- Aug 15, 2009
- 839
- 802
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
The AFL has also stated tanking doesnt happen, players never take drugs and the AFL takes integrity seriouslyAFL stated swans would have his pay in salary cap regardless what happened
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The AFL has also stated tanking doesnt happen, players never take drugs and the AFL takes integrity seriouslyAFL stated swans would have his pay in salary cap regardless what happened
The club is allowed to reduce contract length, but all money must be paid. Won't allow an extension to reduce pressure thoughNot only that but my understanding of the rules at the time is if he retires then all of the remaining contract has to be accounted for in the following year's cap. He is due something like $1.4m in 2020, $1.5m in 2021 and $1m in 2022. So if he retired at the end of this year he would be taking up nearly $4m of next year's cap space which would leave the Swans in deep deep do do, basically unable to field a team. They would be forced to keep him on the list for the last 3 years and then the contract could be spread normally over 3 years of cap space - this however would mean he is tying up a list space without playing.
Sorry man but you're just wrong.
It's about the contract duration and salary for any given player. Not how a player came to another club
Yeah but that,s just a rumour.Heard an interesting rumour today. Hopefully it's just that. That the big bud is about to pull the pin and announce retirement at seasons end. Collating some sources as we post, will update soon.
There is a consequence but isnt there - one player holds that club to the deal and they are fwarked for ten yearsHow a player came to a club is 100% relevant in the case of restricted free agency.
NoCookies | The Australian
www.theaustralian.com.au
• "An explicit acknowledgement that the long-term specific financial commitment over the nine-year agreement will apply to the Swans' total player payments for each of the nine years, regardless of how many years Franklin is available to play for the club."
As I've mentioned, the length of the deal allowed you distinct (and fair) advantages. By offering such a large deal, knowing any club would struggle to match (and if they did match and Buddy chose to remain, HFC would be under the exact conditions as above) they circumvented the part of restricted free agency where they would be liable to trade for 2014 Buddy Franklin. This would be a considerable price, meaning they would have to trade capital for him, made all the more difficult knowing they still want to bid on Callum Mills.
But their offer got them around it, their list stayed intact, gained Franklin and pick 3 in Mills.
You cannot have that advantage and then just throw your hands in the air and walk away from the restricted free agency deal and it's obligations because it's suddenly gotten very scary. It would be the end of free agency as clubs would be offering 15 million contracts to stars and changing the deals as they see fit a few years later, with no consequence.
There is a consequence but isnt there - one player holds that club to the deal and they are fwarked for ten years
Hawks supporters have a Stalin-like knack for rewriting history. The repeated suggestion he left Hawthorn just to win premierships? They make it sound like he left a struggling bottom of the table team to join the premiers. Hello, if that had been his sole plan surely he would've stayed with the top of the table team he'd just won one with? He went to Sydney to be with his then girlfriend, get out of the fishbowl. He might've said he wanted to win one there, but it would've been a by-product of all the other factors.
He didn’t leave for success, he had plenty of it with you guys.I'm pretty sure he was quoted at the time of saying he chose Sydney over GWS because he wanted success straight away.
The irony in that was GWS beating Sydney in the first game he played in Swans colours.
Hawthorn fans wouldn't have cared if he left for GWS. We were mad because he left to chase success instead by did so by joining our second biggest rivals at the time.
He didn’t leave for success, he had plenty of it with you guys.
Of course he was going to choose us first because we were still there abouts and had a chance with finals etc
The sole reason was his partner and that’s the fact
...
I saw Franklin at training on Thursday. He was running at full tilt, pinging them from 60. As I said on our board, if we were still in the hunt for finals I believe he would've played. If he's retiring in a few weeks -- and I don't -- it doesn't appear to be because of his body. Which is first hand evidence, unlike anything the op has produced.
Superstar Sydney recruit Lance Franklin says he left Hawthorn to chase more premiershipsHawks supporters have a Stalin-like knack for rewriting history. The repeated suggestion he left Hawthorn just to win premierships?
He asked about going to Sydney instead of GWS after the 2012 grand final.
Also, GWS is still in Sydney. He 100% chose the Swans to chase immediate success.
Can't wait to sign Coniglio on a 60 year contract.
How a player came to a club is 100% relevant in the case of restricted free agency.
NoCookies | The Australian
www.theaustralian.com.au
• "An explicit acknowledgement that the long-term specific financial commitment over the nine-year agreement will apply to the Swans' total player payments for each of the nine years, regardless of how many years Franklin is available to play for the club."
As I've mentioned, the length of the deal allowed you distinct (and fair) advantages. By offering such a large deal, knowing any club would struggle to match (and if they did match and Buddy chose to remain, HFC would be under the exact conditions as above) they circumvented the part of restricted free agency where they would be liable to trade for 2014 Buddy Franklin. This would be a considerable price, meaning they would have to trade capital for him, made all the more difficult knowing they still want to bid on Callum Mills.
But their offer got them around it, their list stayed intact, gained Franklin and pick 3 in Mills.
You cannot have that advantage and then just throw your hands in the air and walk away from the restricted free agency deal and it's obligations because it's suddenly gotten very scary. It would be the end of free agency as clubs would be offering 15 million contracts to stars and changing the deals as they see fit a few years later, with no consequence.
For fifty million dollars and a hovercraftCan't wait to sign Coniglio on a 60 year contract.
Superstar Sydney recruit Lance Franklin says he left Hawthorn to chase more premierships
The issue is whether all future salaries for players are treated fairly and the same under the salary cap. The status of the player is irrelevant to that.
The issue is whether all future salaries for players are treated fairly and the same under the salary cap. The status of the player is irrelevant to that.
No, that assumes that standard deals and restricted free agent contracts follow they same rules and they do not.
Restricted free agent contracts have different rules, deal with it.
So, there are two different rules for salary cap for someone doing the same job and retiring?They are.
If you draft a player, then offer them a contract, they sign and then retire, that money is no longer under the cap.
If you pick up a restricted free agent (where the club they're coming from has the opportunity to offer the same contract and have the player remain) then you are held to that contract regardless of if they play 1 game or 150.
Seems pretty fair.