Oppo Camp Brodie Grundy (Traded to Melbourne 2022)

Remove this Banner Ad

His form fell right away after 2019. He used hub life as an excuse for a less than enthusiastic approach to the game during covid, then never recovered his former glory when AFL football reverted to a normal fixture again. Then of course last year was an injury disaster, giving him no opportunity to prove he could still be an AA ruckman.

If he was not happy with the way he was treated, many supporters also weren't convinced he had his former hunger for the game. Disgruntled supporters were not responsible for his loss. It was the coaches and football hierarchy at the club who decided that he should go. So adamant were they that Grundy was no longer a required player that renegotiating his contract was not apparently even considered an option.

In the end, the weakness created by his loss to Melbourne was hopefully balanced by the recruitment of Mitchell. Grundy now has the opportunity to show us what might have been by resurrecting his career with Melbourne. If he turns it on for them, we will be left wondering why he could not have done the same for us while the opportunity was there.
What the **** has that got to do with fulfilling the requirements of a contract, entered into ‘in free will’.

If I was a tradesman I wouldn’t be doing any work at your place. Amongst decent folk their word is their bond.

P.S. He was injured playing for CFC.
 
Last edited:
If I was a tradesman I wouldn’t be doing any work at your place. Amongst decent folk their word is their bond.
You obviously wouldn't be doing any work at Wright's or McRae's place either. You obviously don't consider them to be decent folk.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

What the **** has that got to do with fulfilling the requirements of a contract, entered into ‘in free will’.

If I was a tradesman I wouldn’t be doing any work at your place. Amongst decent folk their word is their bond.

P.S. He was injured playing for CFC.
Take it up with the club not me. That he was not a required player was obvious, and the opinion of supporters like me had bugger all to do with his move to Melbourne.
 
What the **** has that got to do with fulfilling the requirements of a contract, entered into ‘in free will’.

If I was a tradesman I wouldn’t be doing any work at your place. Amongst decent folk their word is their bond.

P.S. He was injured playing for CFC.
Please continue sharing the things you wouldn't do at the jobs you don't have.
 
You seriously think Grundy is happy about the way he was treated? Seriously?

If I was a current top level player I would not be traded to Collingwood, after they reneged on deals with Treloar and Grundy. Moreso if I was indigenous.
hopefully those ridiculous deals never happen again. Wouldn't be such an issue if they performed at a level relevant to the salary. And you think we "currently" treat indigenous players poorly?
 
People still knocking Grundy? Honestly we're not Carlton, gjve the sniping a rest.

He played his guts out for us, was given a stupid contract by an over ebthusiastic president and a predatory pkayer manager.

Criticism of his play is wild. He regularly ran the best rucks into the ground, played defently when hurt, and when he had good years we went deep into finals. Poor opponents he demolished, the knock seems to be "yeah he had skills and was an extra mid and played 90% game time but why wasn't he 10 foot tall and kicking 100 goals?"

A brilliant player who was a consistent and above average ruck of phenonenal durability and an extra mid rolled into one, the club botched the contract and now we pay. Im sick of people sniping the bloke, he did his best for us and was loyal.
 
...
In the end, the weakness created by his loss to Melbourne was hopefully balanced by the recruitment of Mitchell. Grundy now has the opportunity to show us what might have been by resurrecting his career with Melbourne. If he turns it on for them, we will be left wondering why he could not have done the same for us while the opportunity was there.
Maybe there were issues over his contract but it looks to me like a "moneyball" type situation where Grundy is swapped for MAitchell + some savings, use the otherwise valueless Cox/Cameron and end up with much the same or even better outcome on field.
What the **** has that got to do with fulfilling the requirements of a contract, entered into ‘in free will’.
...
Football is changing, like it or not - I don't. Players are commodities to be traded at will. It is early days and supporters still feel loss. Grundy will get his money, just not at Collingwood. For this reason I think those who suggest players should take unders, etc are dreaming.
 
How could Supporters forced Change at Collingwood?

Heard at times few did try but Eddie knew about the Dirty Laundry for them to go Thru with the Challange
You are absolutely right TD, supporters have no mechanism to force change. Not sure how to weasel my way out of this one.
Supporters have this tendency to put the club on a pedestal, can do no wrong. This was very much the approach with Eddie & after winning 2010 many had the attitude "president for life." Its the same sort of blindness and emotion that led Eddie to bring back Grubby and Beams (if he was actually responsible), for example. I think we need to fight that tendency, romantic as it is. The critical change at Collingwood will be fixed terms for board members IMO. Now I know supporters have no actual way to force anything but for some reason I can't justify I believe their attitude will influence.
 
You seriously think Grundy is happy about the way he was treated? Seriously?

If I was a current top level player I would not be traded to Collingwood, after they reneged on deals with Treloar and Grundy. Moreso if I was indigenous.

I’m not a mind reader, but he looks happy to me.





On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

You seriously think Grundy is happy about the way he was treated? Seriously?

