List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade and F/A Discussion 2023

[LuckyLee]

Not sure Tom reported it exactly like that? Wasn't it more along the lines that there would need to be a negotiation which would involve Collingwood's agreement?

And there’s no way Melb will be prepared to take a massive hit by on-trading Grundy. If trading him voids our contribution, they’ll just choose to keep him and Grundy will become the most expensive VFL player in history.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[RobJD]

And there’s no way Melb will be prepared to take a massive hit by on-trading Grundy. If trading him voids our contribution, they’ll just choose to keep him and Grundy will become the most expensive VFL player in history.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

It could be as simple as something like: The agreement is between Grundy, MFC and CFC - in the event that there is change in the parties of this agreement then the CFC must be included in any negotiations regarding any such change.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

It could be as simple as something like: The agreement is between Grundy, MFC and CFC - in the event that there is change in the parties of this agreement then the CFC must be included in any negotiations regarding any such change.

You'd have to think Pies would have considered how it would affect their contribution if it didn't work out at the Dee's & have appropriate clauses in place.

 

[sr36]

Maybe that's too simplistic but it's an element of the approach. Frampton and McStay are more for the now than the future. I don't criticise them for the approach, if he snags a flag he will be a Collingwood legend on the spot. Still transitioning this team could be bumpy. I think the age gap problem still is substantial but has softened from 2 years ago. It will be interesting to see the approach for the 30 somethings not contracted into 2025. As it stands that's Pendles, Adams, Sidey, Howe and WHE. Howe and WHE most likely having their last season and maybe its Pendles after that.

I think they're about short and medium term.

At the end of 21 when we finished 17th, I was expecting a short term bounce (not to this extent) because we still had some bloody good players, but I thought the medium term was looking pretty dire, as we had few players from the 2013-2019 drafts. Three guns in JDG, Moore and Maynard. Josh and IQ were looking pretty good and that was about it. I was thinking an absolute plummet was on the way. But the blokes we had in that age group have really kicked on, Josh and IQ kicking on above or at least at the ceiling of expectations, plus Murphy and Noble making big progress. Then Ginni, Nick and McReery already entrenched from the younger group. Plus we've added 6 mature recruits from those 2013-2019 drafts - they won't all survive until the medium term, but we're in much better shape to avoid a plummet in the medium term than we would have been without them.

 

[HyPIEcrite]

Already explained the reasons, not going to repeat myself.

I’m with ya on this. I find it bizarre that we would still be involved on paying a wage as part of an agreement which has had its terms drastically changed.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Gone Critical]

Do you think that Tom Browne (a qualified Lawyer) who’s father is the president of Collingwood (and also a qualified lawyer) would have reported that we’d be off the hook for our contribution if he gets traded, if that wasn’t the case?

Think you are overreading that. I couldn't imagine Melbourne coming to any agreement that specifically said they would be up for Grundy's full wage if they traded him and I can't see any senario where Grundy would take less money from Collingwood if traded. We were the ones desperate to get his contract off our books, they are not going to agree to clauses that hurt them further in the case the Grundy experiment didn't work

 

[sr36]

I think you meant 2014-2019. 2013 Draft is infamous among Collingwood fans as being an unmitigated disaster of a draft, 2 top 10 picks and we have zilch players in that draft playing now.

I meant 2013. At the end of 2021 - we had very few players in the age bracket that covered the 2013-2019 drafts. And you'd expect that age group to be the core of the good teams in about 2025-26 - Three guns: Moore, JDG, Maynard - Josh Daicos, who wasn't yet the current Josh Daicos, IQ who was still developing- they were the only ones that looked like having a future. We've got lucky that all of those plus a couple of others have all really kicked on and we've also added 6 recruits to that age group.

 

[ipswichpies]

No we dont. If we take the side that played Ess into a GF we will have 9 players 30 or more with Crisp turning 30 a few days later. We have an old 23 full stop. We have 10 best 23 players over 30 entering next year, none of them are retiring after 23 which is amazing in itself. We will be older next year, probably go past Geelong who have Smith, Menangola, Ceglar and maybe Stanley not going around again.

Truth is Fly has gone the bold route when he took over of seeing a contending list still present. He has gone the recruit for now route but its gong to be a big job to replace the 10 30 somethings beginning in 2025.

The club has done a fantastic job of turning us around so fast after the Grundy,Treloar,Stevo and co disasters but that is my fear that those mistakes will get us somewhere along the line.

