Roast Chris Mayne Why?

[jackcass]

Talk of Gubby returning next year makes me shudder,

Mayne is the worst signing at Collingwood in 50 years, I cannot fathom how we even considered it, let alone actually went ahead with it.

I can at least see what a fit and firing Wells has to offer the group, gets plenty of ball and an elite user, just almost certainly too late to fulfill his promise at the level we need both consistently and for the length of his contract.

Tend to agree on Gubby. Can understand his thinking, just not the term or $$$s or why he'd run rough shod to get it done.

Chalmers comes to mind. At least Mayne has a senior game to his name.

 

[wicksy]

Tend to agree on Gubby. Can understand his thinking, just not the term or $$$s or why he'd run rough shod to get it done.

Chalmers comes to mind. At least Mayne has a senior game to his name.

Super Nintendo Chalmers?

 

[Saintly Viewed]

When people gnash teeth over Mayne, at least we can always say it wasn't as bad as:

• Daniher one, Daniher two for Neville fields.

Ah, we still aren't the worst.

 

[Black_White]

Both players mentioned in the thread title were recruited to fill perceived holes in the on field game plan.
I can certainly see why Wells was recruited. The man is silk, when he can get on the park.
And as we all know, that's the rub......on the park.
Mayne.....I'm still not sure why. We have more than enough of his type. Mid sized potential game turners.
Bux has recruited, and relisted, plenty of those.
Both appointments were made on the back of Buckleys statement that CFC needed to make finals for him to keep his job.
Gap fillers. Expensive gap fillers.
2017,shows the appointments as a failure.
And as such, the coach should fall on his sword.

 

[MarkT2]

It's not, but you do need to meet a minimum of TPP as well, which we would have been scrambling to do after dumping $2.5-$3m in salary from the books during the off-season.

It is inconceivable that we'd fail to meet the minimum and we'd be incompetent to not meet the maximum. It is always possible to renegotiate contracts, re sign players prior to the expiration of existing contracts or bring forward payments. Brining forward payments and front loading renewals would open cap space for future free agents (Martin?) or trades (Lever?)

The problem with FA contracts is that you can't remove the obligation form your salary cap even if you don't make the payments because a player retires.

 

[jackcass]

Super Nintendo Chalmers?

His cousin, Brett

 

[Finnishpie]

I have to put my hand up. I didn't mind the Maybe recruiting when it happened. I thought he'd give us another dimension -- a medium tall who had fanatical tackling pressure and, if he recaptured his best form, a 30-40 goal player. With his experience under Lyon I thought he'd bring something in leadership. Not a world beater, but played in finals and a B to B+ player.

I was wrong. Guilty you're honour.

Wells -- we can see why we got him. We're a different team with him playing. He has everything we lack. Pace, decision making, creativity, skill.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

We leaked out of the forward line with goal to goal rebounds too much in 2016. The only reason to recruit Mayne was to cover that deficit as being the defensive forward we were missing. He couldn't even manage that.

Wells is a jet. Not worthy of being mentioned in the same thread. I doubt any player this year has as good a win loss ratio as wells.

 

[76woodenspooners]

The Mayne recruitment looks to be a bust, but ...

... we clearly had the TPP, what else were we going to spend the money on? Especially on something that we didn't have to give something back in return?

We had a choice of ...

(1) Chris Mayne

(2) A draft pick in the 60's

(3) Luring alternate free agents (Ty Vickery anyone?)

2017 was always going to be a "we gotta make finals" season, so a pick in the 60's wouldn't have been much good for that. Our class of 2016 have ended up playing so far, what, two games between them?

Re: the rumour of Mayne being Gubby's decision rather than Hine's ...

... maybe Hine felt it was better to hold onto the TPP and squirrel it away for next year (the 5% under / over cap rule) and Gubby felt that it would best achieve the club objectives (getting to finals in 2017) if we spent it on Mayne.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

The Mayne recruitment looks to be a bust, but ...

... we clearly had the TPP, what else were we going to spend the money on? Especially on something that we didn't have to give something back in return?

We had a choice of ...

(1) Chris Mayne

(2) A draft pick in the 60's

(3) Luring alternate free agents (Ty Vickery anyone?)

2017 was always going to be a "we gotta make finals" season, so a pick in the 60's wouldn't have been much good for that. Our class of 2016 have ended up playing so far, what, two games between them?

Re: the rumour of Mayne being Gubby's decision rather than Hine's ...

... maybe Hine felt it was better to hold onto the TPP and squirrel it away for next year (the 5% under / over cap rule) and Gubby felt that it would best achieve the club objectives (getting to finals in 2017) if we spent it on Mayne.

Interesting post.
Hasn't really worked out with Mayne.

The issue is on here we view Mayne as this recruit like we gave so much for him.
But as you say we'd have had a late pick only.

Our cost is salary cap and length of contract-lets hope it's loaded to our favour, let's hope so or it won't be pretty money wise for us.

Or maybe mayne comes good - I know, silly suggestion.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Glad Wells' name has been taken off this thread - should never be in the same stratosphere

 

[Anzacday]

Glad Wells' name has been taken off this thread - should never be in the same stratosphere

Agree(d) and thanks to Timmy from Thomastown for pointing it out.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

The Mayne recruitment looks to be a bust, but ...

... we clearly had the TPP, what else were we going to spend the money on? Especially on something that we didn't have to give something back in return?

We had a choice of ...

(1) Chris Mayne

(2) A draft pick in the 60's

(3) Luring alternate free agents (Ty Vickery anyone?)

