Urq's to be rookied

[roos_fanatic08]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/roos-to-foot-urquhart-bill-20111019-1m842.html

NORTH Melbourne is committed to paying the bulk of Gavin Urquhart's $300,000-plus contract next year even if he is taken by another club, despite de-listing the midfielder.

But the club has agreed to re-draft Urquhart as a rookie and retain him if he is not picked up earlier in the drafts (national or rookie).​

 

[Dan]

Some insurance for Gav but I hope he can get on a seniors list elsewhere. Hard to see him get opportunity being on our rookie list.

 

[Mr Reliable]

As reported by Western Taipan at 9.25 yesterday........here:

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=883215&page=4

WT's got the good oil on matters Gav.

 

[mark73]

Some insurance for Gav but I hope he can get on a seniors list elsewhere. Hard to see him get opportunity being on our rookie list.

On what he's shown it certainly is.

 

[MajakHarpeWright]

When was Urquhart ever worth 300k/season? Seriously. I mean... wtf. Who signed that deal when it was done?

 

[Bigeasy]

When was Urquhart ever worth 300k/season? Seriously. I mean... wtf. Who signed that deal when it was done?

You know how it goes, rookie shows something in his first year, a new club is starting up from where he grew up, footy club panics, player agent starts salivating and bingo, 300K contract.

 

[MaddAdam]

When was Urquhart ever worth 300k/season? Seriously. I mean... wtf. Who signed that deal when it was done?

The year he won a rising star nom and looked to be one of the better young players going around.

 

[Chief75]

I remember Glen Archer on the footy show calling him the best kick of the football he had seen in his time at the club. Not a bad endorsement.

 

[Booze Nasty]

Last year, on an online live forum, I asked Drew Petrie; who has the best skills at training? Drew said, "Urq's" then later added that Boomer "was pretty good at hitting him on a lead".

Soon after I witnessed a two shank game where he actually stubbed his toe and gifted a goal whilst kicking out.

Like other have said he simply doesn't get it enough.

 

[Passmore]

When was Urquhart ever worth 300k/season? Seriously. I mean... wtf. Who signed that deal when it was done?

Most things are clear in hindsight, and there were no complaints when we re-signed him. And I don't think anyone was privy to the financial details. Was it $300k a year or was it back ended?

He showed enough in 2008 for the club to keep him out of the clutches of GC. He had all the physical atributes to have most think a bright future was in store. Unfortunately it hasn't worked out. Hopefully he is re rookied and the penny drops.

It's not an isoated incident either. Essendon have just offered a 19yo with 2 games under his belt a reported 300k a year for three years. I'm sure we'll be offering Bastinac some impressive $$$ to keep him away from GWS.

 

[Event Horizon]

Wonder if Ben Ross is any chance of being rookied by us. He looked miles ahead of Gav towards the end of 2011, and given we have 5 rookie spots available, we could do worse.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Wonder if Ben Ross is any chance of being rookied by us. He looked miles ahead of Gav towards the end of 2011, and given we have 5 rookie spots available, we could do worse.

Doubtful.

 

[RooHooDoo]

I wonder if we would bother re drafting him if it wasn't for his contract.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

I wonder if we would bother re drafting him if it wasn't for his contract.

In the article it points out it will cost us more to re-rookie him than if someone else picked him up (we save 60+k)

 

[RooHooDoo]

In the article it points out it will cost us more to re-rookie him than if someone else picked him up (we save 60+k)

What about if no one picks him up?

So we pay his Rookie wage on top of his 300k?

personally I dont care if someone else grabs him, I just assumed we had to pay him 300k so we might as well have him as a Rookie as not.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Someone else picks him up we pay 240k.

We pick him up we pay 300K+

If he doesnt end up anywhere we'd have to pay his full remaining contract.

 

[RooHooDoo]

If he doesnt end up anywhere we'd have to pay his full remaining contract.

Hence why we would rookie him.

As I pondered earlier, I wonder if we would bother if he was out of contract.

 

[Bomber Trav]

I'd like to see the Bombers have a crack at drafting him. Thought he looked a good player in his rookie year. Haven't seen much of NM since though.
Draft him in the PSD and see what the coaches can do with him.

 

[kool kangas]

Wonder if Ben Ross is any chance of being rookied by us. He looked miles ahead of Gav towards the end of 2011, and given we have 5 rookie spots available, we could do worse.

l'd be very surprised if no other club goes after Ross...l cant see him being around for us to pick him back up as a rookie.

 

[curiousLplater]

l'd be very surprised if no other club goes after Ross...l cant see him being around for us to pick him back up as a rookie.

I am with you on this, but we will rookie him, if no other club picks him up.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

I am with you on this, but we will rookie him, if no other club picks him up.

by the sounds of things, ross never looked like getting another go on our list.

 

[Mr Reliable]

Someone else picks him up we pay 240k.

We pick him up we pay 300K+

If he doesnt end up anywhere we'd have to pay his full remaining contract.

This is what the article states, but I'm not sure why we would gave to pay most of his salary if he plays for another club:

"In the event that Urquhart is not drafted by another club, the Roos will pick him up in the rookie draft and have to pay the entire contract, rather than the estimated $240,000 to $250,000 they would be paying Urquhart if he went elsewhere."

Is there some sort of rule or is just too bad for us that, as George Costanza would say, "we have no hand"?

 

[LT Smash]

This is what the article states, but I'm not sure why we would gave to pay most of his salary if he plays for another club:

"In the event that Urquhart is not drafted by another club, the Roos will pick him up in the rookie draft and have to pay the entire contract, rather than the estimated $240,000 to $250,000 they would be paying Urquhart if he went elsewhere."

Is there some sort of rule or is just too bad for us that, as George Costanza would say, "we have no hand"?

It's quite simply contract law, surely. Gav has a contract that explicitly guarantees him $300K for 2012. If another club drafts him, they would be mad to offer more than $50K minimum payment, knowing that we are obliged to make up the shortfall.

In the NFL, team owners are allowed to tear up contracts like they don't exist. That blows chunks. We screwed the pooch on this deal so we have to cop it on the chin.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

It's quite simply contract law, surely. Gav has a contract that explicitly guarantees him $300K for 2012. If another club drafts him, they would be mad to offer more than $50K minimum payment, knowing that we are obliged to make up the shortfall.

In the NFL, team owners are allowed to tear up contracts like they don't exist. That blows chunks. We screwed the pooch on this deal so we have to cop it on the chin.

Hole in one.

 

[Mr Reliable]

^^^^

So the other club could offer, say $25k, and make us pay the rest?

I understand Gav's entitled to be paid $300k. There must be a point where we say "buggar it, we'd sooner pay him the full $300k and use his services, than pay him ($xxx??) for another club to have him."