Salary cap.

Remove this Banner Ad

should the club consider trading de goey because he is asking for 900k, it will go to the board and one part of the discussion will be about the loss of memberships if the trade is made...
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Sea fog said:
But the board can't be held to ransom if paying too much hurts the club.
Click to expand...

can't be ...

let me paint the scene. ....list manager ned says that de goey is asking for too much. bucks agrees. it goes to the board, they want to trade him....

anderson raises issue of impact on membership if the club trades de goey.... many bigfooty legend members would not buy next years membership...

the board decides to tell the footy dept to reconsider...
 
How much is Barrett on? What about Caro? I want all their salaries put out there so that we can discuss their worth and selfishness too. Media outlets could all take part in a pre season draft for commentators and journos...it'd be fun. Make the months between footy seasons a lot easier to put up with.

I'll start....I reckon Barrett's on $200k....whats he worth?
 
SnakePlisskin said:
Barrett on the AFL app says DeGoey was on 800k this year , surely not?
Click to expand...

Was offered $5M over 5 years by the Roos. What sort of cash do you think we should have offered to retain him? There's generally only a few reasons players leave clubs. Money, opportunity, head home, and disharmony encapsulates most movement. It generally takes an additional $150-200K a year to drive a shift of club so we were lucky to retain him for the suggested $750-800k. I don't recall too many overly disappointed at the time that we did retain him. I think people forget how good he was in 2018.
 
Last edited:
jackcass said:
Was offered $5M over 5 years by the Roos. What sort of cash do you think we should have offered to retain him? There's generally only a few reasons players leave clubs. Money, opportunity, head home, and disharmony encapsulates most movement. It generally takes an additional $150-200K a year to drive a shift of club so we were lucky to retain him for the suggested $750-800k. I don't recall too many overly disappointed at the time that we did retain him. I think people forget how good he was in 2018.
Click to expand...
Good point.
 
Jake Niall said on Radio yesterday that one of significant issues with our salary cap is because the the amount of players contracts that had to be renegotiated to accommodate the trade of Beams. Players were given extra years to spread their payments. Hence why we have players getting extensions on their contracts that are not supported by their on-field exploits.
 
So TheGoey won't be going to the blose, but will he stay with us? And can we afford him? Will he ask too much and if so would we be better to offload and pursue a Cameron type?

Remembering that it's likely Jordy is being groomed for more mid time, which we desperately need given we're getting pantsed in the middle week in week out.

Jordan De Goey won't be at Carlton in 2021

They've made a decision.
www.sen.com.au www.sen.com.au
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Drought Break said:
overpaid players, mercenary players, useless team management. At least half the list is overpaid, some by about 30%.

List of overpaid for there output (main offenders)
Grundy
Treloar
Phillips
WHE
Cox
greenwood
mayne
Sidebottom
Beams lol

Now apparently JDG wants in excess of 900,000.
Click to expand...

DeGoey had to go. I‘d take Cameron over him.
 
Roverjg said:
Jake Niall said on Radio yesterday that one of significant issues with our salary cap is because the the amount of players contracts that had to be renegotiated to accommodate the trade of Beams. Players were given extra years to spread their payments. Hence why we have players getting extensions on their contracts that are not supported by their on-field exploits.
Click to expand...

I'm not too sure about the correlation. My recollection is that the players that had their contracts extended for less money were players like Pendles and Treloar. The players whose contracts aren't supported by their on-field exploits (for want of a better expression) were largely those who got offered 1 year deals like Reid, Dunn and Varcoe.

The whole Collingwood cap issues narrative is a hangover from that white board snap from some years ago but Guy has been on deck now for a couple of seasons and I think the majority of contracts have now been renegotiated and more than a few players currently on different deals than when he assumed the reins. The 2020 unsigned cohort likely the last of them.
 
Markfs said:
can't be ...

let me paint the scene. ....list manager ned says that de goey is asking for too much. bucks agrees. it goes to the board, they want to trade him....

anderson raises issue of impact on membership if the club trades de goey.... many bigfooty legend members would not buy next years membership...

the board decides to tell the footy dept to reconsider...
Click to expand...

Didn't stop us not pursuing Thomas. Wasn't he the face of our junior membership program - Club 13 or something like that?
 
We continually over rate our list and then bend at the knees when a players up's their demands.

For example Grundy 7 years and $1.0 million reportedly a year. I wasn't against resigning him - an A grader for sure. But in terms of list management strategy, what if we decided to trade Grundy out last year, for a couple of first round picks and picked up one of the King bros, and say Rozee, and then went and got an OK ruckman from another club for peanuts (say Preust from Melb)

Salary cap wouldn't be stretched, and we land a couple critical pieces - build for the future.

