MVP Tommy Boyd - The Grand Final Enigma

[Mofra]

^ Have been told he has one monster year then the rest of his contract is pretty standard for a KPF. We were struggling to hit the minimum 95% of the Cap for a few years so there was plenty of front-loading going on (which is why I wasn't surprised when, well after signing Boyd, we could afford to nab Suckling as a FA).

 

[Del165892]

^ Have been told he has one monster year then the rest of his contract is pretty standard for a KPF. We were struggling to hit the minimum 95% of the Cap for a few years so there was plenty of front-loading going on (which is why I wasn't surprised when, well after signing Boyd, we could afford to nab Suckling as a FA).

Wasnt boyd on 200k last year

 

[Mofra]

Wasnt boyd on 200k last year

Yup something like that - second year of a draftee salary, a bit higher than others as a no 1 pick.

 

[dergert]

The ball has been sticking in his hands for a little bit longer in contested situations. Trivial, but those marks are a bees d*** from sticking. I hope he comes out and makes a statement this week in yr vfl.

 

[Guido]

Most of the articles originally mentioned a $7mil/7 year contract. Add Griffen's salary and it's bordering on an $8mil deal.

So if last year was $200K, and Hutchy is accurate and this year he is being paid $1.75mil this year, he's got 5 years and about $5 mil left in the contract.

If we do go nuts with frontloading in the next couple of years, can I ask what protection we have if he walks (ala Griffen) with one or two years out (with only token amounts of the contract left)?

Say by 2018-2019, we've frontloaded heavily, we've shouldered say $6mil of the $7mil contract (with nowhere near commensurate output during that time, with his best years being 24-29 still to come), with two years @$400k-$500k per year left - he says he's really unhappy and won't play for us under any circumstances - other than trading him when we've already paid well over half of his effective salary for those future years, is our only option to force him to sit those seasons out (and get nothing in a trade)?

This is, I'm guessing, the player that this club has invested most in (both real and relative terms) in over 130 odd years of its history. These are incredibly high (premiership) stakes, and it's all nice to think we're being smart by frontloading millions for a player we don't see leaving, but 4-5 years ago, if you had have asked fans and club stakeholders who would be among the most loyal, trusted players at this club to award a heavily frontloaded contract to (who would never, ever, do us over), one of the first names most would have said would have been Ryan Griffen.

One thing that I found a touch questionable with Boyd was when being interviewed after a VFL game last year, his comment was "really looking forward to play out the rest of my contract here" rather than "play here for the rest of my career". I just can't picture any other happy, contented player saying "I wanna play here til the end of my contract". Maybe reading way, way too much into it, but I think as much work/resources need to be put into his headspace (and ensuring he's enjoying his environment) as will obviously be put into developing him as a player.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Most of the articles originally mentioned a $7mil/7 year contract. Add Griffen's salary and it's bordering on an $8mil deal.

So if last year was $200K, and Hutchy is accurate and this year he is being paid $1.75mil this year, he's got 5 years and about $5 mil left in the contract.

If we do go nuts with frontloading in the next couple of years, can I ask what protection we have if he walks (ala Griffen) with one or two years out (with only token amounts of the contract left)?

Say by 2018-2019, we've frontloaded heavily, we've shouldered say $6mil of the $7mil contract (with nowhere near commensurate output during that time, with his best years being 24-29 still to come), with two years @$400k-$500k per year left - he says he's really unhappy and won't play for us under any circumstances - other than trading him when we've already paid well over half of his effective salary for those future years, is our only option to force him to sit those seasons out (and get nothing in a trade)?

This is, I'm guessing, the player that this club has invested most in (both real and relative terms) in over 130 odd years of its history. These are incredibly high (premiership) stakes, and it's all nice to think we're being smart by frontloading millions for a player we don't see leaving, but 4-5 years ago, if you had have asked fans and club stakeholders who would be among the most loyal, trusted players at this club to award a heavily frontloaded contract to (who would never, ever, do us over), one of the first names most would have said would have been Ryan Griffen.

