Buddy's contract killing Sydney's depth?

[Theprofessional]

No problem at all with the proposed.
But...thats what should have happened to start with. I mean you gotta know that cost of living wouldnt affect someone like Franklin or Tippett on the money theyre getting.

Of course which is why I'm glad that combined they were only earning 40k from it and it wasn't crazy numbers that were thrown out. New system is far better.

As long as everyone understands it wasn't a pool of money that could be used and that their COLA is only 40k than sure, no worries at my end. That's fixed, and Academies probably will need a rework without damaging the development that seems to be finally happening in NSW/QLD football. Going back to scholarships will not work.

Swans depth? I think we'll be better of than most think. If you're right and Tippet leaves than no damage done too us at all, we can use that money to sort out our youngsters. If he does stay he'll be on less than he is now. We have Goodes/Shaw/LRT/Ryan O'keefe all likely to go end of season/next season. That's enough to cover the players who are out of contract within next season/two. And that's ignoring the other old guys who would be thinking about it.

Not going to be a mass exodus imo, mostly because we got players who weren't going to run home, Brisbane got very unlucky in that way. A way to counteract this homesickness crap would be great.

 

[Theprofessional]

You just lost ALL credibility. Geelong has arguably managed its list as well if not better than any teams in the past decade, and we could not afford either player. It wasn't a case of managing the list well; it was a case of simple arithmetic

How do you know you couldn't afford either player?

I think most teams could've made Buddy work by giving up a player on similar coin to Mumford, I just don't think people were willing to match the 9 years.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

I work in financial markets, have a degree in corporate finance and have a number of investment properties.

Nice try though.

If you're advising guys on 250k a year to rent, then you need to get your head checked.

Bullshit.

 

[DangerSloane]

Bullshit.

Nope. Not one bit of it.

 

[Sttew]

How do you know you couldn't afford either player?

I think most teams could've made Buddy work by giving up a player on similar coin to Mumford, I just don't think people were willing to match the 9 years.

You're dead right there

 

[Faysals Swans]

Lol 10% is pissy.
In a sport where 1% makes all the difference, having an extra million dollars to pay players is a pretty big ruddy advantage.

Clearly YOU have no ruddy idea.

It feels good to keep smashing you bitter Adelaide flogs, abuse us all you want, you can't back it up on the field.

 

[DangerSloane]

It feels good to keep smashing you bitter Adelaide flogs, abuse us all you want, you can't back it up on the field.

Yep and the 10 year olds are back.
We're having an adult discussion, put the ben10 dvd back on, computer time is over.

 

[Theprofessional]

You're dead right there

Do you think teams could've offered what we offered Buddy? If the payment wasn't 10 mil over 9 but say 5million over 4 years? Because GWS and hawthorn offered more than us, a fact lots of people like to forget when they talk about running of to Sydney for the extra COLA dollars.

 

[My North]

another 8 years of Buddy contract to go

 

[DangerSloane]

Do you think teams could've offered what we offered Buddy? If the payment wasn't 10 mil over 9 but say 5million over 4 years? Because GWS and hawthorn offered more than us, a fact lots of people like to forget when they talk about running of to Sydney for the extra COLA dollars.

It wasnt hte fact that you got buddy that shocked everyone, it was the fact that you got Tippett and Buddy and managed to keep a lot of your highly paid players.

Most people could have individually matched the 1mil for buddy, but not many could have afforded to spend 1.8m extra per year. (Adding the 800k Tippett is on)

 

[DangerSloane]

Funny mate, shows your immaturity, go back to support your own corrupt club before pointing fingers at others.

Oh I'm sorry.
I thought we were in a discussion thread about Sydney...
I must be mistaken....

Nope, its right there in the title.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Nope. Not one bit of it.

Probably every bit of it.

You're 27yo, so you've been in the workforce for say 5 years. Somehow in that time you've risen to a position in corporate finance where you earn a salary such that you can fund several investment properties. And make 8,000+ posts on Big Footy. Absolute garbage.....unless you're a crook.

Meanwhile you would advocate to a young footballer that he make a $500k+ investment into a property when he can't possibly know:

1. Whether he'll be even living in that state beyond more than a couple of years and

2. Whether he'll be even earning the same income beyond a couple of years.

3. Whether his knees will hold up to AFL football.

Buying property in those circumstances is insane.

