No Oppo Supporters General AFL Discussion #11 - Carlton Posters ONLY!

[Aphrodite]

I quoted too much in my previous post so it was deleted, but for everyone's clarity:

You didn't include a link to the article ...


Article posting rules apply site wide for all.

Mod. Notice - Quoting Articles From Outside Sources

Hi all, We are noticing a bit of a 'creep' recently, where people are copying and pasting an entire article and several paragraphs from articles: a) without being put in quotation boxes b) without quotation of source c) in its entirety. Technically, you are not meant to do this. We understand...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Arr0w]

I quoted too much in my previous post so it was deleted, but for everyone's clarity:

Why Buddy Franklin is almost untradeable

The suggestion that Buddy Franklin could be traded by the Swans is a fantasy. It could only happen if the Swans paid some of the backloaded mega contract

www.theage.com.au

I will say for the last time, there is no rule that states a player can't be traded to another club, and or renegotiate their contract

As an example, the Betts scenario you posted

If you can find a rule, happy to be proven wrong

 

[Stamos]

I will say for the last time, there is no rule that states a player can't be traded to another club, and or renegotiate their contract

Oops, sorry, I must have misread your post and was arguing something else.

A player can be traded, and they can renegotiate a contract, but the original amount must go into the salary cap.
So if the Swans were to trade Franklin, they can't get a discount off their cap beyond what the other club pay.

 

[Jabba73]

Oops, sorry, I must have misread your post and was arguing something else.

A player can be traded, and they can renegotiate a contract, but the original amount must go into the salary cap.
So if the Swans were to trade Franklin, they can't get a discount off their cap beyond what the other club pay.

Yep, even if someone thought he had two good years left, not sure you would risk $1mil a year to find out. Swans would need to cover some of his salary if they want him gone.

 

[Stamos]

Yep, even if someone thought he had two good years left, not sure you would risk $1mil a year to find out. Swans would need to cover some of his salary if they want him gone.

Sounds like he's owed $4m over the next 3 years.

 

[Jabba73]

Sounds like he's owed $4m over the next 3 years.

Swan for life then ...

 

[Keyza]

Oops, sorry, I must have misread your post and was arguing something else.

A player can be traded, and they can renegotiate a contract, but the original amount must go into the salary cap.
So if the Swans were to trade Franklin, they can't get a discount off their cap beyond what the other club pay.

Correct. This applies to restricted free agents
The rule exists to stop a club from putting forward a lucrative long term contract to stop the original club from being able to match it and then changing it later.
Also the original club receives compo based on the contract.
Having said that I am unsure why Wells was allowed to renegotiate his contract, maybe he wasn't restricted. But North still got compo based on the original contract.

 

[DangerousD]

Oops, sorry, I must have misread your post and was arguing something else.

A player can be traded, and they can renegotiate a contract, but the original amount must go into the salary cap.
So if the Swans were to trade Franklin, they can't get a discount off their cap beyond what the other club pay.

As I’ve come in late to this, sorry if I’m a bit off. The rules regarding Sydney having to include Franklins $$$$ in the salary cap were brought in after the fact and were made in spite, but as I read it, it referred to if Franklin retired that the money must be included in the cap. Does it say anywhere that it has to remain if he’s traded?

As it’s been a long time and the AFL world has moved on, I doubt there would be an issue if he was traded. I also always wondered with the $$$$ if Franklin retired and the money had to be still in the cap, couldn’t the Swans just spread it out over several players? I’m not sure where the issue is here, whys it a big deal?

 

[Stamos]

As I’ve come in late to this, sorry if I’m a bit off. The rules regarding Sydney having to include Franklins $$$$ in the salary cap were brought in after the fact and were made in spite, but as I read it, it referred to if Franklin retired that the money must be included in the cap. Does it say anywhere that it has to remain if he’s traded?

As it’s been a long time and the AFL world has moved on, I doubt there would be an issue if he was traded. I also always wondered with the $$$$ if Franklin retired and the money had to be still in the cap, couldn’t the Swans just spread it out over several players? I’m not sure where the issue is here, whys it a big deal?

It wasn’t after the fact, but perhaps it was only clarified before the AFL signed the contract off.

Essentially, Buddy’s initial FA contract has to go in somebody’s cap. So if the Swans did trade him, and the new club were not going to cover the approx $4 million over the next 3 years, then Swans would have to cover the excess in their cap. But if the new club were happy to take it all on, the Swans would be free.

