News Buckley, Pies agree to contract extension

[TradeDraft]

Yes but not in the same year unless Bucks steps aside early. Finals in 2016 and bust in 2017 at the latest.

Agree that IF we don't make finals in the next 2 years. He has to Go

 

[PicaBoo]

Someone posted it earlier in the thread. Page 2 I think.

Posted it a few times how to get around it. Paste link in Google and open in new tab

 

[TheWing121]

Great decision. If the club doesn't believe in Bucks now, what is honestly going to change half way into the season. Not only does it stop media attention, but I imagine it is only a positive effect on the players.
How do you think the younger players would react to the club not resigning him. It can only weigh on their minds that the club doesn't believe in the coach then why should they. See the negative effect it had at Carlton

 

[10571z]

Happy with this. * the media talking about it all year. At worst we can pay out 1 year of his contract if he goes badly this year

 

[TradeDraft]

Great decision. If the club doesn't believe in Bucks now, what is honestly going to change half way into the season. Not only does it stop media attention, but I imagine it is only a positive effect on the players.
How do you think the younger players would react to the club not resigning him. It can only weigh on their minds that the club doesn't believe in the coach then why should they. See the negative effect it had at Carlton

I think a 1 Year Extenstion would not take the Heat off him. He would at least need a 2 Year One for that

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Terrible decision.

I agree, they should have given him an extra year on top of what they gave

 

[Saintly Viewed]

The right decision.

It removes the risk of media speculation of Buckley's tenure derailing our season. Worst case scenario is we just terminate early and wear the costs (which we can afford), although it wouldn't surprise me if Buckley had have agreed to less stringent payout terms just to get the deal signed so that the season wouldn't be at risk.

Smart move by the club. Money we got, but you only get one chance at each season...

Have a feeling the pay out clauses are less favourable than a straight out contract. I'm only guessing at that.
Won't matter, we'll succeed and he'll continue

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Not a bad price to pay for Robbo not asking Bucks about his contract on AFL 360. In fact a bargain, if you look at it that way.

Can we pay double to keep Robinson away from 360
I'm often eating my dinner at the time,...
Then again good appetite suppressant

 

[Saintly Viewed]

What's wrong with seeing how Buckley performs before giving him another extension at the club?

Oh wait.. I forget, we need to pay 500K+ to stop a few media articles that (rightfully and correctly) question whether Buckley is the BEST POSSIBLE senior coach for us. I'm glad not many people in here run businesses with how blase they are to potentially flushing over half a million down the toilet if things don't work with Buckley and we're forced to sack him early (then pay him out ala - James Hird)

Yes we may be paying some dollars to keep the media quiet
But for free at no expense to the Club you do it for the media in these parts off big footy - and you're Collingwood.
So stands to reason a few dollars must be to keep the peasants of propaganda at bay.

Ofcourse I respect your opinion and all

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

Do people actually believe that Nathan's contract is as simple as the article makes it sound? That the only things to be negotiated are wages and the length of his term?

There would be performance based conditions in the document which govern the amount of any payout should the club terminate early. I draft and negotiate contracts for a living and these are the first things I would be looking to include if acting for the club.

If his performance is quantifiably (and drastically) inadequate and we terminate, yet Bucks still gets "$500K +" for a single year as has been suggested, then we need to get some new lawyers or an entirely new Board (people don't always follow the advice they have paid for).

 

[76woodenspooners]

What's wrong with seeing how Buckley performs before giving him another extension at the club?

If you're gunna give the bloke running the show the best chance of succeeding, you need to stand him atop a platform of bedrock.

If you're gunna put him in the water wearing his speedos and have a shark fin circling around him, it's kinda hard to take him seriously don't you think? May as well feed him to the sharks now.

Oh wait.. I forget, we need to pay 500K+ to stop a few media articles that (rightfully and correctly) question whether Buckley is the BEST POSSIBLE senior coach for us.

Shrug. We're gunna get that no matter how long his contract is.

I'm glad not many people in here run businesses with how blase they are to potentially flushing over half a million down the toilet if things don't work with Buckley and we're forced to sack him early (then pay him out ala - James Hird)

I take it you've never heard of a 'golden handshake' then?

