View Full Version : Scott Clayton - contract situation?
By my reckoning, his contract has either expired (PS/rookie draft) or is very close to expiring (end of the year), and other than an article suggesting that he rejected Collingwood, there hasn't been any news on him re-signing.
With Collingwood never completely ruled out of the picture (and possibly still looking for a recruiter), and with an article a few weeks back saying that Richmond now has the cash to go hunting for a recruiting manager, I'm getting a little worried that there hasn't been any official word so late in the picture.
Has anyone heard anything?
Pembleton
20 Dec 2005, 13:54
I thought he had only agreed to a new deal a bit over twelve months ago.
I thought he had only agreed to a new deal a bit over twelve months ago.
Yeah, I thought Eddiewood came knocking halfway through his current contract?
I thought he had only agreed to a new deal a bit over twelve months ago.
http://westernbulldogs.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=126215
According to that article, he signed a two year contract in 2003 which ends this year.
OldSchool
20 Dec 2005, 15:08
I thought he had only agreed to a new deal a bit over twelve months ago.
Same here. By my understanding he is pretty well set with us and wants to stay in that the recruiters role for at least two more seasons.
Given that the list has been rebuilt I'm sure he would like to see it through.
Kinnear Beatson will be chased by some other clubs
H Dolphin
20 Dec 2005, 15:26
The whisper is that Clayton had to be paid more to stay, Rocket put his hand up for a raise on the strength of a season better than expected and there wasn't enough to offer the fitness bloke sufficient to entice him to stay. If it's true, its disappointing. It's not as if we won a premiership. We didn't even make the finals.
I think Collingwoods offer was and will be larger than any offer the Dogs have made and will make to Scott Clayton.
I think Scott wants to see this job through and is confident something special may be on the horizon and he wants to be part of it, he is just starting to see his pics from 1999 and onwards coming on and he knows he has something special with our pics in the last couple of years.
Basically he wants to see the job finished and if the job is finished the way he thinks it will happen the big contract will surely come. I also heard that although Collingwood offer was bigger monetary wise it did not fit in with his preffered job description.
Pembleton
20 Dec 2005, 15:43
http://westernbulldogs.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=126215
According to that article, he signed a two year contract in 2003 which ends this year.
I thought he signed a deal half way through that one that gave him a bigger role in the footy department, around the time Wallace had a nibble at him when he joined Richmond. Maybe it wasn't actually a new extended deal but just an enlarging of his role.
I thought he signed a deal half way through that one that gave him a bigger role in the footy department, around the time Wallace had a nibble at him when he joined Richmond. Maybe it wasn't actually a new extended deal but just an enlarging of his role.
The more influential role in the footy department was one of the terms he stipulated before agreeing to a new contract in 2003. Maybe I was reading too much into it, but I think it was a move to have more sway in list management/trade decisions after the 2003 disaster. His role changed again when Eade came on board and he, Eade and Drain agreed to split contract negotiations, admin etc between themselves.
But if quote from the Herald Sun article in September is accurate, there was no extension:
Rose said Clayton was contracted until the end of 2005 and negotiations for a new contract were under way.
It's the new year and still no news - surely the club would have made an announcement if he was re-signed or the media would be onto it if he didn't. Does anyone know any concrete info one way or the other?
But if quote from the Herald Sun article in September is accurate, there was no extension:
Rose said Clayton was contracted until the end of 2005 and negotiations for a new contract were under way.
It's the new year and still no news - surely the club would have made an announcement if he was re-signed or the media would be onto it if he didn't. Does anyone know any concrete info one way or the other?
Im going to have to assume that the Herald Sun was wrong (which wouldnt be a first). If he was out of contract or on a rolling contract, I think he would have jumped on the contract offer from the Pies.
Like I said this is just my assumption, which doesnt really help you.
The whisper is that Clayton had to be paid more to stay, Rocket put his hand up for a raise on the strength of a season better than expected and there wasn't enough to offer the fitness bloke sufficient to entice him to stay. If it's true, its disappointing. It's not as if we won a premiership. We didn't even make the finals.
What a load of carp!
1) If Clayton had to be paid more then they would of announced his contract extension.
2) Rocket was signed to a 3 year deal. If he has any increases they would have been would have been performance based and he deserves it.
3) Heard the fitness guy interviewed and he said 'it was not about money but a better opportunity'.
nuf said
2) Rocket was signed to a 3 year deal. If he has any increases they would have been would have been performance based and he deserves it.
nuf said
I can hardly imagine Rocket taking on a 3 yr contract, not making finals in the 1st year then putting up his hand for a raise on the basis of how good they were! Let's be realistic, we were nothing more than a decent middle-ranking side that played 4 really good games at the end. We missed the finals, and finished lower than sides such as the Kangaroos and the Dees. This is not the stuff of coaches negotiating unexpected pay rises with 2 years left.
Don't you love the rumour mill!
I can hardly imagine Rocket taking on a 3 yr contract, not making finals in the 1st year then putting up his hand for a raise on the basis of how good they were! Let's be realistic, we were nothing more than a decent middle-ranking side that played 4 really good games at the end. We missed the finals, and finished lower than sides such as the Kangaroos and the Dees. This is not the stuff of coaches negotiating unexpected pay rises with 2 years left.
Don't you love the rumour mill!
Not a rumor! It was just a 'whisper'!!!
Have we got someone to replace Justin Cordy yet? (who was glimpsed lounging around the Aussie cricketers' rooms last week, grrr). And if so, is he any good?
Captain Sensible
3 Jan 2006, 16:39
Have we got someone to replace Justin Cordy yet? (who was glimpsed lounging around the Aussie cricketers' rooms last week, grrr). And if so, is he any good?
Mattyhew Drain has taken on his work load.
H Dolphin
3 Jan 2006, 17:30
I can hardly imagine Rocket taking on a 3 yr contract, not making finals in the 1st year then putting up his hand for a raise on the basis of how good they were! Let's be realistic, we were nothing more than a decent middle-ranking side that played 4 really good games at the end. We missed the finals, and finished lower than sides such as the Kangaroos and the Dees. This is not the stuff of coaches negotiating unexpected pay rises with 2 years left.
Don't you love the rumour mill!
The source of the whisper is usually reliable. Rocket is a professional coach who has already experienced the uncertaintly of employment as an AFL coach. He's not an idealistic supporter. I can imagine him, or any coach for that matter, selling his performance for a raise. If he did ask for and receive a raise based upon the team's performance, I'd agree that it would not be deserved.