General AFL thread 2016

[saintbill]

The Saints need to be in Hurleys ear asking him if he wants to go to a club that treats their players like that.

So they offer you X, but if you underperform or get injured you might be pressured into taking a pay cut mid-contract, because you know "a good team player that wanted to win a flag would do that". Who would want to play for an administration that embarrassing, what a rabble.

Get stuffed Dogs, you made your bed you can lie it thanks very much.

 

[saintbill]

Contracts can be re-negotiated, but if both parties don't agree to the new terms, it's business (or existing contract) as usual.

Luckily Boyd is renowned as a shocking tight arse and he won't agree to a smaller contract. I am actually disgusted the Doggies would attempt something like this, if true.

Whilst they are at it, why not ask Redpath and Wallis for a pay cut as well?

 

[CALL ME SNAKE]

Why would a player like Hurley go to a club on the lure of a big contract if they know other big contracted players at that club are being told to take a pay cut if they underperform.
Just gonna scare new players away.

 

[Diehard Saint]

Just to clarify... It's not the club at this stage putting on the pressure, but people are talking about it and the idea is out there, and the article mentions the obvious fact that he is the highest paid player at the club but only the 27th ranked player which does put pressure on the player and can possibly cause a rift in his relationship with the other players. Particularly if he isn't performing.
They are talking about it on SEN as I write so it's going to get bigger than Ben Hur!

 

[J_Rod]

Isn't this the sole reason a club would sign a player on a performance based contract? If you're stupid enough to through drug money at a kid that has nothing but potential with no clauses, and he fails to live up to the hype, then you suffer the consequences.

Sent from my D6653 using Tapatalk

 

[Rors]

I find it hilarious. Most people know that big blokes take time to develop, especially ones that play the forward/ruck role.

Sometimes it can be difficult to fast-track development of a player in just one position, let alone 2 positions.

Gotta love Darcy saying he should take a pay cut.... Luke Darcy didnt become consistent until his 6th season. All this from a bloke that promotes you to come to his pub after games at the G, only for the security to knock you back because you're wearing supporter gear (footy jumpers, scarves, etc). What a flog

 

[Savatage]

Gotta love Darcy saying he should take a pay cut.... Luke Darcy didnt become consistent until his 6th season. All this from a bloke that promotes you to come to his pub after games at the G, only for the security to knock you back because you're wearing supporter gear (footy jumpers, scarves, etc). What a flog

Then pays the bands that play at his pubs like 6 weeks after they perform....flog!!

 

[Melksham2Siposs]

co-lour-ful. Full tirade, i mean interview...


Edit: PS Sheahan is not my favorite journo but holy sheet.

That aint no tough guy, going after lil blokes.

This is a tough guy (0:58, 5:06 lmao)..

 

[pebblesofsand]

Dont see them asking anyone else for a pay cut.
What about the coaches or the Accounts Payable guy, or heres a radical thought, sone of the other players.
So he is forced to take a pay cut for say Hurley.
Will they then go to Hurley after a year and ask him to cut his salary?
Will any player or manager have any faith in a contract with the Bulldogs?

They screwed the pooch (yes intended). Why should Boyd suffer for their incompetence?

Can't see a problem. Contracts are a two way street. He accepted the contract knowing full well he was expected to perform in return for the payment - if he says otherwise its breach of contract.

So if the problem is that he maybe not be putting in as much as other players I'd be a bit blunter with him - we're paying you to perform - you haven't performed so can you please explain to your teammates why you should continue to be paid that salary.

Doggies will then know whether he is part of the team or doesn't give a s@#$?

 

[CALL ME SNAKE]

Can't see a problem. Contracts are a two way street. He accepted the contract knowing full well he was expected to perform in return for the payment - if he says otherwise its breach of contract.

So if the problem is that he maybe not be putting in as much as other players I'd be a bit blunter with him - we're paying you to perform - you haven't performed so can you please explain to your teammates why you should continue to be paid that salary.

Doggies will then know whether he is part of the team or doesn't give a s@#$?

Surely theres a big diff between a star player not performing and a kid not living up to potential.
Doggies took a risk on potential . Risk doesnt always work.
Bad luck PAY UP.
Just my take on it anyway

 

[crasha301]

Most players bust their ass to get a good contract. He hasn't and never will.

 

[Joffaboy]

Can't see a problem. Contracts are a two way street. He accepted the contract knowing full well he was expected to perform in return for the payment - if he says otherwise its breach of contract.

So if the problem is that he maybe not be putting in as much as other players I'd be a bit blunter with him - we're paying you to perform - you haven't performed so can you please explain to your teammates why you should continue to be paid that salary.

