Franks for the memories. Things don't always go well with COLA
- Thread starter eldorado
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
I have heard that the club was informed of his behaviour and was told by a player who he was travelling with him at the time.
If that's true I do not know.
I am surprised we have not changed Buddy to Judas in this thread, or for that matter to any Franklin references.
I do believe time will tell we will be the winners here. IMO Sydney are taking a great risk with someone who allegedly has a variety of well documented problems. They are also taking a gamble on his fitness.
The compensation may not be much, but we should be able to entice another recycled player who wants to play in a grand final, plus look after some of our brilliant up and comers.
Is Franklin worth 3 Breusts?
I do believe time will tell we will be the winners here. IMO Sydney are taking a great risk with someone who allegedly has a variety of well documented problems. They are also taking a gamble on his fitness.
The compensation may not be much, but we should be able to entice another recycled player who wants to play in a grand final, plus look after some of our brilliant up and comers.
Is Franklin worth 3 Breusts?
I'm not too disappointed at losing Buddy. I thought the $1m price tag was out of proportion and, given his form and contribution over the last couple of years, we could use the money better elsewhere. The thing that sucks is the COLA and the way the AFL has allowed it to be rorted by Sydney.
Is it a real possibility that the AFL will veto the deal? $1m and a bit a year is fine and represents market value. COLA is what it is. 9 years is just ridiculous and completely unrealistic for any responsible footy club to match. The AFL cannot just let something like 9 years ride surely. Especially a back ended 9 years - it is irresponsible, particularly when the rest of the AFL is propping them up.
I was saying that Franklin wasn't worth the $1.1 million that we were going to pay him. When you look at what we can get on the free trade marketing, he wasn't worth it. I'm not saying go get them, but a Dale Thomas and a Shane Mumford could be paid the $1.1 million together to come to Hawthorn.
One thing we can look at this as good is that Sydney just go out and get the best player they can who is out of contract. We go and get players that fill holes that we have. We have a holes in the backline, we got Josh Gibson and Brian Lake. We needed a Ruckman/Forward, we got David Hale. We needed a young forward to develop for the future, we got Jack Gunston.
The Swans have gotten Kurt Tippett and Franklin, how is that going to work on the SCG. With it being so small the position of Centre Half Forward is not needed. Tippett may have worked by himself at Full Forward, but with Franklin they will be to top heavy in the forward line. The up and coming tall Swans forwards won't like this, they may be out the door.
One thing we can look at this as good is that Sydney just go out and get the best player they can who is out of contract. We go and get players that fill holes that we have. We have a holes in the backline, we got Josh Gibson and Brian Lake. We needed a Ruckman/Forward, we got David Hale. We needed a young forward to develop for the future, we got Jack Gunston.
The Swans have gotten Kurt Tippett and Franklin, how is that going to work on the SCG. With it being so small the position of Centre Half Forward is not needed. Tippett may have worked by himself at Full Forward, but with Franklin they will be to top heavy in the forward line. The up and coming tall Swans forwards won't like this, they may be out the door.
To be fair the only reason why AFL should veto the deal would be for the integrity of the competition, but from a Hawthron perspective it would be a disaster having him back.
No doubt he would still be a valuable role player but not worth a million dollars. You'd have to trade him.
Agreed. Apart from the potential bad blood that would be created if he returned, we would be better off spending the money on two or three cream players.
The AFL are only considering vetoing the deal because they think Sydney are digging themselves into a hole. If buddy retires 5 years into his contract it could effectively destroy the Swans if they have to pay out the remainder of his contract within one year. They wouldn't be able to field a team. So of course the AFL willl either block the deal or force parts of the deal to change so that their lovechild doesn't kill itself.
The Cost of Living Allowance is a joke. The Herald Sun website has a graphic up that shows that Melbourne is as expensive as Sydney to live in. If it was a fair system, shouldn't West Coast, Fremantle, Adelaide and Port Adelaide have less to spend in their salary cap because it is cheaper to live there. Try to get that past at the AFL Commission and survive an attack from any of those clubs. In the American NFL each club has the same salary cap, no matter if they are the New York Giants or the Green Bay Packers. They all have $X million to spend and that it.
MinerBoy
Brownlow Medallist
Veteran
10k Posts
Red Centre Kangaroos Player - BFFCL
Hawthorn Hawks - Conor Nash Player Sponsor 2017
Hawthorn Hawks - James Cousins Player Sponsor 2017
Hawthorn Hawks - Kaiden Brand Player Sponsor 2017
Hawthorn Hawks - Alex Woodward, Jed Anderson and Jermaine Miller-Lewis Player Sponsor 2015
Hawthorn Hawks - Lowden, Anderson, Woodward Player Sponsor 2014
- Jan 9, 2007
- 29,888
- 42,879
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Other teams?
Hope not. As sad as I am he's leaving, it's too late to take him back. Too much damage is done. If it's vetoed then I still want him somewhere else next year.
The advantage of an AFL veto is just to bring Sydney to the trade table. Keep the same deal, just make them give us something instead of getting it all for free.
If the AFL veto the deal it changes everything. 1/ Hawks don't have to match the deal. They can offer Buddy whatever they like. If the Swans deal is eliminated then there is no other live deal on the table. Hawks can offer him $750k or something. 2/ Hawks do not have to deal exclusively with the Swans. They can deal with other clubs and threaten to send Buddy to the pre season draft where he will end up at GWS which is what the AFL want anyway. And if the AFL will not accept a nine year deal now as part of free agency they will not accept it as a price in the pre season draft.
