how Viney is acting like top shit. All I see him doing is making some extremely valid points regarding the way contracts will be structured and how clubs go about it. You don't need to work in a footy club to know this as it's common knowledge.

Your last sentence actually proves you don't exactly understand how everything works. I've got no problem with Scully getting paid 1.5 million in one of the seasons as it would simply mean he would be paid much less in the other seasons. They sign the contract over a certain amount of years and, before they sign, they understand what they will get paid in each year that will eventually add up to the final amount. The club will do that to make sure they can re-sign all our other key players as we aren't stupid enough to jeopardise our future for one player, no matter how good he is.

 

[Spirit of 39]

Haha fair enough

I guess the equation is a $3m over 5 year contract = $600 p.a. in salary cap no questions asked??

Ha ha. I heard we even have an acoountant down at the club these days who can use a calculator. Who would have thought....

 

[DaveyTrainxpress]

hahaha yeah I know nothing about footy.. everyone else on here know's it all.

Saying that if Scully goes then its not about money is a joke! Why would be go then? Coz he isn't happy about other thinks the footy department is doing?

All you know what to say is "you don't understand this and you don't understand that" get over yourself

For a second year player to think so highly of themselves in concerning, how about earning a pay rise?

Its also good to know that so many on here think only guys like footy...

 

[Topkent]

there will be no problems paying scully 15 million over 5 years if we can fit in under the cap NOW.. you people have to think about in 5 years time at the end of his next deal

say melb end up payin ave 750k per year...
he is now a 100 game player with an AA nomination and so on

its only logical that if he was worth 750k he will now demand 1.2 mil..
jack trengove is now due to re sign.. melbourne offer 600k, trengove says in all due respect sculls is earning over the mil barrier i want more, but the club cant afford to because they had just recently resigned watts on a 650k deal as he is a 2 time CHF AA, do you think the club is gonna say to trenners sorry mate we need you to take a pay cut to keep the group together, while scully earns twice as much?

all clubs need there best players to take pay cuts eventually... i just hope this group is willing to shave figures off there deals to keep sculls around

because your jamars, petterds, trengoves, tapscotts etc can all earn more money playing in there home states .. you dont think eventually the crows and port arent gonna try make huge offers jamar, trengove, and tappy.. we need as much spare cash as possible

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

The boys need to realise that if they want success they are going to have to take some pay cuts. That's just the nature of the salary cap in a club which has a lot of talent.

 

[Topkent]

The boys need to realise that if they want success they are going to have to take some pay cuts. That's just the nature of the salary cap in a club which has a lot of talent.[/quote]


exactly, one rule for 43 blokes, another for 1 bloke

 

[Viney]

hahaha yeah I know nothing about footy.. everyone else on here know's it all.

Saying that if Scully goes then its not about money is a joke! Why would be go then? Coz he isn't happy about other thinks the footy department is doing?

All you know what to say is "you don't understand this and you don't understand that" get over yourself

For a second year player to think so highly of themselves in concerning, how about earning a pay rise?

Its also good to know that so many on here think only guys like footy...

Simple question then. Do you understand the nature of front loading and back ending contracts?

there will be no problems paying scully 15 million over 5 years if we can fit in under the cap NOW.. you people have to think about in 5 years time at the end of his next deal

say melb end up payin ave 750k per year...
he is now a 100 game player with an AA nomination and so on

its only logical that if he was worth 750k he will now demand 1.2 mil..
jack trengove is now due to re sign.. melbourne offer 600k, trengove says in all due respect sculls is earning over the mil barrier i want more, but the club cant afford to because they had just recently resigned watts on a 650k deal as he is a 2 time CHF AA, do you think the club is gonna say to trenners sorry mate we need you to take a pay cut to keep the group together, while scully earns twice as much?

all clubs need there best players to take pay cuts eventually... i just hope this group is willing to shave figures off there deals to keep sculls around

because your jamars, petterds, trengoves, tapscotts etc can all earn more money playing in there home states .. you dont think eventually the crows and port arent gonna try make huge offers jamar, trengove, and tappy.. we need as much spare cash as possible