One thing that I found a touch questionable with Boyd was when being interviewed after a VFL game last year, his comment was "really looking forward to play out the rest of my contract here" rather than "play here for the rest of my career". I just can't picture any other happy, contented player saying "I wanna play here til the end of my contract". Maybe reading way, way too much into it, but I think as much work/resources need to be put into his headspace (and ensuring he's enjoying his environment) as will obviously be put into developing him as a player.

It was $6 million over 6 years, after the 1st of 7 being the 200k fixed draft contract amount. 7 from 7 was counted as such because of the 800k or so we paid of Griffin's salary last year.

 

[Guido]

It was $6 million over 6 years, after the 1st of 7 being the 200k fixed draft contract amount. 7 from 7 was counted as such because of the 800k or so we paid of Griffin's salary last year.

We don't have the contract in front of us so you might be right, but below is a google search with search terms "Tom Boyd" "$7 million contract", and it delivers a fair few results from a fair few reputable sources that specifically mention Boyd's $7mil contract/salary with us. Very few if any have any of those articles mention the Griffen salary compo to GWS, and none (that I can see) say it was included as part of that $7mil.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q="tom+boyd"+"$7+million"&oq="tom+boyd"+"$7+million"&aqs=chrome..69i57.10385j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[Doggies7]

Give the Hutchy / Barrett segment on Tom Boyd on "The Sounding Board" podcast a listen. Hutchy was brilliant and shut Barrett down repeatedly and made him look very petty not being able to get over the $ amount for Tom and not being able to see it's a smart deal that was necessary to lure him over. Have a lot more respect for Hutchy now after that and somehow less for Barrett.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Below is a google search with search terms "Tom Boyd" "$7 million contract", and it delivers a fair few results from a fair few reputable sources that specifically mention Boyd's contract with us, very few if any have any of those articles mention the Griffen salary compo to GWS.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q="tom+boyd"+"$7+million"&oq="tom+boyd"+"$7+million"&aqs=chrome..69i57.10385j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

They were correct in saying that the cost of the trade and the cost involved in getting Boyd to the club was $7 million over 7 years because paying Griffen's salary was a function of that trade and that cost of getting Boyd to the club.
If we really were paying him $7 million over 6 years, you'd think that the media would have been all over the fact that we are paying him more than $1 million per year average. But they weren't all over it because we are paying him an average of $1 million from the six years from this year.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...isen-despite-6m-contract-20150623-ghvrx1.html
"$6 million contract"

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/tom-bo...ryan-griffens-giant-deal-20141015-116m1f.html
"Nearly $1 million" (ie 800k, so Boyd's 200k draft contract + Griffen 800k is where we get the $1 million for last year and the $7 million over 7 years)

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...y/news-story/a19eb8763f50d8a79fc766722dbe11d4
"$1 million salary"


Where $7 million comes from is the fact that the hit against the salary cap as a function of the trade will total $7 million in the 7 year period from 2015-2021. 2015 involved that being 200k to Boyd as per his fixed 2nd year draft contract, and 800k to pay out the rest of Griffen's contract as he was otherwise contracted to the end of 2015. We are then paying a total of $6 million for the 6 year period of 2016-2021. It's likely front loaded to the point that we're paying almost $2 million this year alone, when we have cap room, and then when Stringer/Bont etc contracts increase over the next 5 years his will decrease.

