James Frawley

[MC_9]

I think it's because he's watching Vince rack up 25+ touches a game in red and blue, whilst Sylvia has only just got into the side on big money and averages about a third of that.

If Frawley leaves, he'll probably command $650k over 4 or 5 years.

That's big money.

The AFL will also recognise that it's three years in a row we will have lost a player to FA.

I think the only teams prepared to spend that sort of money on him, is Melbourne or another bottom club.

If thats the case, he may as well stay at Melbourne.

 

[Jack London]

I think the only teams prepared to spend that sort of money on him, is Melbourne or another bottom club.

If thats the case, he may as well stay at Melbourne.

That'd be good.

 

[Taylor]

Which is why I think it's not about money. He has played in about 130 games and lost how many of them? 100?

Free agency is about the players being able to control their own destiny, unrestricted free agents even more so.

It's not about clubs getting value.

I'm not interested in Melbourne being bent over on this, I only care that Melbourne fans will be angry at Frawley for doing what he wants in the environment he had no control in arranging.

I would laugh however if James came to a club for two years cheap, Melbourne subsequently getting a third round pick, won a flag and was then traded to a third club on big cash and four years for a top ten pick.

It's the subtleties of the system that make for conversation points.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Don't get too comfortable with the idea of getting a top 5 pick for losing Frawley or you might be too upset, all because his contract was front loaded by the Melbourne management.

Previous contract history has nothing to do with compensation. All that matters is the contract signed with the new club

 

[Taylor]

Previous contract history has nothing to do with compensation. All that matters is the contract signed with the new club

That his contract was front loaded means his last year is below the top 25% of your club's salary recipients.

That is why he is an unrestricted free agent. That is why he can sign for minimum wage if he wants and walk without input from Melbourne.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

That his contract was front loaded means his last year is below the top 25% of your club's salary recipients.

That is why he is an unrestricted free agent. That is why he can sign for minimum wage if he wants and walk without input from Melbourne.

Even if he was restricted I doubt we'd want to keep him if he wanted out. It's not the kind of culture Roos is trying to bring to the club.

 

[Taylor]

Even if he was restricted I doubt we'd want to keep him if he wanted out. It's not the kind of culture Roos is trying to bring to the club.

You want to only keep players who want to stay? That's fair enough.

Losing one of your best because he is disgruntled with the direction of the club would so that the culture needs work, I'm all ears about how it's a character flaw in Frawley though.

 

[LBJ6]

Tayl0r is dribbling some absolute rubbish in this thread. No player will ever intentionally screw over their former club by signing a one year minimal contract. No one. It will NEVER happen. To think that it could practically happen is actually ridiculous.

I feel dumber for reading the last few pages.

 

[carnthedons]

Tayl0r is dribbling some absolute rubbish in this thread. No player will ever intentionally screw over their former club by signing a one year minimal contract. No one. It will NEVER happen. To think that it could practically happen is actually ridiculous.

I feel dumber for reading the last few pages.

Yep, what's to stop him doing a Jason Snell like injury, day 1 at training and having no locked in income. So stupid.

 

[Taylor]

Tayl0r is dribbling some absolute rubbish in this thread. No player will ever intentionally screw over their former club by signing a one year minimal contract. No one. It will NEVER happen. To think that it could practically happen is actually ridiculous.

I feel dumber for reading the last few pages.

Scott Pendlebury did.
Signed a one year deal so he could screw more money out of Collingwood the following year when he was a free agent.

Players look after themselves.

 

[00Stinger]

Scott Pendlebury did.
Signed a one year deal so he could screw more money out of Collingwood the following year when he was a free agent.

Players look after themselves.

It's wasn't for minimum wage though

Hey Eddy stick your $2.4m over 4 yours up your ass, I want $50k over 1 year or I'm walking

 

[manny100]

Scott Pendlebury did.
Signed a one year deal so he could screw more money out of Collingwood the following year when he was a free agent.

Players look after themselves.