Again it's to do with front loading and back ending

If in year 3 of his contract, scully is earning roughly $330k per annum, then in that year there is room to give Trengove $600 - $700k etc. per annum

Jamar turned down an offer from Port, who says Tren / Tap want to go back to SA? Who says these players will come on to earn that sort of coin? Who's to say they wont accept a lower amount to keep the group together? Geelong players publically stated they would

The club knows what they are doing, they know how to structure contracts to ensure when renegotiations are up for other players, they'll need cap sapce

If the club thought that signing scully on these figures was going to throw the baby out with the bath water, there's no way they'd be doing it

Have faith they know what they're doing

 

[Topkent]

Simple question then. Do you understand the nature of front loading and back ending contracts?



Again it's to do with front loading and back ending

If in year 3 of his contract, scully is earning roughly $330k per annum, then in that year there is room to give Trengove $600 - $700k etc. per annum

Jamar turned down an offer from Port, who says Tren / Tap want to go back to SA? Who says these players will come on to earn that sort of coin? Who's to say they wont accept a lower amount to keep the group together? Geelong players publically stated they would

The club knows what they are doing, they know how to structure contracts to ensure when renegotiations are up for other players, they'll need cap sapce

If the club thought that signing scully on these figures was going to throw the baby out with the bath water, there's no way they'd be doing it

Have faith they know what they're doing

you guys should lay off daveytrain cuz your just as confusing?

at the end of the day front loading back loading still means you can only pay (i think the caps 8mil) 40 mil over 5 years.. they wont have a problem in the next 5 years with paying contracts, im talking about later on now that you have told sculls he is worth x now, he is gonna be worth x plus some later

look at the contradiction! you say who says trengove and tapscott will be worth that sort of coin, yet numerous times on here people are justifying paying scully shit loads over the top because he 'will' be the next judd, he has done **** all so far and we want to pay him on potential.. so therefore watts/trengove/frawley/tapscott/gys all deserve huge pay rises immediately

it just seems strange to me that on one hand you guys will expect our group to all take pay cuts to stay together, yet your willing to pay overs for ONE player who is nothing but potential atm

i hope the melbourne footy club gets it right, but they will set a very dangerous precedent if they choose this path

 

[Viney]

you guys should lay off daveytrain cuz your just as confusing?

at the end of the day front loading back loading still means you can only pay (i think the caps 8mil) 40 mil over 5 years.. they wont have a problem in the next 5 years with paying contracts, im talking about later on now that you have told sculls he is worth x now, he is gonna be worth x plus some later

look at the contradiction! you say who says trengove and tapscott will be worth that sort of coin, yet numerous times on here people are justifying paying scully shit loads over the top because he 'will' be the next judd, he has done **** all so far and we want to pay him on potential.. so therefore watts/trengove/frawley/tapscott/gys all deserve huge pay rises immediately

it just seems strange to me that on one hand you guys will expect our group to all take pay cuts to stay together, yet your willing to pay overs for ONE player who is nothing but potential atm

i hope the melbourne footy club gets it right, but they will set a very dangerous precedent if they choose this path

The Scully situation is unique, due to the GWS factor - that is why we have to pay overs for Scully

I don't profess to know everything about football, but I see far more than just potential in Scully. His first 2 seasons have been outstanding, especially considering his delayed start to this year

The reality is, we may not have to give the Trens and Taps a pay cut, due to the way contracts could be structured

Let's look at an example

Scully:

2012 $1.5m
2013 $500k
2014 $330k
2015 $330k
2016 $330k

Trengove

2012 (Already Contracted)
2013 $300k
2014 $400k
2015 $500k

By this time, we will have Davey and Jamar able to go on to Vets list, so only half their income is included in the cap

Also, a lot of the argument about the cap sapce rests on the provisio that guys like Watts take the next step, Tappy takes the next step etc.