Degoey this year another example - we will hang onto him at any cost, but based on performance I wouldn't pay anymore than $500k. Darcy Moore is a far more critical player long term for us.

I thought Ned was going to fix this stuff?
 
jackcass said:
I'm not too sure about the correlation. My recollection is that the players that had their contracts extended for less money were players like Pendles and Treloar. The players whose contracts aren't supported by their on-field exploits (for want of a better expression) were largely those who got offered 1 year deals like Reid, Dunn and Varcoe.

The whole Collingwood cap issues narrative is a hangover from that white board snap from some years ago but Guy has been on deck now for a couple of seasons and I think the majority of contracts have now been renegotiated and more than a few players currently on different deals than when he assumed the reins. The 2020 unsigned cohort likely the last of them.
Click to expand...

That in part is the issue. Late last year we reportedly extended Treloar's contract on great $$$$ for a further 4 years to spread out over more years. This extension does not start until the end of next season. By the time 2022 starts he will be 29. We did the same with Adams. Grundy's contract does not commence until next season. Having to fit Beam's contract in and spreading it amongst who we have means we have had no room to bring anybody else in since Beams. Agreeing to Grundy's long-term contract hampers the ability to move players contracts around more. We have not been able to trade the likes of Thomas, Wills etc out (they are on the lower end of the pay scale) because we did not have the room to pay better players coming in.
 
Roverjg said:
That in part is the issue. Late last year we reportedly extended Treloar's contract on great $$$$ for a further 4 years to spread out over more years. This extension does not start until the end of next season. By the time 2022 starts he will be 29. We did the same with Adams. Grundy's contract does not commence until next season. Having to fit Beam's contract in and spreading it amongst who we have means we have had no room to bring anybody else in since Beams. Agreeing to Grundy's long-term contract hampers the ability to move players contracts around more. We have not been able to trade the likes of Thomas, Wills etc out (they are on the lower end of the pay scale) because we did not have the room to pay better players coming in.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm not sure of the veracity of a lot of that.

My understanding is that Treloar has always signed on for relatively low salary and that's predicated on security of tenure. Relatively low salary might still mean $600-650k but in the scheme of things that is still low and he'll still only be 32 when that concludes.

Adams deal likewise takes him till he's 31 and I'd assume the length of the deal enabled them to sign him for cheaper than if he'd only signed for a year or 2.

Those longer term deals for key players give you greater certainty with your TPP moving forward and I'd have thought free up cap space. Even Grundy's deal.

I disagree on Wills and Thomas types firstly because being contracted doesn't preclude trading someone although it certainly gives that player more say, and secondly, it assumes that we wanted to trade them when at a minimum they're cheap depth. We've clearly had TPP space to chase Lynch and May, and it seems we were also in the market for Kennedy this year.

I'd be more concerned if we had players like Buddy (7 years into a 9 year deal and already 33) and Lynch (2 years into a 7 year deal and 33 when it concludes) on really long deals that are reportedly heavily back ended, and what that does to your TPP. CV 19 may even compound that.
 
Captivating said:
Didn't stop us not pursuing Thomas. Wasn't he the face of our junior membership program - Club 13 or something like that?
Click to expand...

You make a good point. Different players though. THomas had injury issues and his best was in his past. I was just giving an example where there would be a lot of pressure on the board not to trade de goey. Nothing stopping the board from being brave.
 
Markfs said:
You make a good point. Different players though. THomas had injury issues and his best was in his past. I was just giving an example where there would be a lot of pressure on the board not to trade de goey. Nothing stopping the board from being brave.
Click to expand...

You think the board have the final say on which players we trade in and out?

Half the people on our board don't even understand Football ffs
 
Kappa said:
You think the board have the final say on which players we trade in and out?

Half the people on our board don't even understand Football ffs
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is that I dont understand football... You seem to have a fairly gutless way of expressing yourself. I would argue that considering the role that the president took in recruiting beams, it is highly likely that if the footy side was intending to trade de goey, they would pass it in front of the board. You think otherwise?
 
Markfs said:
it is highly likely that if the footy side was intending to trade de goey, they would pass it in front of the board.
Click to expand...
Was going to jump in and say similar, but thought it best if you address it first. (lest the implication be directed at me).
A great example is the Tony Lockett recruitment being knocked on the head at board level.
My understanding is it’s fairly common for the board to be invited to provide their opinion.
But then again, what would I know?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Salary cap.

Similar threads

steviewonder36
Anyone collect Membership Lanyard and Caps?
Replies
0
Views
239
steviewonder36
steviewonder36
Kes1984
Prediction Who will be named Vice Captain?
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
Dead Eye Didak
Dead Eye Didak

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top