 

[Faysals Swans]

Oh I'm sorry.
I thought we were in a discussion thread about Sydney...
I must be mistaken....

Nope, its right there in the title.

It's okay you're forgiven, life is tough for you Adelaide supporters.

 

[peppy la pew]

It feels good to keep smashing you bitter Adelaide flogs, abuse us all you want, you can't back it up on the field.

Why are you playing the man, he's obviously good at crunching the numbers.

 

[Indie_]

The housing market is inflated everywhere in Australia.
Fact is people have been saying housing prices will drop for a number of years and they havent. They may, but they may not.

Put it this way, rent money gets you nowhere.
Youd be much smarter to buy if you can afford it, which 99% of AFL players can. FULL STOP.

you wot m8? Do you know how many AFL players earn >100k?

 

[Sttew]

Do you think teams could've offered what we offered Buddy? If the payment wasn't 10 mil over 9 but say 5million over 4 years? Because GWS and hawthorn offered more than us, a fact lots of people like to forget when they talk about running of to Sydney for the extra COLA dollars.

Look, Geelong could have come somewhere near what GC offered Ablett, but in the end it was a blessing that they didn't as it would have meant losing players like Bartel, or Taylor. I'm sure Hawks were relieved they didn't have to fork out whatever it is you say they offered Buddy

 

[momentbymoment]

It wasnt hte fact that you got buddy that shocked everyone, it was the fact that you got Tippett and Buddy and managed to keep a lot of your highly paid players.

Most people could have individually matched the 1mil for buddy, but not many could have afforded to spend 1.8m extra per year. (Adding the 800k Tippett is on)

Please ...
You just need to trade players and free up a few million. Any club could have done that.

The issue is - what do you do with the additional dud players you bring in?

Sydney has this knack of turning discarded players into successful ones. Ted Richards and Laidler are great examples. Thats the real secret to their success and it clearly hurts a little ...

 

[Theprofessional]

It wasnt hte fact that you got buddy that shocked everyone, it was the fact that you got Tippett and Buddy and managed to keep a lot of your highly paid players.

Most people could have individually matched the 1mil for buddy, but not many could have afforded to spend 1.8m extra per year. (Adding the 800k Tippett is on)

But who was highly rated in the Swans team before 2012? And let's not make up things. Because the Swans weren't meant to win, it was another year where we were meant to drop down. Goodes was rated, Bradshaw had left the year before, Mumford was rated. Kennedy/McGlynn were beginning to (but weren't on money to their worth).

It makes perfect sense we could afford them back than, our list was front loaded big time because we didn't have all that many star players, that's why we didn't have many Brownlow winners (outside of Goodes), Brownlow contenders or Coleman medal type players. Our list was full of good players but no stars to hog the cap, than we sign Tippet. People begin to be outraged, why? It made perfect sense than we could afford him. And upon reflection everyone seems to understand how we could afford him (not cola) but with all the outgoing being more than the incoming by a lot, front loading and long term dealing a LOT of our players.

Same thing has now happened with Buddy. The difference is, now our individuals are being rated higher. Nick Smith a year or so ago was doing what he is today, but now people are calling him the best small defender in the comp? He's been it for years in the Swans eyes. Luke Parker is now a gun? He's certainly stepped up but he was always good in the Swans eyes. We had no outside pressure of clubs coming for our players unless the players were looking to return home themselves, everybody every season criminally underrated our list and we were able to frontload contracts big time. Now we've gotten into the moment where we can backload Tippet/Franklins contracts while we wait until our plodders/now superstars are going to retire.

 

[momentbymoment]

Look, Geelong could have come somewhere near what GC offered Ablett, but in the end it was a blessing that they didn't as it would have meant losing players like Bartel, or Taylor. I'm sure Hawks were relieved they didn't have to fork out whatever it is you say they offered Buddy

Exactly ...
It is an issue of list management.

Geelong feels they are a better team without Ablett.
The Hawks feel they are a better team without Buddy.
The Swans feel that they are a better team with Buddy.

Also - how do you say no to him when he turns up unannounced on your doorstep??