We are a much better run club these days and hopefully it may not be so painful and if by perchance we were able to snag one this year who would change the decisions made,I know I would not.

I think we just have to hope a few of our young lads come through we have to have more than the Daicos bros and a few others, but we were left in a diabolical position the sort where it takes years to turn it around.

 

[Jen2310]

Geelong delisted "Sam Simpson

37

Sam Simpson

Age

26

Ht

183cm

Wt

75kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.7

3star

K

6.2

2star

HB

6.4

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

2.2

4star

CL

0.8

3star

D

17.0

4star

K

9.0

4star

HB

8.0

4star

M

3.3

3star

T

4.3

5star

CL

1.7

4star

D

11.2

3star

K

5.2

2star

HB

6.0

4star

M

2.4

3star

T

1.0

3star

CL

0.4

3star

; Simpson is joined by Cooper Whyte and Osca Riccardi, who also won’t have their contracts renewed beyond this year."

 

[RobJD]

Geelong delisted "Sam Simpson; Simpson is joined by Cooper Whyte and Osca Riccardi, who also won’t have their contracts renewed beyond this year."

Interesting - the Cats have a lot of list vacancies and very few ND picks!

 

[Jen2310]

Interesting - the Cats have a lot of list vacancies and very few ND picks!

They'll prob try to attract some players, or leave some for MSD/SSP

 

[ipswichpies]

Think you are overreading that. I couldn't imagine Melbourne coming to any agreement that specifically said they would be up for Grundy's full wage if they traded him and I can't see any senario where Grundy would take less money from Collingwood if traded. We were the ones desperate to get his contract off our books, they are not going to agree to clauses that hurt them further in the case the Grundy experiment didn't work

The thing of it is the Dees will not be up for his full wage whoever he goes too will be paying him also if he leaves Melbourne no one is getting a good player for 4 yrs without contributing to his wage.

I think it gets back to the agreement between the Pies and Dees over any possible moves Grundy makes,we were told he would not leave Melbourne and now we are being told he cannot stay because no one here wants him.

I would not be surprised if he stays at Melbourne myself what age is Gawn 33 you are closer to the end than the start at that age.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

As McMahon and Poulter were both drafted under the same regime, I’d be fascinated if the Pies drafted any sort of KP forward this year. Presumably Wright and Fly prioritise contesting ability in their KP forwards, I don’t know if that will open up any market inefficiencies that we were able to exploit with, say, pace in the likes of Oleg Markov

37

Oleg Markov

Age

28

Ht

188cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.1

3star

K

8.4

3star

HB

4.8

3star

M

4.8

5star

T

1.4

3star

MG

228.8

4star

No current season stats available

D

15.4

4star

K

11.2

4star

HB

4.2

4star

M

6.0

5star

T

2.0

4star

MG

295.2

5star

off half-back or Hill on a wing.

 

[Mick F]

No we dont. If we take the side that played Ess into a GF we will have 9 players 30 or more with Crisp turning 30 a few days later. We have an old 23 full stop. We have 10 best 23 players over 30 entering next year, none of them are retiring after 23 which is amazing in itself. We will be older next year, probably go past Geelong who have Smith, Menangola, Ceglar and maybe Stanley not going around again.

Truth is Fly has gone the bold route when he took over of seeing a contending list still present. He has gone the recruit for now route but its gong to be a big job to replace the 10 30 somethings beginning in 2025.

Two should be retiring at the end of this year. Two more next year.

 

[Gone Critical]

Two should be retiring at the end of this year. Two more next year.

None are retiring this year. Five Pendles, Sidey, WHE, Howe and Adams have contracts ending in 2024

 

[Apex36]

Not sure Tom reported it exactly like that? Wasn't it more along the lines that there would need to be a negotiation which would involve Collingwood's agreement?

I can’t remember the exact wording, but it was pretty clear that Collingwood wouldn’t necessarily be responsible for supplementing Grundy’s salary at any club other than Melbourne.

 

[Apex36]

Think you are overreading that. I couldn't imagine Melbourne coming to any agreement that specifically said they would be up for Grundy's full wage if they traded him and I can't see any senario where Grundy would take less money from Collingwood if traded. We were the ones desperate to get his contract off our books, they are not going to agree to clauses that hurt them further in the case the Grundy experiment didn't work

Am I? To be honest I think that you’re probably dismissing it too easily.