The rule is there to stop rorting of the FA bidding and compensation system.

 

[OldBlueFan]

As I’ve come in late to this, sorry if I’m a bit off. The rules regarding Sydney having to include Franklins $$$$ in the salary cap were brought in after the fact and were made in spite, but as I read it, it referred to if Franklin retired that the money must be included in the cap. Does it say anywhere that it has to remain if he’s traded?

As it’s been a long time and the AFL world has moved on, I doubt there would be an issue if he was traded. I also always wondered with the $$$$ if Franklin retired and the money had to be still in the cap, couldn’t the Swans just spread it out over several players? I’m not sure where the issue is here, whys it a big deal?

While there may have been an element of spite involved, I think it was mostly just practicalities. If you don't have a rule like this "Buddy" rule in place, then what's to stop a club offering a player 20 million over 15 years? Then, when the player retires after 7 or 8 the club says "oh, he's retired, no need to pay the last 10 million". The size of the offer is enough to prevent other clubs from matching, but really, it's an amount that all concerned know won't have to be paid.

Telling clubs that in such circiumstances, the amounts will be counted against their salary cap for the entire duration of the initial contract, prevents this sort of rorting.

At the time, I rememeber thinking "there's no way Buddy will still be running around - or at least as a productive member of the team, at the end of that contract". You only have to look at his output for this year, the Swans are in a bit of bother having to carry him - or at least his salary - for the next 3 years.

 

[SammaGilberto]

Bailey Rice delisted by the Aints, wonder if it would've been different had he chose us over them, ah well!

 

[Sector 7G]

Good to see Carlton with an E, shared last place with Adelaide on Knightmare's ESPN analysis of the trade period.

AFL trades and free agency: Every club's moves rated

It was another hectic, tense and turbulent trade and free agency period, but which clubs did the best job at the AFL's annual meat market? Chris Doerre assesses every team's moves.

www.espn.com.au

Tough mark for a team that did very little.
Tough on the Crows as well -got a 2nd rounder for Keith and shed 4 players who played in their reserves.

In contract Buckanara gave us a B

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Ugh, chalk Hanners up to another player seriously injured from a 'misadventure' (or as in my case, a clumsy mishap)

Having surgery next week for my broken ankle which I got from picking up washing from the clothes line.

 

[thylacine60]

Bailey Rice delisted by the Aints, wonder if it would've been different had he chose us over them, ah well!

 

[Aphrodite]

Good to see Carlton with an E, shared last place with Adelaide on Knightmare's ESPN analysis of the trade period.

AFL trades and free agency: Every club's moves rated

It was another hectic, tense and turbulent trade and free agency period, but which clubs did the best job at the AFL's annual meat market? Chris Doerre assesses every team's moves.

www.espn.com.au

Tough mark for a team that did very little.
Tough on the Crows as well -got a 2nd rounder for Keith and shed 4 players who played in their reserves.

In contract Buckanara gave us a B

Typical Filth supporter.

HUN gave us a B.

 

[thylacine60]

hannebery breaks his foot

St Kilda stumble as Dan Hannebery breaks foot

St Kilda midfielder Dan Hannebery will spend the rest of his post-season break recovering from a broken foot after stumbling on a small set of stairs.

www.theage.com.au

 

[mediumsizered]

Bailey Rice delisted by the Aints, wonder if it would've been different had he chose us over them, ah well!

Nah. He just wasn't any good. He did us a favour by choosing the Aints over us.

 

[bigm386]

Nah. He just wasn't any good. He did us a favour by choosing the Aints over us.

Didn't seem to be a world beater. But Saints player development isn't exactly known to be good

 

[thylacine60]

as poor as ours has been ......

 

[Jabba73]

Didn't seem to be a world beater. But Saints player development isn't exactly known to be good

They baked Rice

 

[Lace_Out]

I bet he's steaming now.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[JoeyPBLUES]

Yeah poor kids fried.... I’ll show myself out

 

[thylacine60]

rex hunt always referred to his dad as special fried...........idiot

 

[Dadda Dave]

Yeah poor kids fried.... I’ll show myself out

Dean will be the judge if the kid is tried or not ..

 

[JoeyPBLUES]

rex hunt always referred to his dad as special fried...........idiot

Yep. Remember it well...