- Sep 26, 2004
- 47,659
- 64,504
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Moderator
- #1,314
Infractions and thread bans have been handed out.
Keep it civil and on topic, or keep it to yourself.
Thanks.
Keep it civil and on topic, or keep it to yourself.
Thanks.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
So new CBA isn't being fully factored but only partially? Sound very dodgy.He won’t need 1m to trigger band 1 in 2024.
He will need max 900k.
Potentially 850k with his 6 year deal
It’s based off the salary cap and there was only a small increase for the 2024 season.So new CBA isn't being fully factored but only partially? Sound very dodgy.
It should take those years into account as well given the percentage of increase is known so clubs are taking into account them when offering contract otherwise it only benefit clubs with FA players this year. Players like Battle and Zurhaar being in the discussion of band 1 compensation wouldn't happen other years. They aren't May, Lynch or Daniher players.It’s based off the salary cap and there was only a small increase for the 2024 season.
Big jumps every year beginning next season until 2027
It’s based on the salary % on the year the contract is given. No club has to offer these players more then they think they are worth and it would have applied to last seasons crop aswell.It should take those years into account as well given the percentage of increase is known so clubs are taking into account them when offering contract otherwise it only benefit clubs with FA players this year. Players like Battle and Zurhaar being in the discussion of band 1 compensation wouldn't happen other years. They aren't May, Lynch or Daniher players.
I just gave you the stats, I don't need to factor in anything.You haven't factored in frontloading.
McKay is one of those, hes close to the highest paid player in the comp in 2024, one you are claiming isn't earning near that amount.
They're discussing it because they have thousands of hours of content to fill.He contract was front loaded.
So I wouldn’t be coming in all high and mighty saying he definitively won’t.
Clearly it’s close. That’s why the likes of Twomey are now discussing this.
His contract will start in 2025.He won’t need 1m to trigger band 1 in 2024.
He will need max 900k.
Potentially 850k with his 6 year deal
That helped for McKay and Doedee, but it won't from next season.It’s based off the salary cap and there was only a small increase for the 2024 season.
Big jumps every year beginning next season until 2027
It is based against all existing signed contracts - which wont mean past contracts (i.e. what they were paid for 2024). It compares the deal signed for 2025 onwards with all contracts for 2025 on.It’s based on the salary % on the year the contract is given. No club has to offer these players more then they think they are worth and it would have applied to last seasons crop aswell.
The melts from people in here.
The system is functioning exactly as it should.
Don’t ****ing poach bottom 4 sides best talent and top 3-4 picks won’t be awarded.
It’s there to prevent teams from being picked off continually and staying bottom 4 forever.
So for St Kilda to get overs is exactly as it should function.
In fact, I’d like to see a +20% loading on the compensation results for bottom 4 clubs losing any player to FA.
The servers might explode when people realize that Zurhaar is every chance to trigger Band 1 also.
He’s had a 5 x $750k deal from North on the table for 4 months and hasn’t signed it.
Collingwood will be offering more than that. And there’s every chance the AFL will be amending the formula to allow for tenure this period according to Twomey.
Has he EVER been a top ten in the B+F?
I have no issues with the Saints getting band 1 after the Roos got band 1 for McKay & Frawley got for the Dees.
We have a similar offer on the table for Perryman who may also get band 1 compensation, imagine the salty comments after that...
The only logical way to fix this is the compensation needs to change so that band 1 is not in the first round but end of first.
If players like McKay, Battle etc were given pick 19 as compo noone would care.
Your McKay was not "best talent" nor is Battle St Kilda's. Zurhaar too, is not "best talent".
McKay led the league in intercept marks and contested marks for key defenders 12 months before he left, what exactly would you call that?
A lot of people in this thread are confusing "best talent in the league" with "best talent available".McKay led the league in intercept marks and contested marks for key defenders 12 months before he left, what exactly would you call that?
AgreedGONE
Ridiculous. Imagine if a Lynch situation happens again.I have no issues with the Saints getting band 1 after the Roos got band 1 for McKay & Frawley got for the Dees.
We have a similar offer on the table for Perryman who may also get band 1 compensation, imagine the salty comments after that...
The only logical way to fix this is the compensation needs to change so that band 1 is not in the first round but end of first.
If players like McKay, Battle etc were given pick 19 as compo noone would care.
Love these options when they really don’t have any idea, but to be fair when contracts on hold till end of year usually means they goingGONE
If only compo was never provided. Would avoid all these tantrumsRidiculous. Imagine if a Lynch situation happens again.
So big clubs can just poach players that have been developed by smaller clubs, even paying them less money?If only compo was never provided. Would avoid all these tantrums
Yep. Would encourage clubs to be better The cap space is what you receive ala the NBA.So big clubs can just poach players that have been developed by smaller clubs, even paying them less money?