Doggies will then know whether he is part of the team or doesn't give a s@#$?

Not performance based though.

 

[CALL ME SNAKE]

Most players bust their ass to get a good contract. He hasn't and never will.

True.
My argument for him doing nothing wrong is he has NEVER performed. Dogs took a huge gamble. Gambling doesnt always pay so bad luck Doggies.
I could understand the Cats feeling financially hard done by if Danger took all that money and slacked off. But he hasnt and it was money well spent.
Boyd hasnt slacked off either. He is just playing like he has his whole AFL career.
If Dogs wanna pay a million for that then they cant complain.

 

[Diehard Saint]

Most players bust their ass to get a good contract. He hasn't and never will.

Can't blame Boyd for the fact that he took a ( stupidly outrageous) offer. Can't blame him for not being the power forward they need now when most people know the big men take a few years to develop.
The blame lies fairly and squarely at the feet of the Bulldogs for taking such a huge risk based on potential.

 

[crasha301]

Can't blame Boyd for the fact that he took a ( stupidly outrageous) offer. Can't blame him for not being the power forward they need now when most people know the big men take a few years to develop.
The blame lies fairly and squarely at the feet of the Bulldogs for taking such a huge risk based on potential.

I don't blame Boyd at all. Every 19 year old in the comp would have taking the deal.

My point is that his already getting paid the big bucks so the hunger won't be there.

 

[Choomah]

Dogs are an absolute shambles of a club, it's time they were relegated to the VFL what an embarrassment it's truly is beautiful what Peter Gordon is doing to that club

 

[Highlander35]

Boyd deserves to get a million dollars a year because he signed a million dollar contract that the Bulldogs offered him, seemingly with few allowances made for performance.

There's nothing necessarily wrong with asking him for a pay cut, but

a) there is no reason for him to even consider it
b) he would be entitled to feel insulted them asking for him to do so, and even 6 years out, could see him eventually walk away from the club
c) if he was willing to do so, it would be entirely reasonable for he and his agent to expect and negotiate for lost wages now to be accounted for in his next contract extension, merely deferring the problem to later

 

[Diehard Saint]

The really big problem is that if he doesn't come good in a few years. ( got to give him development time) and they want to trade him, which club is going to be prepared to pay him that amount? And they wouldn't be able to pay part of his salary and afford to attract other big name players. This is a huge mess which will have ramifications for years to come.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Is it even kosher to ask a contracted player to take a pay cut on a signed contract? Surely that's not allowed to happen.

Can you imagine if a player, say Josh Bruce last year, asked the club for more money mid contract because his output was 10x worth his basement salary he agreed to?

If they were smart, they'd ship him to Essendon. They're desperate and would suck up a good chunk of his coin.

As someone said, its fine to dissolve a contract if both parties agree. Would be a very nasty law if contracts were enforced when neither party wanted it .

 

[CALL ME SNAKE]

Boyd deserves to get a million dollars a year because he signed a million dollar contract that the Bulldogs offered him

 

[Persevering Saint]

Surely theres a big diff between a star player not performing and a kid not living up to potential.
Doggies took a risk on potential . Risk doesnt always work.
Bad luck PAY UP.
Just my take on it anyway

Nup, I'm with Pebbles here. Businesses hire people on potential all the time. Doesn't mean they get a free ride from then on.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

...the article mentions the obvious fact that he is the highest paid player at the club but only the 27th ranked player...

Hopefully none of his team mates take issue with that.

May lead to fisticuffs

 

[CALL ME SNAKE]

Nup, I'm with Pebbles here. Businesses hire people on potential all the time. Doesn't mean they get a free ride from then on.

Then they gotta PROVE Boyds not trying dont they? Maybe he is doing his best?
Thats what they are paying him for. To play well. If he is playing as good as he can how is it his fault?
BUT if it can be proved he is a lazy arse and not trying then Doggies have something to complain about.

 

[Persevering Saint]

Can't blame Boyd for the fact that he took a ( stupidly outrageous) offer. Can't blame him for not being the power forward they need now when most people know the big men take a few years to develop.
The blame lies fairly and squarely at the feet of the Bulldogs for taking such a huge risk based on potential.

I don't blame him for taking the deal. I would blame him, if I was a Doggies supporter, for his attitude from that point on. Ideally, he'd honour the good faith shown to him. Reports seem to indicate otherwise.

I don't blame Boyd at all. Every 19 year old in the comp would have taking the deal.

My point is that his already getting paid the big bucks so the hunger won't be there.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

"He's not the messiah; he's just a very overpaid bulldog!"