I agree, that is why the Dees will get a pick after their first round pick. Free agency was originally (so they say) brought in to assist fringe players move on and get a game. Instead its turned into a way the better players can set themselves up for life - and why not a lifetime's supply of money is way better than working 40 hours for a living. Of course Frawley's manager is wanting big bucks and big years and if someone is willing to pay then good luck to the player and club. Someone will pay. Every year at least one club thinks they are a player away from the big one. The Tigers have been doing this for 25 years.

 

[markm106]

If he wants to play in a finals side he could take a pay cut to do it, if in a couple of years he resigned for big money then he misses out on nothing.

The first comment made was that he would sign a low 1 year deal then immediatley in the pre season sign a lenghty big bucks deal. He would risk being de-registestered for that and also the club would risk punishment for tampering with the free agency process.
If he was to be so keen to play finals at a particular club and he was prepared to sign a low paying deal I would be very surprised. He would have offers coming from several clubs almost assured to play finals, so he woudl likely get a decent pay packet. I doubt he has any interest in stuffing Melbourne over either.

 

[Taylor]

It's wasn't for minimum wage though

Hey Eddy stick your $2.4m over 4 yours up your ass, I want $50k over 1 year or I'm walking

Good thing doing that didn't get him any extra money then, phew. Otherwise it might show that even the guy who went on to be captain of the club would be looking after himself.

 

[Jack London]

You want to only keep players who want to stay? That's fair enough.

Losing one of your best because he is disgruntled with the direction of the club would so that the culture needs work, I'm all ears about how it's a character flaw in Frawley though.

Who said they blamed Frawley for leaving.

We're all pretty comfortable about the culture now, Hogan confirmed it too.

 

[thethinkingcat]

Tough one to call now but the list of free agency players is getting smaller. However, what will surprise many people is that come the end of the home and away season you lot hear that Frawley's re-signed a contract. I'm not ruling that one out just yet. Nor am I ruling out him leaving. Each player who knows that they are coming out of contract can take a look at any contract that any team has offered him. If none of them are any good he will most likely stay. If something sounds awesome he might take a closer look.

 

[00Stinger]

Good thing doing that didn't get him any extra money then, phew. Otherwise it might show that even the guy who went on to be captain of the club would be looking after himself.

Are you stupid?

There is NO correlation between Pendlebury and Frawles cases. I thought my sarcasm would be obvious, but then again I did just realise it is school holidays

 

[Taylor]

Are you stupid?

There is NO correlation between Pendlebury and Frawles cases. I thought my sarcasm would be obvious, but then again I did just realise it is school holidays

That was responding to the comment that no player has ever signed a one year deal to screw their club to get a better deal for themselves, I was pointing out that it was exactly what Scott Pendlebury did.

 

[manny100]

Were there really any days where players knocked back set yourself up for life money to accept peanuts for the chance to play in finals? I doubt it.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

That was responding to the comment that no player has ever signed a one year deal to screw their club to get a better deal for themselves, I was pointing out that it was exactly what Scott Pendlebury did.

Pendlebury stayed at his own club to do that, he didn't slap them in the face by leaving and ensuring they got the least possible compensation. Very different scenarios.

 

[Corkie]

Still waiting to see if the Suns enter into the Frawley saga. Bluey McKenna said they will chase a mature defender if Bock retires (which is more than likely now his broken leg is cactus again), so surely they will enquire? Got the cash I presume, just whether Frawley would consider moving north to chase possible finals action over the next 5 years?

 

[whatwhatsaywhat]

If I was Chip, GC17 is the only team I'd really be super keen on - as you say, they have the cash, and the potential for finals as early as this year and into the future.

Still hope he stays.

 

[Blackas87]

If I was Chip, GC17 is the only team I'd really be super keen on - as you say, they have the cash, and the potential for finals as early as this year and into the future.

Still hope he stays.

Port Adelaide?

 

[whatwhatsaywhat]

nah, don't reckon port need him - carlile, trengove, hombsch fill their key defensive rolls with requisite back-up in jonas, o'shea, clurey. he's not needed at port.

but i can definitely see gc17 and hawthorn seeing need for him.

 

[James44]

Hawthorn need to target young mids before Frawley.