 

[Leezorr]

They were correct in saying that the cost of the trade and the cost involved in getting Boyd to the club was $7 million over 7 years because paying Griffen's salary was a function of that trade and that cost of getting Boyd to the club.
If we really were paying him $7 million over 6 years, you'd think that the media would have been all over the fact that we are paying him more than $1 million per year average. But they weren't all over it because we are paying him an average of $1 million from the six years from this year.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...isen-despite-6m-contract-20150623-ghvrx1.html
"$6 million contract"

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/tom-bo...ryan-griffens-giant-deal-20141015-116m1f.html
"Nearly $1 million" (ie 800k, so Boyd's 200k draft contract + Griffen 800k is where we get the $1 million for last year and the $7 million over 7 years)

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...y/news-story/a19eb8763f50d8a79fc766722dbe11d4
"$1 million salary"


Where $7 million comes from is the fact that the hit against the salary cap as a function of the trade will total $7 million in the 7 year period from 2015-2021. 2015 involved that being 200k to Boyd as per his fixed 2nd year draft contract, and 800k to pay out the rest of Griffen's contract as he was otherwise contracted to the end of 2015. We are then paying a total of $6 million for the 6 year period of 2016-2021. It's likely front loaded to the point that we're paying almost $2 million this year alone, when we have cap room, and then when Stringer/Bont etc contracts increase over the next 5 years his will decrease.

Try explaining that to the numpties on this site.

 

[Guido]

They were correct in saying that the cost of the trade and the cost involved in getting Boyd to the club was $7 million over 7 years because paying Griffen's salary was a function of that trade and that cost of getting Boyd to the club.
If we really were paying him $7 million over 6 years, you'd think that the media would have been all over the fact that we are paying him more than $1 million per year average. But they weren't all over it because we are paying him an average of $1 million from the six years from this year.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...isen-despite-6m-contract-20150623-ghvrx1.html
"$6 million contract"

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/tom-bo...ryan-griffens-giant-deal-20141015-116m1f.html
"Nearly $1 million" (ie 800k, so Boyd's 200k draft contract + Griffen 800k is where we get the $1 million for last year and the $7 million over 7 years)

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...y/news-story/a19eb8763f50d8a79fc766722dbe11d4
"$1 million salary"


Where $7 million comes from is the fact that the hit against the salary cap as a function of the trade will total $7 million in the 7 year period from 2015-2021. 2015 involved that being 200k to Boyd as per his fixed 2nd year draft contract, and 800k to pay out the rest of Griffen's contract as he was otherwise contracted to the end of 2015. We are then paying a total of $6 million for the 6 year period of 2016-2021. It's likely front loaded to the point that we're paying almost $2 million this year alone, when we have cap room, and then when Stringer/Bont etc contracts increase over the next 5 years his will decrease.

Mate, plenty of those links in that google search I provided earlier say he's being paid $7mil. And Hutchy himself on Footy Classified has said the rest of his contract is "above one million a year. Well above".

Like I said, no-one can know without the contract in front of them, if it's $6mil then fantastic.

 

[jdz101]

His contract is by the by.

Honestly it doesn't matter.

The revenue from the AFL's TV deal from 2017 onwards is increasing by 67% compared to the last deal.

The players association in discussion of the new CBA will be negotiating a fair percentage of that TV revenue to up the salary cap.

A million dollars a year will soon be a fairly widely accepted figure for key position players or good midfielders. By the end of Tom's deal, he will be cheap in comparison to what the other key forwards/ruck-forwards will be getting.

There's a reason Hogan held off his contract until the new CBA. He'll be making over a million each season from any number of suitors.

 

[Guido]

Try explaining that to the numpties on this site.

Numpties?

With hundreds upon hundreds of references, many written by journalists with more of an insight and connections to those involved than many of us - sources from the Herald Sun, The Age, Foxsports, Footy Classified - I may very well be wrong bud, but what I've written is based on evidence from a lot of sources.

*He later signed a seven-year, $7 million contract with the Bulldogs

*Then there's Boyd's contract — a whopping $7 million over seven years

*Boyd's stunning seven-year deal worth about $7 million

*Former Western Bulldogs champion says $7 million Tom Boyd contract is a 'monster risk'.

*The 2013 No.1 pick joined the Western Bulldogs on a seven-year contract understood to be worth about$7 million.