The reality is, Tapscott MAY be a good solid player, market value maybe $250k p.a - who knows

and yes, I know that contradicts offering Scully a huge contract - but we are in a unique position now with GWS

It's unfortunate we have to pay over the odds as far as I'm concerned to retain Scully, thank the media and GWS for that

But I see it as an investment for the future

Scully is way more than potential, and anyone talking down his ability as far as I'm concerned is purely trying to soften the blow if he leaves

I also fail to see how we are being confusing?

We are simply saying that if you get a $3m 5 year contract, those payments can be structured to accomodate the playing list

The salary cap is judged annually, not over a 5 year period - as long as we are within the cap each year, nothing else matters

Keep in mind the club has stated they have front loaded youngsters contracts now to ensure when people are up for renegotion

 

[CowboyFromHell]

you guys should lay off daveytrain cuz your just as confusing?

What a surprise, nickgrant comes out of the woodwork to defend his little e-girlfriend. What next mate? Setting up an e-date?

We'll "lay off" when "she" understands the nature of how to front load and back end contracts which seems completely lost to "her".

 

[CowboyFromHell]

The Scully situation is unique, due to the GWS factor - that is why we have to pay overs for Scully

I don't profess to know everything about football, but I see far more than just potential in Scully. His first 2 seasons have been outstanding, especially considering his delayed start to this year

The reality is, we may not have to give the Trens and Taps a pay cut, due to the way contracts could be structured

Let's look at an example

Scully:

2012 $1.5m
2013 $500k
2014 $330k
2015 $330k
2016 $330k

Trengove

2012 (Already Contracted)
2013 $300k
2014 $400k
2015 $500k

By this time, we will have Davey and Jamar able to go on to Vets list, so only half their income is included in the cap

Also, a lot of the argument about the cap sapce rests on the provisio that guys like Watts take the next step, Tappy takes the next step etc.

The reality is, Tapscott MAY be a good solid player, market value maybe $250k p.a - who knows

and yes, I know that contradicts offering Scully a huge contract - but we are in a unique position now with GWS

It's unfortunate we have to pay over the odds as far as I'm concerned to retain Scully, thank the media and GWS for that

But I see it as an investment for the future

Scully is way more than potential, and anyone talking down his ability as far as I'm concerned is purely trying to soften the blow if he leaves

I also fail to see how we are being confusing?

We are simply saying that if you get a $3m 5 year contract, those payments can be structured to accomodate the playing list

The salary cap is judged annually, not over a 5 year period - as long as we are within the cap each year, nothing else matters

Keep in mind the club has stated they have front loaded youngsters contracts now to ensure when people are up for renegotion

Stop being so clear about things mate, it's not in keeping with this thread!

 

[Viney]

Stop being so clear about things mate, it's not in keeping with this thread!

Oh sorry..... Scully 2 GWS, wtf, mercenary, money hungry souless scumbag, signed in October, sky falling....etc etc

more like it ?

 

[Topkent]

What a surprise, nickgrant comes out of the woodwork to defend his little e-girlfriend. What next mate? Setting up an e-date?

We'll "lay off" when "she" understands the nature of how to front load and back end contracts which seems completely lost to "her".

your talents wasted here theres a d grade comedy show on down at the pub and youd be a great warm up act

i dont understand how ive come out of the woodwork ive posted about 15 times today...

i completely understand the nature of front loading backloading contracts, we pay more now so we pay less later, but im not talkin about this bunch of contracts im talking about the next bunch.. you need room to wriggle and they have now put a minimum value on scullys next deal... from now we have guaranteed for the rest of his playing days scully will be the highest paid player at the dees even though watts/frawley/trengove become better players.. at some stage all of those top few draft picks are gonna want and deserve much higher deals and its going to be harder to please them all if we are already paying scully so much... frawley is more valuable simple as that, if it was a choice between scully and frawley every single afl club would pick frawley.. so we should not pay overs to keep this kid..