Buddy is gone from Hawthorn and I am good with that. Hawks need to extract something out of it though and the best chance of that is an AFL veto IMO.
Karma is a vengeful elephant.
That Hawks can't just do whatever they like, and they can't just veto Buddy's entitlement to restricted free-agency.
The only other result would be him going to GWS with similar money, and Hawthorn getting some compensation picks (don't hold your breath) but most likely just pick 20. The AFL getting exactly what the want without ambassadorial payments.
Ned Ryerson
Future Captain
What I'm loving about reading this thread is that it's brought Geelong, Richmond and Adelaide fans together with us in mutual rage. You know we're getting hosed if Cats and Tiges fans are sympathetic towards us.
That's the thing though Miner, if it was vetoed them we COULD trade him if another offer was put on the table. If not we could possibly shop him to Freo or GWS, who I am sure would still look at him (Vlad would make sure of it).
Maybe Vlad will veto it to make this happen
. Vlad likes to get what he wants at all costs.
Legit? and legit?
The Hawks are getting nothing though, and the Hawks are not without rights. Buddy is not a free agent, he is a restricted free agent.
We offered him $1.1m, they have only offered $1.1m (which includes COLA so the offer is actually less than what the Hawks have offered). They cannot even afford the $1.1m now, so it is back ended so that he gets the money in a few years time after Tippett is paid. So the only way the Swans can get this deal done is 9 years which is quite frankly ludicrous. Can you imagine the AFL allowing the Bulldogs or Saints or Port to sign a 9 year deal? Under any circumstances?
Hawks should be pressuring the AFL, with 16 other clubs supporting to veto the deal. It is self serving to the Hawks but that is apparently how all this works.
Where were the Richmond and Adelaide fans in GF week.
- Aug 29, 2006
- 4,395
- 4,772
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
After being able to sleep on this. I am over it. Bud is gone. We were lucky enough to see Buddy for the best years of his career (he will only decline from here), I will never forget the excitement he provided. And he was part of 2 premierships. Its very disappointing how he has gone about his whole departure, but it is what it is.
The Hawthorn Football Club is more important then one player. We showed this year that Buddy is nothing more then a cog in the Hawthorn machine, he can be replaced. I mean we beat the almighty AFL COLA Swans by 54 point without Buddy.
Now we just have to do what best for HFC. Use this salary cap space to sign some guns. I think if we manage to get Mumford and Thomas, we are actually a better team than we are with Buddy. We will come out of this in very good shape for our Flag defence. Roughead and Gunston, with Bruest and Rioli is still one of the best forward lines in the AFL. Thats a coleman medalist, and our best finals player and 2 of the best small forwards in the league.
Hopefully AFL dont block this deal, as surely it will backfire on Sydney. He is already on a downward curve with his career. He peaked in 2008 as a 21 year old. He has got max 3 years of high quality football left. The next 6 years, Sydney will be paying a superstar wage, for a solid player. He relies on his speed and athleticism to be a good player, it is the first thing that goes with age. It has already left him a bit compared to 2008.
ALWAYS HAWTHORN - 2013 PREMIERS
No matter what Buddy does, that will never change.
The Hawthorn Football Club is more important then one player. We showed this year that Buddy is nothing more then a cog in the Hawthorn machine, he can be replaced. I mean we beat the almighty AFL COLA Swans by 54 point without Buddy.
Now we just have to do what best for HFC. Use this salary cap space to sign some guns. I think if we manage to get Mumford and Thomas, we are actually a better team than we are with Buddy. We will come out of this in very good shape for our Flag defence. Roughead and Gunston, with Bruest and Rioli is still one of the best forward lines in the AFL. Thats a coleman medalist, and our best finals player and 2 of the best small forwards in the league.
Hopefully AFL dont block this deal, as surely it will backfire on Sydney. He is already on a downward curve with his career. He peaked in 2008 as a 21 year old. He has got max 3 years of high quality football left. The next 6 years, Sydney will be paying a superstar wage, for a solid player. He relies on his speed and athleticism to be a good player, it is the first thing that goes with age. It has already left him a bit compared to 2008.
ALWAYS HAWTHORN - 2013 PREMIERS
No matter what Buddy does, that will never change.
Don't know, was on the trade rumours page on FB.
They say it is now believed:
-Franklin deal was done with Sydney 12 months ago. Not sure the deal was done but he approached them.
-He had an agreement with them at some point this year. Yes that is true, deal (verbal) was done before this season even started.
- Deal includes a 2 million place in Sydney once he retires. True, not sure, not surprised if it is though.
Not quite, GWS was 1.2 over 5 or 6 years, we can match that due to the time frame. That means trades are on the table again if it is vetoed. They can veto it if they think it is irresponsible management by the Swans. Sucks to be owned and bankrolled by the AFL sometimes I guess. The AFL have some cards to play in this if they want to.
Interesting to see if that 2mil house is within the salary cap or viewed as third party or hell the f*ck that works. I wonder if it could amount to draft tampering and we would see K . Tippett all over again?? Could this be the story the AFL have been wanting to get the bombers off the front page when the full asada report is released? Tin foil hat is now firmly wrenched to my cranium
I think the realistic outcome is that they will tell Sydney to pull there head in with the length of the contract.
I hope they let the deal go through and let Sydney shaft themselves. Interesting to see what happens to Tippett when his contract is up for renewal - reckon he will take a pay cut so Buddy gets his mill plus??
I hope they let the deal go through and let Sydney shaft themselves. Interesting to see what happens to Tippett when his contract is up for renewal - reckon he will take a pay cut so Buddy gets his mill plus??
- Status
Similar threads
