Oppo Camp Other Clubs News/General Discussion

[jmac70]

He had the choice to take a pay cut. He is earning 900,000 a year and the only person that doesn't accept that he's not worth that , is himself. We wanted him to stay but to take a pay cut. So unless you are saying that Grundy deserves 900,000 a year, then it's just a silly answer

Sounds pretty silly to take a pay cut when you don’t have to.
Have you ever accepted a pay cut to do the same job?

 

[Anzacday]

I can’t remember where it came from - but I was under the impression we were shelling out for most of Grundy contract this year. This was made possible by Hawks shelling out lots of Tom Mitchell for us.

I recall reading the same thing.

I've never heard or been under the impression we were paying 'most' of it, or even a 'large' portion. Always heard that it was either a small amount, ie $250,000 per year

$250k p.a. and we paid it up front i.e., paid something along the lines of $1.5m this year.

 

[Apex36]

I recall reading the same thing.

$250k p.a. and we paid it up front i.e., paid something along the lines of $1.5m this year.

That was BF rumours more than anything I think. I don’t recall ever reading that we were paying upfront from any reputable news source, and the fact it’s Collingwoods presidents son reporting the new development that Collingwood is off the hook if Melbourne trade Grundy would lead me to believe that the upfront payment rumour was a furphy.

 

[sideswipe]

He had the choice to take a pay cut. He is earning 900,000 a year and the only person that doesn't accept that he's not worth that , is himself. We wanted him to stay but to take a pay cut. So unless you are saying that Grundy deserves 900,000 a year, then it's just a silly answer

Pretty sure Grundy has said the option of taking a pay cut to stay at Collingwood was never put to him. Feel free to produce otherwise.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[gouki88]

Pretty sure Grundy has said the option of taking a pay cut to stay at Collingwood was never put to him. Feel free to produce otherwise.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yeah, we didn't want him any longer, that much was clear. Which makes the fanciful rumours of a reuniting all the funnier

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

I recall reading the same thing.

$250k p.a. and we paid it up front i.e., paid something along the lines of $1.5m this year.

Well then what is being reported about us being cleared of the debt if Grundy goes to a third club is bs.

 

[manicpie]

Well then what is being reported about us being cleared of the debt if Grundy goes to a third club is bs.

Not really, it just means that Melbourne can't hold up there end of the deal and the contract would be void, I imagine we would get our money back

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Not really, it just means that Melbourne can't hold up there end of the deal and the contract would be void, I imagine we would get our money back

Lol. I doubt that. Nothing in that reporting suggests we'd get any money back...just that we wouldn't have to continue paying any more towards Grundy's contract if he's no longer playing at the club we have the arrangement with.

 

[Scodog10]

Yeah I heard about that. Severely hamstrings the Dees in any trade scenario. What’s better for them, a $650k player sitting in the VFL or playing as an ineffective forward. Or shelling out $250k to another club for the next 4 years in order for them to take on his contract and using the $400k elsewhere?

It’s a terrible and hilarious situation they’ve got themselves in to, and something I think every pies supporter saw coming when they announced they’d be rotating Gawn and Grundy through the forward line.

That’s if the other club wants to pay $650k… I mean can you imagine if the Dees were cluey enough to pay him the $400-500k he’s actually worth to them? We’d have potentially been on the hook for another $1m (give or take) or stuck with him.

 

[manicpie]

Lol. I doubt that. Nothing in that reporting suggests we'd get any money back...just that we wouldn't have to continue paying any more towards Grundy's contract if he's no longer playing at the club we have the arrangement with.

It would if we've paid it up front, which is what was reported

 

[leon123]

Sounds pretty silly to take a pay cut when you don’t have to.
Have you ever accepted a pay cut to do the same job?

Spc workers have done it a couple of times by memory

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

It would if we've paid it up front, which is what was reported

It's only on bf where anyone has heard/suggested that we paid upfront. We wouldn't get back the percentage for the time he's played at the Dees, ie 2023.

Theoretically it's still the same amount of money we'd be contributing (or contributed) if we only pay the Dee's whilst Grundy is playing at the Dee's.

And if Grundy knows he won't get the Pies portion of his contract by moving to a 3rd club, he won't leave.

And if the Dee's lose money on the deal by moving him on, then they won't be wanting to do that either.

Looks like Grundy just sits back and collects the moula.

 

[jmac70]

Spc workers have done it a couple of times by memory

Was there another organisation willing to take them on for their original wage?

If a pay cut was really an option for Grundy, which is questionable, why would he choose to reduce his contract by 20-30% when he could get paid in full at another team?

Seems the only legitimate option was to agree to the trade.

 

[manicpie]

It's only on bf where anyone has heard/suggested that we paid upfront. We wouldn't get back the percentage for the time he's played at the Dees, ie 2023.

Theoretically it's still the same amount of money we'd be contributing (or contributed) if we only pay the Dee's whilst Grundy is playing at the Dee's.

And if Grundy knows he won't get the Pies portion of his contract by moving to a 3rd club, he won't leave.

And if the Dee's lose money on the deal by moving him on, then they won't be wanting to do that either.

Looks like Grundy just sits back and collects the moula.

It's going to be interesting because unless Grundy becomes a KF, he might be playing VFL for the rest of his career. I'm just glad that Melbourne were dumb enough to take him

 

[Scodog10]

I recall reading the same thing.

$250k p.a. and we paid it up front i.e., paid something along the lines of $1.5m this year.

I’m not sure how it shook down, but I’m certain this isn’t it because no club can carry $1.5m in dead cap in a single year. We’ll find out next year what our payments were when the 2023 highest paid players are revealed because if we paid it up front Grundy will be the highest paid player ever in a single season. My guess is we’re on the hook for $250-300k over the life of the deal.