 

[Theprofessional]

Look, Geelong could have come somewhere near what GC offered Ablett, but in the end it was a blessing that they didn't as it would have meant losing players like Bartel, or Taylor. I'm sure Hawks were relieved they didn't have to fork out whatever it is you say they offered Buddy

And I'm sure right now the Swans are glad that they did and I'm sure right now Gold Coast are glad that they did. Swans were willing to take a risk that imo many others could've (offload a top five player/one of top five highest paid players) and signed Buddy on a very longterm deal.

Tippet was got through a lot of departures (more than normal and Bradshaws contract ending, funny how nobody had a problem with bradshaw joining the Swans on only a fraction less money from memory) and Buddy joined due to us getting rid of a high paid player and backloading a contract while making it for 9 years. The salary cap will increase, Buddy's contract will get bigger and what's the problem? It's a risk but a move that makes perfect sense without outcry from people calling the Swans cheats.

Edit: And was everywhere that both GWS and Hawthorn had offered more per year, and they were very happy to be paying him what we are now... they weren't in 6 years time though.

 

[DangerSloane]

But who was highly rated in the Swans team before 2012? And let's not make up things. Because the Swans weren't meant to win, it was another year where we were meant to drop down. Goodes was rated, Bradshaw had left the year before, Mumford was rated. Kennedy/McGlynn were beginning to (but weren't on money to their worth).

It makes perfect sense we could afford them back than, our list was front loaded big time because we didn't have all that many star players, that's why we didn't have many Brownlow winners (outside of Goodes), Brownlow contenders or Coleman medal type players. Our list was full of good players but no stars to hog the cap, than we sign Tippet. People begin to be outraged, why? It made perfect sense than we could afford him. And upon reflection everyone seems to understand how we could afford him (not cola) but with all the outgoing being more than the incoming by a lot, front loading and long term dealing a LOT of our players.

Same thing has now happened with Buddy. The difference is, now our individuals are being rated higher. Nick Smith a year or so ago was doing what he is today, but now people are calling him the best small defender in the comp? He's been it for years in the Swans eyes. Luke Parker is now a gun? He's certainly stepped up but he was always good in the Swans eyes. We had no outside pressure of clubs coming for our players unless the players were looking to return home themselves, everybody every season criminally underrated our list and we were able to frontload contracts big time. Now we've gotten into the moment where we can backload Tippet/Franklins contracts while we wait until our plodders/now superstars are going to retire.

I was just saying it was surprising.
You still had guys like O'Keeffe, Kennedy, Jack, McVeigh, Malceski, Goodes, Reid etc etc. who must've mostly being getting underpaid for the performances they were putting in.

 

[DangerSloane]

Please ...
You just need to trade players and free up a few million. Any club could have done that.

The issue is - what do you do with the additional dud players you bring in?

Sydney has this knack of turning discarded players into successful ones. Ted Richards and Laidler are great examples. Thats the real secret to their success and it clearly hurts a little ...

Richards yes, McGlynn yes, not sure Laidler is quite in the same league of improvement.

 

[DangerSloane]

you wot m8? Do you know how many AFL players earn >100k?

Considering a cap of $9m and 40 player lists....quite a few.
The average is $220k.

 

[DangerSloane]

Probably every bit of it.

You're 27yo, so you've been in the workforce for say 5 years. Somehow in that time you've risen to a position in corporate finance where you earn a salary such that you can fund several investment properties. And make 8,000+ posts on Big Footy. Absolute garbage.....unless you're a crook.

Meanwhile you would advocate to a young footballer that he make a $500k+ investment into a property when he can't possibly know:

1. Whether he'll be even living in that state beyond more than a couple of years and

2. Whether he'll be even earning the same income beyond a couple of years.

3. Whether his knees will hold up to AFL football.

Buying property in those circumstances is insane.

Its called hard work.
Ive been in the work force for 7 years. Earned various qualifications and have negatively geared housing investments, some on my own, and some with others.
Put it this way, if he buys a house he gets something for his money.
If he rents he has nothing at the end, whether that be in 1 year or 15 years.

 

[momentbymoment]

Richards yes, McGlynn yes, not sure Laidler is quite in the same league of improvement.

He is doing his job surprisingly well.

As I said - it is about list management. If you have Buddy and Tippett up forward you need a budget crew down back. Richards, Grundy, Rampe and Laidler are probably the most cost effective defence in the league. And one of the best.

Otherwise we would be completely stuffed ....