Strijk contract problems

Remove this Banner Ad

Wirra for PM

Wirra for PM

All Australian
Jul 30, 2009
850
1
near the 'G
AFL Club
West Coast
According to this story in the West Andrew Strijk is peeved he hasn't been offered a senior list contract.

This is ridiculous if true, Strijk has shown more in the second half of this year than plenty of others and for WC not to reward that performance with a senior list spot would be inconsistent to say the least.

2 year contracts for senior listers that don't perform, but if you're on the rookie list and perform don't even think about an upgrade.

Wouldn't blame Strijk if we say rookie list or nothing and he walks to another club.
 
Well they have a few weeks to sort out. I'm sure they are trying to weigh up elevating Strijk and Hams against elevating the 3rd year rookies like Wilson, Stevenson and Sullivan who can't stay on the rookie list.

The biggest problem is the club has got itself into a mess with some contracts going past this year - they will have to pay out some players to keep/upgrade the best players.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The majority of football clubs don't evaluate their list until the end of the season and then there will still be uncertainty until trade week is over. I am sure it will be sorted out in due course.
 
Be Aggressive said:
The biggest problem is the club has got itself into a mess with some contracts going past this year - they will have to pay out some players to keep/upgrade the best players.
Click to expand...

This is spot on. At a time when we should be looking to draft deeply and ensure we retain our rookie talent, poorly thought through contracts for the likes of Nicoski are getting in the way.
 
I think the title 'strife' it's a bit premature, just a hype article. Strijk's manager sad that WC haven't decided what they'll do as yet, he was just pushing the case that he should be offered a senior spot.

Strijk really has been a revelation this year and IMO is in a small handful of players I class as our most exciting with huge potential. We'd be crazy not to promote him but it's probably a week or two too early by WC to make that call as yet.

We must delist Sullivan re rookie him and give Strijk his spot.
 
You just know that the club is wanting to keep Hansen and the other contracted spuds on our list, but it better not be at the expense of some talented youngsters.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

strijk has come along very quickly at afl level,
probably quicker than west coast could offer him a deal.

im sure it will happen.

though i dont think west coast expected to so many rookies to play so well
(stevenson, hams, strijk, wilson) so may have some issues in keeping them all.
 
why are people taking a journo's article about what is going to happen with our list management?

Sure there are some quotes from his manager.

He's been told he is a required player - he may remain on the rookie list and promoted pre-season like Sullivan. He may get a senior contract.

The other side is a positive - we may just investigating ways we can clear room from the main list without jeopardising TPPs - and hence can't commit at the moment.

Rather than jump the gun and head to supposition - let's just wait and see what happens.

If we lose him due to poor list management - i'll moan and bitch as well.

However I'm not going to start assassinating the club on the pen of a journo.
 
As mentioned, time to let some of these guys who aren't performing go and make room for these young blokes to come through. Pay out the contracts if needed and make the space. Will be very pissed if some of the same olds are kept on.
 
The Falcon Strike said:
why are people taking a journo's article about what is going to happen with our list management?

Sure there are some quotes from his manager.

He's been told he is a required player - he may remain on the rookie list and promoted pre-season like Sullivan. He may get a senior contract.

The other side is a positive - we may just investigating ways we can clear room from the main list without jeopardising TPPs - and hence can't commit at the moment.

Rather than jump the gun and head to supposition - let's just wait and see what happens.

If we lose him due to poor list management - i'll moan and bitch as well.

However I'm not going to start assassinating the club on the pen of a journo.
Click to expand...

This.:thumbsu:

If both players are happy I'd be pushing to retain both Strijk and Hams on the rookie list for one more year. Gives us flexibility to upgrade Stevenson and Wilson plus use at least 4 main draft picks plus possibly PSD pick #1.

I'd promise to upgrade Strijk in round 1 and hams later. Obviously need to throw some bigger $$ to them as reward for preforming so well.

Also if we do move on a Nocski or a Hansen by paying them out it may have to be post draft to get these $$$ into next years cap payments.

If we upgraded 4 rookies we'd only have places for 2 or 3 draft picks ............ which is simply not going to happen.
 
Exactly Falcon! I cant see the club leaving Strijk in the lurch. Think the title of this thread is very misleading.
 
Veteran list Glass, Cox and Embley.
Show the door to Wilkes, Lynch, Spangher and McKinley.
Offer Cockie a 3rd year rookie contract.
Payout either Nicoski or Hansen.

Elevate the 3rd year rookies Wilson, Stevenson and Sullivan.
Elevate Hams and Strijk.

I think that would leave us with 3 picks in the draft.
We could probably get a pick upgrade with our pick 26 and McKinley.

So we might end up with say picks 4, 18 and 28.
 
silver eagles said:
Veteran list Glass, Cox and Embley.
Show the door to Wilkes, Lynch, Spangher and McKinley.
Offer Cockie a 3rd year rookie contract.
Payout either Nicoski or Hansen.

Elevate the 3rd year rookies Wilson, Stevenson and Sullivan.
Elevate Hams and Strijk.

I think that would leave us with 3 picks in the draft.
We could probably get a pick upgrade with our pick 26 and McKinley.

So we might end up with say picks 4, 18 and 28.
Click to expand...

I've just mentioned this in another thread but wasn't Sullivan already elevated to the seniors this year?
 
The Falcon Strike said:
why are people taking a journo's article about what is going to happen with our list management?

Sure there are some quotes from his manager.

He's been told he is a required player - he may remain on the rookie list and promoted pre-season like Sullivan. He may get a senior contract.

The other side is a positive - we may just investigating ways we can clear room from the main list without jeopardising TPPs - and hence can't commit at the moment.

Rather than jump the gun and head to supposition - let's just wait and see what happens.

If we lose him due to poor list management - i'll moan and bitch as well.

However I'm not going to start assassinating the club on the pen of a journo.
Click to expand...


Don't go and apply any sense on this board... :thumbsu:;)

That would be madness!!!! :cool:
 
Makka said:
I've just mentioned this in another thread but wasn't Sullivan already elevated to the seniors this year?
Click to expand...
He had been named as a 3rd year rookie. I know he was elevated to the senior list before round 1, but for some reason I was under the impression it was only temporary. Can anyone else clear this up for us?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Strijk contract problems

Similar threads

Keys
List Mgmt. Contract, Trade and Draft Discussions - 2024 Post Season
150 151 152 153 154
Replies
4K
Views
190K
Elite Pete
E
eaglevision
  • Locked
  • Poll
List Mgmt. Contract, Trade and Draft Discussions - 2024 Edition
841 842 843 844 845
Replies
21K
Views
968K
maverick001
maverick001

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top