*By virtue of his seven-year $7 million contract Tom Boyd will always..

*First-year player Tom Boyd sent shockwaves through the footy industry after he scored himself a reported $7 million seven-year deal

*TOM Boyd arrived at the Bulldogs with a $7 million contract amid a media storm

*He is believed to be on over $7 million for seven years and after being paid around $200,000 under his standard second-year contract in 2015 will be earning well over $1 million a season. So he could be paid as much as $400,000 a season more than Hawkins in 2016 despite almost no exposed form.

There's other sources that quote $6mil and they could very well be right, but regardless of which figure is correct/incorrect, if it's not beyond you, maybe try contribute something to the discussion rather than one sentence pot-shots at people providing a (possibly factual) point of view that you don't like hearing.

 

[Pannalstaroz]

Craig Hutchison "thinks" Toyd's on $1.75m-$2m this year.

2018&19 are the big years

 

[Del165892]

Why are we discussing Boyds salary? Who cares the kid is a gun and he will be a solid contributor at Footscray over the next 6 years. Worth every penny.

 

[Del165892]

2018&19 are the big years

I heard that we are actually paying him 5 mil this year and then the rest of his year he doesnt make much money. Smart decision because it lets us pay more to other players

 

[Pannalstaroz]

I heard that we are actually paying him 5 mil this year and then the rest of his year he doesnt make much money. Smart decision because it lets us pay more to other players

Nah

 

[maddog37]

Loving the evolving thread title!!

 

[TiAn_]

Why are we discussing Boyds salary? Who cares the kid is a gun and he will be a solid contributor at Footscray over the next 6 years. Worth every penny.

Craig Hutchison said exactly that also.

But you already knew that didn't you....... Craig....

 

[immortalmike]

Craig Hutchison said exactly that also.

But you already knew that didn't you....... Craig....

That does explain a lot.

 

[Ozil]

Feel for all the people who are going to click on this thread expecting steamy fan fiction.

 

[immortalmike]

Feel for all the people who are going to click on this thread expecting steamy fan fiction.

If they just read Pannalstaroz 's posts it kind of is.

 

[TiAn_]

Feel for all the people who are going to click on this thread expecting steamy fan fiction.

You can either be part of the problem or part of the solution...

 

[Leezorr]

Numpties?

With hundreds upon hundreds of references, many written by journalists with more of an insight and connections to those involved than many of us - sources from the Herald Sun, The Age, Foxsports, Footy Classified - I may very well be wrong bud, but what I've written is based on evidence from a lot of sources.

*He later signed a seven-year, $7 million contract with the Bulldogs

*Then there's Boyd's contract — a whopping $7 million over seven years

*Boyd's stunning seven-year deal worth about $7 million

*Former Western Bulldogs champion says $7 million Tom Boyd contract is a 'monster risk'.

*The 2013 No.1 pick joined the Western Bulldogs on a seven-year contract understood to be worth about$7 million.

*By virtue of his seven-year $7 million contract Tom Boyd will always..

*First-year player Tom Boyd sent shockwaves through the footy industry after he scored himself a reported $7 million seven-year deal

*TOM Boyd arrived at the Bulldogs with a $7 million contract amid a media storm

*He is believed to be on over $7 million for seven years and after being paid around $200,000 under his standard second-year contract in 2015 will be earning well over $1 million a season. So he could be paid as much as $400,000 a season more than Hawkins in 2016 despite almost no exposed form.

There's other sources that quote $6mil and they could very well be right, but regardless of which figure is correct/incorrect, if it's not beyond you, maybe try contribute something to the discussion rather than one sentence pot-shots at people providing a (possibly factual) point of view that you don't like hearing.

Not the size, just the structure and it not affecting our cap.

 

[Cadillac]

2018&19 are the big years

So his big years of making huge coin are when Stringer and Bont come out of contact? That's not good for us if that's the case.