 

[Gone Critical]

The hotels fiasco is a reason we shouldn't feel too secure in our wealth and a good example of why we can't afford to be wasteful. That almost bankrupted our club and by all rights deserved more outrage from the supporter base than it received. If Bucks is on at a guess circa 500k-1million? that's not a sum of money I believe we should be frivolous enough to flush down the toilet.

That's a bit dramatic Quicky. All AFL contracts are based on some risk involving their length because their is a wide margin in performance possibilities. Sign a Clarkson for 4-5 seasons and you have continuity and strength in your coaching department but a risk the players tire a bit of his message or he loses his edge you may be left with a less than ideal setting and maybe a payout in season 4 or 5.

In Buckleys case, because he doesn't have the same record, a much shorter time frame is being used so less risk of a big pay out than if a greater term. All contracts have a risk, I don't believe it is fair to describe this one as frivolous.

 

[jathanas]

Good move to re-sign him. I love Bucks so it's hard for me to be objective, but my gut-feel is that Buckley has the attributes we need in a coach. The club's job is to back him and they are doing that.

Success will come if all the stars align i.e. injury, form etc.

 

[Quicky]

That's a bit dramatic Quicky. All AFL contracts are based on some risk involving their length because their is a wide margin in performance possibilities. Sign a Clarkson for 4-5 seasons and you have continuity and strength in your coaching department but a risk the players tire a bit of his message or he loses his edge you may be left with a less than ideal setting and maybe a payout in season 4 or 5.

In Buckleys case, because he doesn't have the same record, a much shorter time frame is being used so less risk of a big pay out than if a greater term. All contracts have a risk, I don't believe it is fair to describe this one as frivolous.

I think you missed my point. The comment wasn't aimed at the contract length. Rather this idea that if we don't like how Buckley performs this year its okay because we can just sack him and eat the financial loss of the last year of his contract. I don't think we should be so careless with the clubs finances.

 

[Buckley is my hero]

Happy with this. **** the media talking about it all year. At worst we can pay out 1 year of his contract if he goes badly this year

Can't imagine Buckley self destructing during the season like MM did last season at Carlton, but can imagine the media bringing the knives out if we have another run of losses mid season. Better to sign up Buckley now so the media won't have anything to bitch about. If it doesn't work out the Collingwood board can handle it and not have the media run its affairs for it. Public opinion has being running the Carlton FC for years and look where it got them.

 

[TheWing121]

I think a 1 Year Extenstion would not take the Heat off him. He would at least need a 2 Year One for that

It wont take the heat off him performing but it will stamp out constant speculation by the media if Pies are going to re-sign him. I think more importantly it shows the players the club believes in the coach and where they are headed

 

[Dynamics]

Can we pay double to keep Robinson away from 360
I'm often eating my dinner at the time,...
Then again good appetite suppressant

Who would you replace him with? Need to balance out Gerard's evenhandedness and nerdy tendencies (I'm a fan of his, by the way).

I'd like Rohan Connolly, off the top of my head. He's another that tends to polarise people but he has an encyclopedic knowledge of the game thanks to his obsessive love of footy. Calls a spade a spade (usually), likes an argument and, unlike Robbo, isn't a deluded arse. Also doesn't come off as smug as blokes like Ralph and Maher.

He's also one of those rarest of beasts - an even-handed Bombers supporter.

 

[Gone Critical]

I think you missed my point. The comment wasn't aimed at the contract length. Rather this idea that if we don't like how Buckley performs this year its okay because we can just sack him and eat the financial loss of the last year of his contract. I don't think we should be so careless with the clubs finances.

Not sure that the club would be going with that idea, maybe just BF. The one year extension is a compromise but with the aim and belief also that Bucks can do the job. Not sure the club would be so glib as to believe it is no big deal to sack him and take the loss. That would be worst case scenario

 

[Quicky]

Not sure that the club would be going with that idea, maybe just BF. The one year extension is a compromise but with the aim and belief also that Bucks can do the job. Not sure the club would be so glib as to believe it is no big deal to sack him and take the loss. That would be worst case scenario

I agree. My comments were'nt aimed at the club. Personally I would have preferred to let the year run out and decide on an extension at the end of the year. I think this fear of media speculation is unwarranted and I'd like to see if we can improve this year first. But I'm not too bothered by a one year extension either.

