If he was a FA then he would have 5 year deals in front of him, there would be many clubs in the market and youd have to offer 5 to keep up.
You are offering 4 with a trigger for a 5th I thought
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 7 - Pride Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Speculation Tom Barrass [UFA 2027] - Reportedly headed to Hawthorn
- Thread starter TiAn_
- Start date
- Tagged users None
You are offering 4 with a trigger for a 5th I thought
Aren't hawthorn extending he's contract and money?
Yep, West Coast were under paying him his true value.
Its a 4 year deal with a trigger of a 5th year
In free agency compo the triggers dont count and would be based on 4 years
Even if it was 5 years his age wouldnt allow a band 1 compo
So by saying that if he was a free agent and others would pay over $1 mil for 5 years
Why dont the eagles just give him the extra $100k to keep a loyal vice captain and premiership player ?
Why didnt you guys just pay Rioli, Graham, Bolton etc 500k more each just to make sure they stay?
Market hasn't yet paid anything
We did ................ Not for graham
Rioli is on $800k
Shai on $1.2 mil
baker was offered $850k + Captain
They want to go home or to their dad
Graham was the 1 we wanted to off load but clarke stuffed it up for both our teams
Why not 500k more to make sure they dont feel homesick?
That's why you've offered only three years and less money than Hawthorn?
He wants more years too btw
We have no reason to extend his contract
We offered 6 years, of which he's halfway through and decided he wanted more money.
A Bit Dusty
2017🏆2019🏆2020🏆
- Oct 6, 2017
- 13,477
- 39,418
- AFL Club
- Richmond
But he is the best defender in the comp apparently why wouldn't you extend his contract and pay him more?
Because we don't have to? Why would you extend a bloke who already has 3 years to run on his contract?
Only an idiot club would do that.
We offered them all an extra $million a year each. They said they didn’t want all that because they’d lose most of it in tax.
Baker and Graham only wanted out to WA to lift the low standards at WC.
Bolton wanted family time and support in WA, not money.
Rioli’s gf wanted more sunshine.
Hes contracted until hes 32 or something, why would we bother extending? Whats the benefit? We could just keep him on his current contract
A Bit Dusty
2017🏆2019🏆2020🏆
- Oct 6, 2017
- 13,477
- 39,418
- AFL Club
- Richmond
So there you go that's why the Hawks offer was below what you wanted because that's all he is worth
The deal is done.
Settle.
Settle.
Art Vandelay_
TheBrownDog
- Oct 28, 2012
- 107,373
- 148,907
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers - Tottenham
Nobody on here likes a liar. You got any pics to prove that
Richmond supporters are way too invested in this trade
Didn’t you extend and upgrade Watermans existing contract?
Who cares if it’s one year, two years or three years. Plenty of clubs extend and upgrade contracted players. That’s how you keep them.
It’s seems that you’ve lowballed his contract $ wise and the hawks offered extra value.
It’s not as if WC couldn’t fit extra in the saary cap and kept an important key backman. How long has McGovern got left?
Of course, because the pick you got for Barass you were passing on to Richmond for Baker
- Sep 25, 2013
- 3,448
- 4,348
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
This sort of thing is why the AFL need to get serious and sort all of their player movement and contract stuff out. It’s just so manipulatable. Theoretically, you could offer a FA a 1 yr deal with 4 years worth of extremely achievable triggers if you had a need to mess with a club’s compensation. The rules aren’t so much rules as much as they are guidelines. Extremely rubbery, flexible guidelines.
Similar threads
