Player Watch Rory Laird

[Mr_Moogle]

This one will end up burning us the same way Sloane's contact is right now.

 

[Trigger13]

Disgraceful

 

[BACCS]

Disagree on both parts. Laird has been in our top players for the last 5 years but I wouldn't say he has been our outright best in that period.

I also think Matt is more important to keep. He has proven midfield form and plays a clearly defined role that we can build around. If Laird doesn't make it as a midfielder, he reverts to half back where we are stacked with talent

Did you forget he has two AAs as a half back? Half a season of form below his usual output doesn’t mean he’s washed up as a half back

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

Whats with the 5 year deals for guys of his age???

He’s 27

He’ll be 32 in the final year

chill

 

[Scorpus]

That’s just ridiculous for a player of his caliber, where else is the money going with the youngest list in the comp? Guys like Thilthorpe are a couple of years away from potentially commanding much bigger contracts.

You don't want to waste money for the sake of not having anyone to spend it on. Ideally you'd bring forward as many payments into this year as possible, leaving room in later years to re-sign younger players who are future stars

 

[BACCS]

We always manage to spend it.
When have we ever had excess cap to go shopping?

What do you see this impacting on contacts wise? We aren’t attracting big names for 2-3 seasons, Doedee will stay, Crouch is the only other player that will demand a similar contract.

 

[BACCS]

You don't want to waste money for the sake of not having anyone to spend it on. Ideally you'd bring forward as many payments into this year as possible, leaving room in later years to re-sign younger players who are future stars

I don’t see this as wasting money though

 

[Mutineer]

Disagree on both parts. Laird has been in our top players for the last 5 years but I wouldn't say he has been our outright best in that period.

I also think Matt is more important to keep. He has proven midfield form and plays a clearly defined role that we can build around. If Laird doesn't make it as a midfielder, he reverts to half back where we are stacked with talent

If they want to keep the younger Matt they just made it harder for themselves unless they've already signed off with Crouch as well.

 

[Crow_68]

Let’s hope we have learnt our lesson and years 4 & 5 have some triggers and/or performance related conditions.

 

[Scorpus]

Did you forget he has two AAs as a half back? Half a season of form below his usual output doesn’t mean he’s washed up as a half back

Let's say we play him as a midfielder this year and it doesn't work out.

Do you think a five year contract for a half back is sensible list management given who we have in our squad?

 

[Scorpus]

If they want to keep the younger Matt they just made it harder for themselves unless they've already signed off with Crouch as well.

Is it harder? Surely this would have limited impact on Matt's contract

 

[Mutineer]

Is it harder? Surely this would have limited impact on Matt's contract

I mean with the length of contract clearly.

 

[Deaneus!]

A year too long, and he has to learn to kick under pressure other than slam it on the boot

But good he signed, AF/SC locked in

 

[Murray2503]

I want to know the pay overall and then I will make judgement. Also what are the clauses in the contract? What performance triggers are in the contract? Is it front loaded so we can trade him out in 3? What component is guaranteed? I think if he is getting paid more than 3million(5 * 600) it was a bad deal for us.

 

[hey shorty]

I mean with the length of contract clearly.

More money over less years ??

This is a long deal for Laird, but of all the remaining guys of his age I'm more confident of him lasting the distance at a high enough level.

 

[BACCS]

Let's say we play him as a midfielder this year and it doesn't work out.

Do you think a five year contract for a half back is sensible list management given who we have in our squad?

Yes, given he’s elite in that position. We aren’t just talking a run of the mil half back here.

 

[Scorpus]

Genuine question

Who was the last Crows player who had no question marks over his inclusion in the team at the age of 31 or later?

 

[Bernie L]

Genuine question

Who was the last Crows player who had no question marks over his inclusion in the team at the age of 31 or later?

McLeod?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

The players walking out over the years are having a secondary effect. Now every player knows it is so difficult for us to keep players that they can be more demanding. Using our desperation against us.

Really difficult to turn this ship around and I don't envy the current custodians.

Need three things to happen:
- Select good players in the draft (last year looking good, some iffy selections previously)
- Have good coaches for those players (starting.... NOW)
- Sign the youngest players up early to long term contracts (not yet)

Signing the older players to inflated, lengthy deals is a disaster. Will just continue the downward spiral.

 

[Mutineer]

Genuine question

Who was the last Crows player who had no question marks over his inclusion in the team at the age of 31 or later?

Simon Goodwin?

 

[Crow_68]

Genuine question

Who was the last Crows player who had no question marks over his inclusion in the team at the age of 31 or later?

D-Mac of course

 

[hey shorty]

Genuine question

Who was the last Crows player who had no question marks over his inclusion in the team at the age of 31 or later?

Laird is probably the most likely too, but I'm not confident.

 

[Murray2503]

Genuine question

Who was the last Crows player who had no question marks over his inclusion in the team at the age of 31 or later?

I agree but not every player is equal. At least Laird doesn't have a chronic foot problem like Sloane when we signed him up for 5. Now that was,a complete disaster which I said at the time would eventuate. We need to know the full facts of the deal and not just the total years. Remember it's very common to trade a contracted player especially when they aren't performing. We just don't need another player we are paying 40% of their deal at another club.

 

[hey shorty]

The players walking out over the years are having a secondary effect. Now every player knows it is so difficult for us to keep players that they can be more demanding. Using our desperation against us.

Really difficult to turn this ship around and I don't envy the current custodians.

Need three things to happen:
- Select good players in the draft (last year looking good, some iffy selections previously)
- Have good coaches for those players (starting.... NOW)
- Sign the youngest players up early to long term contracts (not yet)

Signing the older players to inflated, lengthy deals is a disaster. Will just continue the downward spiral.

Jones, McHenry, Sholl and Hamill were all signed for 4+ years after drafting but it needs to be a bigger priority IMO

 

[Murray2503]

The priorities to sign up on a longer term basis for us are:
Doedee? Can his body hold up. Would offer him 2years.
Sholl
Schoenberg
ROB
Worrell
McPherson
Hamill
Himmelberg
Thilthorpe
McAdam
Pedlar
Berry