Mega Thread Buddy Franklin moves to Sydney

[SHAKESPEARE]

Good thing you are still able to type.

haha (Y)

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Yeh, because this is not a crazy over reaction to free markets and personal choice.

I mean really.

Wow.

lolwut?

The AFL is not a free market...

 

[Off The Couch]

His poor game? He was in the best ten players on the field. You don't remember his amazing first and third quarters?

Poor game? He killed Richards for three quarters and if he'd kicked straight he'd have won the match and possibly the Norm Smith.

By jeesus that didn't take long - ink isn't even on the page yet

By all accounts buddy cost the hawks the game against Sydney and now he's close to BOG
This why I love BF

 

[Arwib]

By jeesus that didn't take long - ink isn't even on the page yet

By all accounts buddy cost the hawks the game against Sydney and now he's close to BOG
This why I love BF

Well he went missing in the last quarter.

 

[theta]

doubting the legitimacy of it. it's been widely report that Swans have offered 1.4 and Hawks 1.1.

Of course Crawf could be talking about 900k from Swans and 500k from the AFL for "marketing" as has been bandied around.

Ireland said on AFL360 they would not be applying for ambassador money.

Doesnt sound right to me either, but will be interesting if right. Spose we'll have to wait and see which story becomes the 'official' story over the next few days/weeks.

Doubt we'll ever know the truth though...

 

[maverick001]

It sets a precedent in FA. If a player has an intention to go to another club, he and his management can collude with that team and create a 'dummy' bid.

In this case, Bud probably sees himself having 4/5 years left in the game. He retires then and doesn't ask for a contractual payout. It's not tampering but it may be bordering on it.

Yep this is totally how I see it happening. The AFL needs to watch closely

 

[Zgope1]

Why does it matter ? We have the same cap as everyone else.

i agree there shouldn't be a COLA but don't get this "this is the last straw!" mentality. The rules are the rules, AFL needs to change them. They needed to years ago. Doesn't take away from Sydney's 2012 flag for mine because there was no start hunting by them back then and now they're just doing what they can. We don't know the sacrifices they'll have to make to fit him in. This isn't a disaster for Hawthorn or anyone else, Sydney's had a look at the rules and taken a huge risk. Like i've said - let's see how it plays out for them.

Re: COLA yeah it should be taken away but its influence is hard to judge and there's a lot of people speculating as if it was the difference in this deal. For mine the difference was the number 9 in front of the word years. I have no problem with a footy club taking a huge huge risk to get a player. This is FA

 

[theta]

He must have been really good.

Umm, yeah, he played in the world cup for Canada, and left on his own accord.

 

[The Passenger]

Let's just hope that the AFL finally sees sense and abolishes the Prop-up-Sydney allowance once and for all.

I think the Swans have signed the death knell for COLA today. Maybe not, but we'll see. Regardless of what happens from here the pressure from all other clubs to get rid of it will be huge.

 

[theta]

Just lies.

2010 - Rising Star
2011 - 7th in the BnF
2012 - 3rd in the Norm Smith.

Rising Star is exactly that
7th?
Norm Smith for 1 game.

errr, go check your stats buddy. Or troll away, its what you're good at.

 

[Bronson23]

Sydney the masters of poaching power forwards
Lockett
Hall
Tippet
Now Franklin.

Other clubs lock up your forwards

you missed bradshaw.
at the time he looked the goods.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

I think the Swans have signed the death knell for COLA today. Maybe not, but we'll see. Regardless of what happens from here the pressure from all other clubs to get rid of it will be huge.

It was on death knell before we made the Franklin offer.

 

[theta]

ROFL at Buddy choosing Sydney over similar other deals and Sydney being more expensive as two of the main reasons. Not to mention the bit about QLD being unable to earn cash outside AFL.

1. Buddy had no other comparable deals after GWS withdrew their offer.

2./ QLD don't get any COLA or similar offers anymore after McChins bitched about his offended with Brisbane beating Magpies two years in a row except for Gold Coast now with Ablett while they're an expansion side. There still has been no news what happens when the expansion phase ends.

3. Sydney is slightly more expensive but then to look logically and legitimately then why does Perf based teams not get a COLA due to their drastic rise in living money and secondly the additional and disproportionately higher rate of relocating there and doing things to get back to the east where most players in their sides have come from?