 

[Viney]

your talents wasted here theres a d grade comedy show on down at the pub and youd be a great warm up act

i dont understand how ive come out of the woodwork ive posted about 15 times today...

i completely understand the nature of front loading backloading contracts, we pay more now so we pay less later, but im not talkin about this bunch of contracts im talking about the next bunch.. you need room to wriggle and they have now put a minimum value on scullys next deal... from now we have guaranteed for the rest of his playing days scully will be the highest paid player at the dees even though watts/frawley/trengove become better players.. at some stage all of those top few draft picks are gonna want and deserve much higher deals and its going to be harder to please them all if we are already paying scully so much... frawley is more valuable simple as that, if it was a choice between scully and frawley every single afl club would pick frawley.. so we should not pay overs to keep this kid..

In the next lot of contract negotiations, then the club will front load / back end them accordingly, it's simple

How do you think Collingwood has managed to do it? Geelong?

The fact is, Scully's next contract may be a reduced contract. He may be satisfied with a lower amount

Keep in mind - no one knows the motivation Scully had for putting off talks. It may've simply been a recommendation of his manager and he's accepted that. It really, IMO, is the media etc. that has whipped this up into the frenzy it is

I feel sorry for Scully. A young kid, taken the advice of his manager during his 1st contract, and now he's being labelled a merc, a money grabber, greedy, a heathen and basically being told to F off from the club by some of the supporters

I mean you yourself have said you hate him......insane!

 

[Gazza_11]

hahaha yeah I know nothing about footy.. everyone else on here know's it all.

Saying that if Scully goes then its not about money is a joke! Why would be go then? Coz he isn't happy about other thinks the footy department is doing?

All you know what to say is "you don't understand this and you don't understand that" get over yourself

For a second year player to think so highly of themselves in concerning, how about earning a pay rise?

Its also good to know that so many on here think only guys like footy...

You either don't understand front/back loading, or are simply bad at maths.

 

[DaveyTrainxpress]

What a surprise, nickgrant comes out of the woodwork to defend his little e-girlfriend. What next mate? Setting up an e-date?

We'll "lay off" when "she" understands the nature of how to front load and back end contracts which seems completely lost to "her".

What a loser you are lol whats with the " " ? Am I lying that I'm female?
You do know that you can't go over the crap?

How is front load and back end contracts lost to me? You are only thinking of the now whereas I'm thinking in about 5 years time.

I go for the Melbourne Football Club not the Tom Scully Football club like you.

 

[DaveyTrainxpress]

your talents wasted here theres a d grade comedy show on down at the pub and youd be a great warm up act

i dont understand how ive come out of the woodwork ive posted about 15 times today...

i completely understand the nature of front loading backloading contracts, we pay more now so we pay less later, but im not talkin about this bunch of contracts im talking about the next bunch.. you need room to wriggle and they have now put a minimum value on scullys next deal... from now we have guaranteed for the rest of his playing days scully will be the highest paid player at the dees even though watts/frawley/trengove become better players.. at some stage all of those top few draft picks are gonna want and deserve much higher deals and its going to be harder to please them all if we are already paying scully so much... frawley is more valuable simple as that, if it was a choice between scully and frawley every single afl club would pick frawley.. so we should not pay overs to keep this kid..

Yeah but they are only thinking of the now, whereas we are thinking about later on...guess that means we don't understand lol

Some people just think their opinion is the ONLY one that matters and should run our footy club.

Look at the bigger picture, one club doesn't equal a team

 

[CowboyFromHell]

What a loser you are lol whats with the " " ? Am I lying that I'm female?
You do know that you can't go over the crap?

How is front load and back end contracts lost to me? You are only thinking of the now whereas I'm thinking in about 5 years time.

I go for the Melbourne Football Club not the Tom Scully Football club like you.

Ouch. No, really. Ouch.

It's lost to you because we will pay Scully more NOW and less later so in five years time the kid is being paid only 300k of the contract he signed so there is more money there to sign other players. It really is that simple. That 300k is what is being put towards the salary cap for that year. If we front load and pay him 1 million for 2012 then that is what is counted towards the salary cap for that year when others like Trengove, Tapscott, Gysberts etc are still on their base rookie salary or the equivalent and we have the space.