The rumour of us paying up front was most likely designed to make the perceived low trade value easier to swallow. It makes for a delicious scenario for us come the trade period because either the Dees strengthen two competitors (the team he’s traded to and us by releasing us from the payments) or they weaken themselves by having $650k invested in a VFL player for the next 2 years?

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

It's going to be interesting because unless Grundy becomes a KF, he might be playing VFL for the rest of his career. I'm just glad that Melbourne were dumb enough to take him

Lol. Same.

 

[Apex36]

That’s if the other club wants to pay $650k… I mean can you imagine if the Dees were cluey enough to pay him the $400-500k he’s actually worth to them? We’d have potentially been on the hook for another $1m (give or take) or stuck with him.

I’m not sure that any club would be willing to take on the full whack of his contract, unless they essentially got him for free. If Port wanted to get Grundy without losing any significant trade capital then it could be an option for them, albeit a risky one given the cap investment required over the next 4 years.

 

[sideswipe]

I’m not sure how it shook down, but I’m certain this isn’t it because no club can carry $1.5m in dead cap in a single year. We’ll find out next year what our payments were when the 2023 highest paid players are revealed because if we paid it up front Grundy will be the highest paid player ever in a single season. My guess is we’re on the hook for $250-300k over the life of the deal.

The rumour of us paying up front was most likely designed to make the perceived low trade value easier to swallow. It makes for a delicious scenario for us come the trade period because either the Dees strengthen two competitors (the team he’s traded to and us by releasing us from the payments) or they weaken themselves by having $650k invested in a VFL player for the next 2 years?

There won't be any releasing us from our obligations. Browne's reporting has been misunderstood - he didn't state a trade would void our obligations, merely that we would need to be somehow involved.

You can guarantee two things:
1. The AFL will not want a player's right to move clubs fettered by the spectre of losing entitlements under an existing two club deal.
2. Our obligations would carry over to Grundy's new club, if a trade was to take place.

That's the fair outcome.

 

[3rdMan]

It's going to be interesting because unless Grundy becomes a KF, he might be playing VFL for the rest of his career. I'm just glad that Melbourne were dumb enough to take him

Not his career. Didn't play VFL all of this year and Gawn won't be around or able to play first ruck for ever.

 

[Maggie5]

Was there another organisation willing to take them on for their original wage?

If a pay cut was really an option for Grundy, which is questionable, why would he choose to reduce his contract by 20-30% when he could get paid in full at another team?

Seems the only legitimate option was to agree to the trade.

Given that SPC is in Shepparton, workers had little option than to take a pay cut as employment elsewhere was limited.
Grundy's situation is nothing like theirs as was evidenced.

 

[3rdMan]

Nah if they wanted a chop-out ruck they would have picked one for peanuts somewhere. You Don’t pay what they’re paying Grundy for a relief ruck.

I Think they genuinely thought the two playing together would gain then some sort of competitive advantage and it backfired massively.

It's not a chop out ruck though. They wanted a first ruck for, at least, most of the season. When you're replacing Gawn and pushing for a flag, that ruck needs to be good.

Given how dominant Gawn is as a ruck there's no making sense of playing him as forward/ruck without considering that he's no longer up to playing first ruck for a year. Then you think about how long Gawn will play for or ruck for and when a replacement will be needed.

I'm sure there was some thought that shared ruck duties would work and they'd continue with it all year. There would always have been the fallback of Gawn taking over if he and Grundy proved underwhelming as forwards. Either way the trade works.

 

[TradeDraft]

 

[Scodog10]

I’m not sure that any club would be willing to take on the full whack of his contract, unless they essentially got him for free. If Port wanted to get Grundy without losing any significant trade capital then it could be an option for them, albeit a risky one given the cap investment required over the next 4 years.

Zero chance anyone’s taking on $900k-1m for Grundy. It would have to boil down to what Melbourne are prepared to chip in and I’d suggest it wouldn’t be much higher than our payment to them. Port might be prepared to go to $600-650k, but that’s a lot!

It's going to be interesting because unless Grundy becomes a KF, he might be playing VFL until Gawn retires. I'm just glad that Melbourne were dumb enough to take him

EFA. This is an issue for the Dees until Gawn retires so you’d think until end of 2025 at least.

 

[Apex36]

Zero chance anyone’s taking on $900k-1m for Grundy. It would have to boil down to what Melbourne are prepared to chip in and I’d suggest it wouldn’t be much higher than our payment to them. Port might be prepared to go to $600-650k, but that’s a lot!

I agree. Interestingly it was just reported on the MMM news update that Grundy has said he’s open to a trade at the end of the year, which is essentially code for he wants out. This is going to be a very interesting watch regardless of what happens.

EFA. This is an issue for the Dees until Gawn retires so you’d think until end of 2025 at least.

By the sounds of it he’s not going to want to play second fiddle for two years, and fair enough. He’s got his deficiencies, but at the end of the day he’s a high quality first ruck, and is still extremely capable when working solo, as seen when again went down injured.

 

[Scodog10]

I agree. Interestingly it was just reported on the MMM news update that Grundy has said he’s open to a trade at the end of the year, which is essentially code for he wants out. This is going to be a very interesting watch regardless of what happens.

By the sounds of it he’s not going to want to play second fiddle for two years, and fair enough. He’s got his deficiencies, but at the end of the day he’s a high quality first ruck, and is still extremely capable when working solo, as seen when again went down injured.

That’s effectively him acknowledging he’s a VFL player unless Gawn goes down and that he isn’t keen on being a VFL footballer…

Having a presence like that at Collingwood after 10 years of service is one thing, but a guy like that in the mix 3/4 of the way through his 1st season at the club is cancerous.