2017 was always going to be a "we gotta make finals" season, so a pick in the 60's wouldn't have been much good for that. Our class of 2016 have ended up playing so far, what, two games between them?

Re: the rumour of Mayne being Gubby's decision rather than Hine's ...

... maybe Hine felt it was better to hold onto the TPP and squirrel it away for next year (the 5% under / over cap rule) and Gubby felt that it would best achieve the club objectives (getting to finals in 2017) if we spent it on Mayne.

Holding on to Cloke for another year might have been a better choice for starters. Or throwing a bunch of money at Grundy to lock him in a year before his contract expires.

Or signing Mayne for one year not. Four.

 

[Apex36]

The Mayne recruitment looks to be a bust, but ...

... we clearly had the TPP, what else were we going to spend the money on?

Front loading heavy contracts like those of Pendlebury, Treloar and to a lesser extent, Reid. There's plenty of ways to meet the TPP criteria without wasting big chunks of cash on mediocre players like Mayne.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Front loading heavy contracts like those of Pendlebury, Treloar and to a lesser extent, Reid. There's plenty of ways to meet the TPP criteria without wasting big chunks of cash on mediocre players like Mayne.

And who to use the list spot on? Chris Mayne, Ty Vickery, a delisted F/A, or a pick in the 60's?

Yeah, a pick in the 60's looks like it might have been the better option - but the Club probably thought it was worth a punt given 2017 objectives.

 

[Apex36]

Pick in the 60's on a base contract was a far better option.

 

[barrackers]

The Mayne recruitment looks to be a bust, but ...

... we clearly had the TPP, what else were we going to spend the money on? Especially on something that we didn't have to give something back in return?

We had a choice of ...

(1) Chris Mayne

(2) A draft pick in the 60's

(3) Luring alternate free agents (Ty Vickery anyone?)

2017 was always going to be a "we gotta make finals" season, so a pick in the 60's wouldn't have been much good for that. Our class of 2016 have ended up playing so far, what, two games between them?

Re: the rumour of Mayne being Gubby's decision rather than Hine's ...

... maybe Hine felt it was better to hold onto the TPP and squirrel it away for next year (the 5% under / over cap rule) and Gubby felt that it would best achieve the club objectives (getting to finals in 2017) if we spent it on Mayne.

Or we pushed for proper value for Witts and had a pick in the 20s. I think the lack of list spots meant we only cared about f/s points and have Witts away cheaply.

 

[Quicky]

And who to use the list spot on? Chris Mayne, Ty Vickery, a delisted F/A, or a pick in the 60's?

Yeah, a pick in the 60's looks like it might have been the better option - but the Club probably thought it was worth a punt given 2017 objectives.

There's also the loss of a compensation pick we would have received for Brown had we not taken a free agent. That may have allowed us to take someone like Cox as a developing key defender while still securing Daicos and Brown. I think we misjudged where our list was at and we'd have been better investing in the draft.

 

[76woodenspooners]

There's also the loss of a compensation pick we would have received for Brown had we not taken a free agent.

That had gone anyway with us taking Wells.

That may have allowed us to take someone like Cox as a developing key defender while still securing Daicos and Brown. I think we misjudged where our list was at and we'd have been better investing in the draft.

I reckon if were sitting around 7th on the ladder (as we planned) then it would be a non-issue.

The club took a punt on us being successful and lost.

 

[Quicky]

That had gone anyway with us taking Wells.



I reckon if were sitting around 7th on the ladder (as we planned) then it would be a non-issue.

The club took a punt on us being successful and lost.

Yes that's true. But was it the correct strategy to take both Mayne and Wells if we were also giving up Brown as a free agent? I like Wells and was supportive of that at the time. And I like what he provides us when he plays now. But I don't think it was the correct approach. I think if we were to give up Brown we needed to bank the compensation pick and hit the draft. I think we incorrectly assessed where the list was at in terms of quality and development.

 

[Quicky]

Whether it was the correct call trading Brown is another debate also. We gave up a lot in defensive structure by trading him.

 

[jackcass]

Yes that's true. But was it the correct strategy to take both Mayne and Wells if we were also giving up Brown as a free agent? I like Wells and was supportive of that at the time. And I like what he provides us when he plays now. But I don't think it was the correct approach. I think if we were to give up Brown we needed to bank the compensation pick and hit the draft. I think we incorrectly assessed where the list was at in terms of quality and development.

Were we ever going to get compo for Brown?

 

[mike123]

The Mayne recruitment looks to be a bust, but ...

... we clearly had the TPP, what else were we going to spend the money on? Especially on something that we didn't have to give something back in return?

We had a choice of ...

(1) Chris Mayne

(2) A draft pick in the 60's

(3) Luring alternate free agents (Ty Vickery anyone?)

2017 was always going to be a "we gotta make finals" season, so a pick in the 60's wouldn't have been much good for that. Our class of 2016 have ended up playing so far, what, two games between them?

Re: the rumour of Mayne being Gubby's decision rather than Hine's ...

... maybe Hine felt it was better to hold onto the TPP and squirrel it away for next year (the 5% under / over cap rule) and Gubby felt that it would best achieve the club objectives (getting to finals in 2017) if we spent it on Mayne.

Enforce Cloke's contract


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Quicky]

Were we ever going to get compo for Brown?

We would have assuming we didn't trade any FA's in ourselves. It was question of how much compo.

 

[jackcass]

We would have assuming we didn't trade any FA's in ourselves. It was question of how much compo.

I would have thought he was on pretty low salary at the Saints so wasn't sure. Every source I've looked at lists "none" as the compo but I'm not sure if that's what he qualified for or if that's what we'd get given we had Wells and Mayne.