Can you answer my question? Do you believe that the journalist likely most qualified to decipher player contracts, with the best Collingwood contact in the industry, would report that if it wasn’t true?

 

[sideswipe]

Am I? To be honest I think that you’re probably dismissing it too easily.

Can you answer my question? Do you believe that the journalist likely most qualified to decipher player contracts, with the best Collingwood contact in the industry, would report that if it wasn’t true?

Go read my post 8,021 above. That isn't inconsistent with how Browne has been reporting it. And it is a long way short of "off the hook".

Think you might be getting too caught up in the on-trade. We agreed to pay dollars to get him off our list. Finis.

 

[Apex36]

Go read my post 8,021 above. That isn't inconsistent with how Browne has been reporting it. And it is a long way short of "off the hook".

Think you might be getting too caught up in the on-trade. We agreed to pay dollars to get him off our list. Finis.

Grundy was on around $900,000 a year at Collingwood and the Pies agreed to pay a portion of his contract while he was at Melbourne - somewhere between $250-300,000.

But Browne says, under the contract terms, that agreement exists only between Collingwood and Melbourne.

“If he wants to move clubs, the AFL rules do theoretically allow three clubs to pay part of his wage,” Browne said.

“But Melbourne have an agreement with Collingwood only to pay about three-quarters (of his wage) ...

“It leaves the Demons exposed, and makes any potential trade very difficult.”

Maybe, maybe not. It’s going to be an interesting watch, regardless. Anyone who is saying Melbourne would never have signed an agreement with such a loophole is clearly wrong. Whether Collingwood act on that loophole is another story, but he’s made it clear that the contract terms exist only between Collingwood and Melbourne. Not Collingwood, Melbourne and [insert x club here], or Collingwood and any other club separately.

 

[76woodenspooners]

I'd say less than that, as thats everyone OOC. We'll need to retain some depth.

I’m conscious that every season we can’t imagine losing many players beyond the announced retirements, and yet every season somehow we maintain a steady turnover.

Sure, we need depth, but the club might decide that they’re better off finding a Noble / Carmichael / Johnson in the state leagues than hanging onto a draftee that they don’t think will ever make it.

 

[sideswipe]

Maybe, maybe not. It’s going to be an interesting watch, regardless. Anyone who is saying Melbourne would never have signed an agreement with such a loophole is clearly wrong. Whether Collingwood act on that loophole is another story, but he’s made it clear that the contract terms exist only between Collingwood and Melbourne. Not Collingwood, Melbourne and [insert x club here], or Collingwood and any other club separately.

You’ve watched too much tv Pexy. It’s not a loophole. We won’t be off the hook because Melb clearly wouldn’t do a trade if they had to suddenly wear the whole contract less newclubs obligation.

Don’t overthink it


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[76woodenspooners]

Yeah I agree.

I don't see us filling those list spots with many exciting trades.

I think we'll hit the draft and maybe add some el-cheapo cast offs like Markov.

The late picks we might look at state leaguers.

We might be tempted to trade earlier picks if its for a young player but our picks are poor so I dont see them getting trades like that done.

I guess the thing with Markov is that (1) Fly had a relationship with him and knew his value and (2) Markov had been delisted so was a free agent so it’s not as if Fly was poaching him

Not sure that there’d be too many players who would fall into that category between Fly, Wright and Bolton?

 

[Gone Critical]

Maybe, maybe not. It’s going to be an interesting watch, regardless. Anyone who is saying Melbourne would never have signed an agreement with such a loophole is clearly wrong. Whether Collingwood act on that loophole is another story, but he’s made it clear that the contract terms exist only between Collingwood and Melbourne. Not Collingwood, Melbourne and [insert x club here], or Collingwood and any other club separately.

To me thats pretty vague, perhaps making the most of a little knowledge. Would I be surprised by a journo, even with good contacts, putting mayo on? No

I very much doubt any move would allow us to forgo our obligation. Cant see how anyone would have agreed to that.

 

[Apex36]

You’ve watched too much tv Pexy. It’s not a loophole. We won’t be off the hook because Melb clearly wouldn’t do a trade if they had to suddenly wear the whole contract less newclubs obligation.

Don’t overthink it


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Honestly I hope that you’re just even slightly wrong on this, purely because you’re being such a condescending dick about it.

 

[Jen2310]

7news reporting dees dont plan on paying anything. Of course its prob a negotiation tactic at this point. We are a month away from trade period.