Of course they had massive amounts of cap room. It is absolutely undeniable with the players they had out of contract. Are you saying that isn't true? It was VERY widely discussed.
And of course it was part of the equation. They were in discussions about the Danger trade for months, and it absolutely would have been noted.
Why would Geelong NOT point out they have a massive stick that they don't want to use unless they had to?
Your naivety to think "no, they wouldn't discuss that, Adelaide is just stupid" is pretty shocking from you.
There were only a couple of players left from the salary parity days - Bartel, Corey and others were all finishing up.
Obviously they WANTED to keep their salary structure and bring other players in. I stated very clearly that they chose to pay extra in picks instead of paying extra in salary.
It's absolute foolishness to think that was a massive thing we had over them, though.
If we played a brinksmanship game like you're proposing, they would have told us to get stuffed.
on that basis every club has all the salary cap they need, in all cases.
sure they could throw out their cap structure, their list management, go 4 players short into the season
but that’s not realistic or really true
they had already agreed personal terms with Henderson, Scott Selwood, Zac Smith etc.
their lack of cap space is why Danger took unders.
we should have not blinked, ****ed them, their cap & list management. We’d have been no worse off
and they’d have been badly damaged
there is a reason why Geelongs big cap space was never mentioned at the time. And that reason is that it wasn’t true
then or now