1. Says who? What about Hawthorne? Have we got Freos/Melbs/Bulldogs offers?

2. Yep, 4 GFs in a row would make anyone question a COLA.

3. I agree WA teams probably do deserve some COLA. I've argued this many times. (I live in Perth) I spose the AFL didnt know how long the mining boom would last or its influence on COL.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

LOL

Yeah, they've only
-played more finals then any other team since 96
-missed finals twice since 96
-been the best trading team of the last 10 years
-had the best player development.
-made 3 gfs and won 2 flags in 8 seasons
-just made it to a prelim with 9 premiership players out injured

MUST BE THE COLA!

lol, yeah, what morons.

You have just made a great argument for the abolition of COLA.

So, if Sydney are all these things why do they a) need the COLA and b) need the AFL to subsidise their star signings with ambassadorial payments, because honestly it does seem odd at this point and I don't even hold a grudge against Sydney.

 

[Lebron James]

COLA is fine for a start up club like GWS. Swannies shouldn't have it anymore.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

So just curious if Freo would of landed Franklin it would of been all ok correct?

 

[SHAKESPEARE]

So just curious if Freo would of landed Franklin it would of been all ok correct?

Yep. Not a 9 year deal though. That's farked

 

[DivideandMultiply]

People are questioning the length of contract offered to Franklin, but from my perspective it's an absolute masterstroke

• Sydney know signing Franklin will end the COLA
• Sydney know the AFL won't take away the COLA until *after* this deal goes ahead. They will want to ensure Sydney are not disadvantaged by any rule changes that would put them over their *new* cap
• Signing Franklin to 9 years instead of 5 maximises the number of years Sydney will benefit from the COLA
• If Sydney had only signed Franklin for 5 years, they would have only benefited from the COLA for the next 5 years
• Signing Sydney to $1.1M over 9 years instead of $1.4M over 5 years has given Sydney $300K/year for the first 5 years of Franklin's deal, giving them more cap space to sign/retain other players
• Projecting the COLA out for the remaining 4 years of Franklin's contract, the last 4 years COLA will cover Franklin's $1.1M/year contract in its entirety

This is a great post and an idea I was considering. If the AFL do not veto the deal, Sydney may just have strong armed the AFL, into putting off something that they viewed as inevitable.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Yep. Not a 9 year deal though. That's farked

It's our prerogative to offer whatever we like there is no rule against that.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

There is a loophole which allows any club to exclude the last few year's from the Salary Cap.

If after 6 years Buddy's shoulder is rooted - Sydney can retire him and the final year(s) can be excluded from the cap.

Same thing happened with Croad.

I'd have money this is what Sydney uses when Buddy is using a Zimmer on the lead

Another very good point.

Sydney seem to be both equal parts creative and devious.

Next time Colless, or another figure at Sydney opens their mouth to complain about player or coach poaching, I hope they get given an almighty smackdown in the press.

 

[theta]

There are certain players from each club who are considered untouchable. Hodge, Franklin, Rioli, Mitchell would be four of Hawthorn's. Clubs don't go after these players generally because they would have to end up paying overs as they are worth more to their current club than they would be to the opposition. Unfortunately sydney have now set a precedent where this no longer applies.

Untouchable until they announce they are exploring other options.

 

[SHAKESPEARE]

It's our prerogative to offer whatever we like there is no rule against that.

Not yet. Remove COLA and you're pissing in the wind

 

[DivideandMultiply]

So just curious if Freo would of landed Franklin it would of been all ok correct?

They don't have an extended cap, nor players on big ambassadorial money.

Whilst Sydney's situation doesn't really bother, you cannot deny the unequal advantage they receive.

 

[Bronson23]

Poor game? He killed Richards for three quarters and if he'd kicked straight he'd have won the match and possibly the Norm Smith.

exactly if he'd kicked straight they would have won, maybe he pulled those shots on purpose!
in return the swans guaranteed him a 9 year deal!
the conspiracy continues!

after the essendon saga this year and the tippett contract saga last year... ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN!
dooms day is upon us.
next.. ben cousins will coach the eagles & matthew lloyd will return to play FF for essendon to reignite the bombers next year!

 

[theta]

Bullshit. Clubs voted for it due to the usual AFL standover tactics.

Uh huh...