 

[Kirby]

Do people actually believe that Nathan's contract is as simple as the article makes it sound? That the only things to be negotiated are wages and the length of his term?

There would be performance based conditions in the document which govern the amount of any payout should the club terminate early. I draft and negotiate contracts for a living and these are the first things I would be looking to include if acting for the club.

If his performance is quantifiably (and drastically) inadequate and we terminate, yet Bucks still gets "$500K +" for a single year as has been suggested, then we need to get some new lawyers or an entirely new Board (people don't always follow the advice they have paid for).

Eddie said on Hot Breakfast yesterday that it is (or will be) very much performance based.

 

[Lefthanded]

What's wrong with seeing how Buckley performs before giving him another extension at the club?

Oh wait.. I forget, we need to pay 500K+ to stop a few media articles that (rightfully and correctly) question whether Buckley is the BEST POSSIBLE senior coach for us. I'm glad not many people in here run businesses with how blase they are to potentially flushing over half a million down the toilet if things don't work with Buckley and we're forced to sack him early (then pay him out ala - James Hird)

Whilst I believe you have a point I am supportive of the extension on the proviso that I agree with Boris (quoted below) that the contract is unlikely to be as simple as reported in the media. Some performance based conditions may be subjective, some may be as clear cut as:
1 (eg only, argue all anyone wants over the level) finish bottom four and board have the option to terminate contract (wording like this gives them the right but not obligation in case there are lot of injuries that are out of Nathan's control)
2. (eg only) finish top 4 and get automatic contract extension.

Extension lessens media speculation and enhances stability.

I also support Quicky that we shouldn't be looking to flush money with payouts, especially when it would affect football department tax as well.

Do people actually believe that Nathan's contract is as simple as the article makes it sound? That the only things to be negotiated are wages and the length of his term?

There would be performance based conditions in the document which govern the amount of any payout should the club terminate early. I draft and negotiate contracts for a living and these are the first things I would be looking to include if acting for the club.

If his performance is quantifiably (and drastically) inadequate and we terminate, yet Bucks still gets "$500K +" for a single year as has been suggested, then we need to get some new lawyers or an entirely new Board (people don't always follow the advice they have paid for).

 

[Mattwj81]

I just assumed it was a clause as its not uncommon to prevent a rival company poaching an employee under contract by putting something like that in there. I know that Reece Plumbing have a clause in their showroom consultant contract that prevents any of their consultants going to work for a direct competitor for 6 months after they leave the company.

There was a settlement I remember reading his manager talking about it out the front of the club after they had shaken hands with Eddie. They advised that the settlement was to be kept secret but at the same time Malthouse had reassured the club that he would not be coaching anywhere the following year.

 

[Greening Magic]

Good result. Clubs can never predict the future but based on how Bucks, Hine & Co have restructed the list then if we don't play serious finals next year (when list should be ready to go) then Bucks will have to go. In fact based on what I've heard out of Buckleys mouth over the years, it's my opinion that he'd grab the sword and fall on it anyway.

For those whining about warding off media speculation by re-signing Bucks I think you are underestimating the massive instability they can cause and the affect it can have on the playing group.
Inviting instability to a football club is poor management !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We are Collingwood after all. Collingwood sells papers and fuels Footy shows.
Todays headline is a tantalising piece about how Howe (brown cow) broke his finger FSS.
Headline doesn't exist if he was still a Demon, it'd be an Odd Spot on page 83.

 

[Men of Steele]

Terrible decision.

Great decision

 

[10571z]

Good result. Clubs can never predict the future but based on how Bucks, Hine & Co have restructed the list then if we don't play serious finals next year (when list should be ready to go) then Bucks will have to go. In fact based on what I've heard out of Buckleys mouth over the years, it's my opinion that he'd grab the sword and fall on it anyway.

For those whining about warding off media speculation by re-signing Bucks I think you are underestimating the massive instability they can cause and the affect it can have on the playing group.
Inviting instability to a football club is poor management !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We are Collingwood after all. Collingwood sells papers and fuels Footy shows.
Todays headline is a tantalising piece about how Howe (brown cow) broke his finger FSS.
Headline doesn't exist if he was still a Demon, it'd be an Odd Spot on page 83.

Spot on. They would be fueling it all year.

We have come this far with bucks IMO the pieces are there and now its time to go forward.