If I was a current top level player I would not be traded to Collingwood, after they reneged on deals with Treloar and Grundy. Moreso if I was indigenous.

And if I was a supporter so upset as you definitely are. I’d change clubs and follow those players you so dearly love.

Bye bye .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
i provided some evidence. Where’s yours? If you can’t provide it, you should stfu. If you can, I’m happy to hear it.

My evidence is Soy Boy is out the door. And if you think no discussions were had based on you little irrelevant snippet. You’re more ill-informed than I thought.

If you feel you need a fix he usual passes by on his way to Dreamons training on a Wednesday. Make your way down and say hello.

Tell him I said Hi .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
If you really want to blame someone, blame the contract structure Collingwood used.
Bang on, the Pies admin and FD at the time were to blame, and now the new admin and FD have to clean up all the * ups left behind. Not just the Grundy debacle.

'Good ol Collingwood forever, we know how to shoot our foot'
 
Bang on, the Pies admin and FD at the time were to blame, and now the new admin and FD have to clean up all the * ups left behind. Not just the Grundy debacle.

'Good ol Collingwood forever, we know how to shoot our foot'
All true and I agree.

Maybe it is time for the Grundy detractors to move on and get on with their life just as he has... .
 
Maybe there were issues over his contract but it looks to me like a "moneyball" type situation where Grundy is swapped for MAitchell + some savings, use the otherwise valueless Cox/Cameron and end up with much the same or even better outcome on field.

Football is changing, like it or not - I don't. Players are commodities to be traded at will. It is early days and supporters still feel loss. Grundy will get his money, just not at Collingwood. For this reason I think those who suggest players should take unders, etc are dreaming.
It’s not about players taking unders , it’s about a player getting what is fair and reasonable within the realities of trying to fit 40 plus players on a playing list within the salary cap , when one player is taking one tenth of the total sum of that salary cap pie , then it is neither fair nor reasonable to his 40 plus “mates” who also deserve a fair share of the pie. He is both selfish and self indulgent. Arrivederci mercenary. May your over inflated self worth be your legacy
 
It’s not about players taking unders , it’s about a player getting what is fair and reasonable within the realities of trying to fit 40 plus players on a playing list within the salary cap , when one player is taking one tenth of the total sum of that salary cap pie , then it is neither fair nor reasonable to his 40 plus “mates” who also deserve a fair share of the pie. He is both selfish and self indulgent. Arrivederci mercenary. May your over inflated self worth be your legacy

Spot on
 
It’s not about players taking unders , it’s about a player getting what is fair and reasonable within the realities of trying to fit 40 plus players on a playing list within the salary cap , when one player is taking one tenth of the total sum of that salary cap pie , then it is neither fair nor reasonable to his 40 plus “mates” who also deserve a fair share of the pie. He is both selfish and self indulgent. Arrivederci mercenary. May your over inflated self worth be your legacy
So allowing market forces dictate pricing is not ok, the clubs can use it but not players. If this is what they all want why hasn't the players assoc got involved? Seems to be about sentiment.
 
It’s not about players taking unders , it’s about a player getting what is fair and reasonable within the realities of trying to fit 40 plus players on a playing list within the salary cap , when one player is taking one tenth of the total sum of that salary cap pie , then it is neither fair nor reasonable to his 40 plus “mates” who also deserve a fair share of the pie. He is both selfish and self indulgent. Arrivederci mercenary. May your over inflated self worth be your legacy
It seems to me that you are assuming players know what other players must be getting therefore not ask for a certain amount.
His manager asked for x and the board approved it. Good for him. Don't get all the sour grapes over Grundy and his salary package.

I don't see it as any different to my asking for a wage and the company I work for giving it. They could have said 'no' and either I would have moved on or accepted their offer.

The fault lies as per Carringbush2010's post.
 
It seems to me that you are assuming players know what other players must be getting therefore not ask for a certain amount.
His manager asked for x and the board approved it. Good for him. Don't get all the sour grapes over Grundy and his salary package.

I don't see it as any different to my asking for a wage and the company I work for giving it. They could have said 'no' and either I would have moved on or accepted their offer.

The fault lies as per Carringbush2010's post.
Big difference Maggie. For one your company is not governed or restricted by a salary cap , if they deem that you are worth the amount you believe you are , they will meet your request. Just like Collingwood deemed Grundy was not worth anywhere near what he earned the last 3 years from his below par performances
 
Hey boss, I want to be paid $x.
Son, we only have $y, some of your mates would have to take less.
No drama, I'll move to Adelaide, they can do it there.
Why Grundy should act differently to almost every other player in my lifetime I don't know. Some of you must give a lot to charity. I get very little of the Australian pie, message me & I'll send you my bank details if you are feeling selfish.
 
Although difficult with a players agent involved. He won't want to take unders. Brody may have heavily invested in the meantime and needed his $ to keep flowing with his contract.

We will never know the truth. I just know Grundy is a nice bloke.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Oppo Camp Brodie Grundy (Traded to Melbourne 2022)

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top