When they come out of contract and we re-sign them that is the year of Scully's contract that may only pay him 500k so we can still re-sign other players. Or we pay Scully another million and back end the contracts so by 2015 Scully is getting 300k and Trengove 500k, but that's just an example.

I can't fathom what is so hard to understand about that.

And how noble of you to go for MFC and not the TSFC. I don't think anyone here is any different just because we make sense.

 

[Viney]

What a loser you are lol whats with the " " ? Am I lying that I'm female?
You do know that you can't go over the crap?

How is front load and back end contracts lost to me? You are only thinking of the now whereas I'm thinking in about 5 years time.

I go for the Melbourne Football Club not the Tom Scully Football club like you.

Yeah but they are only thinking of the now, whereas we are thinking about later on...guess that means we don't understand lol

Some people just think their opinion is the ONLY one that matters and should run our footy club.

Look at the bigger picture, one club doesn't equal a team

Do you think they can't front load / back in contracts in 5 years time?

It's a constant renegotiation

You think because Tom Scully gets 1 large contract, the whole thing will spiral out of control?

You don't think perhaps they will back end Scully's next contract, Front Load Frawleys and Chips and average Tapscotts as examples

Do you think we only get one chance to front load / back end contracts?

Do you know for fact that Scully's contract will be bigger next time. The uniqueness of Sporting contracts is that they are not like regular jobs where people expect increases every year. Sometimes, players take a reduced contract later on, for a variety of reasons

I read a good point on Demonland today actually

Clubs HAVE to pay 92.5% of the salary cap in TPP. We lost Cam Bruce who was our highest earning player (reportedly $600k per annum). With his loss, we did not replace him with a player of his salary calibre.

Effectively, we had to rejig a lot of contracts currently in place to even reach the 92.5% minimum left by Bruce's departure.

This means that we will have to pay players more in the next few years as it is, to maintain at least 92.5% TPP and then still have that 7.5% wriggle room to increase existing player contracts

What's 7.5% of $8m??? $600k

 

[DaveyTrainxpress]

Ouch. No, really. Ouch.

It's lost to you because we will pay Scully more NOW and less later so in five years time the kid is being paid only 300k of the contract he signed so there is more money there to sign other players. It really is that simple. That 300k is what is being put towards the salary cap for that year. If we front load and pay him 1 million for 2012 then that is what is counted towards the salary cap for that year when others like Trengove, Tapscott, Gysberts etc are still on their base rookie salary or the equivalent and we have the space.

When they come out of contract and we re-sign them that is the year of Scully's contract that may only pay him 500k so we can still re-sign other players. Or we pay Scully another million and back end the contracts so by 2015 Scully is getting 300k and Trengove 500k, but that's just an example.

I can't fathom what is so hard to understand about that.

And how noble of you to go for MFC and not the TSFC. I don't think anyone here is any different just because we make sense.

How do you know that this will happen? You and everyone else is guessing that this may happen, true? It sounds good in theory, I'll give you that but we don't know that Scully will be happy to get paid 300k in five years time when he was once on around 500k+

It's not hard for me to understand but all I'm saying is that we should look at the bigger picture and one player (no matter how good he may be) isn't worth pissing off a group a players.

 

[Viney]

How do you know that this will happen? You and everyone else is guessing that this may happen, true? It sounds good in theory, I'll give you that but we don't know that Scully will be happy to get paid 300k in five years time when he was once on around 500k+

It's not hard for me to understand but all I'm saying is that we should look at the bigger picture and one player (no matter how good he may be) isn't worth pissing off a group a players.

Becasue thats how most contracts work

The players are smart enough to realise $3m over 5 years is still $3m over 5 years no matter how you break it down

It's not like he's going to be on tough street earning "only" $300k per annum and the $1.5m (hypothetical) he could earn year 1 would more than set him up anyway

It's not like the players would be checking the ATM balance going "shit only got paid $10k this week when it was $25k a week last year"

The contracts for all players would appropriately be front loaded back ended to ensure we are under the cap and they are getting fair worth

Kouta was happy earning a couple of hundred grand a year knowing his contract down the track would be netting him close to $1m a year