Mumford's "fortune"

Deep North

Senior List
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Posts
177
Likes
48
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Melb Victory, West Ham
Thread starter #1
Was just listening to 3AW, they were discussing Sydney and Caro lobbed in that she's been told Mumford was paid an "absolute fortune" to move to Sydney. Does anyone know how much this fortune is? I thought he'd moved on because he was behind Blake and Ottens in the pecking order.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Tristagi

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 11, 2006
Posts
1,795
Likes
34
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Jimmy Bartel and Everton
#2
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

at geelong he was on bugger all due to being a Rookie, and due to having a very strong team we couldn't offer him more than about $100,000. Sydney swooped in and offered him around $300,000 a year for 3 years
 
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Posts
10,933
Likes
1,657
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
#3
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

The club tried to convince him to stay and he must have had second thoughts as the swans then upped the offer to 4 years.

Sydney overpaid him, we got Duncan as compensation. I'm still none the wiser why so many people have massive hard ons for Mumford.
 

Duskfire

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 30, 2007
Posts
6,037
Likes
4,335
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Geelong
#4
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

He is a promising young player but he doesn't deserve that much money. I don't blame him for taking it; he must have known that he would be behind the pecking order of Blake and Ottens for awhile. So he goes to a decent club with a good paycheck; can't cargue with that.
 

Simon_Nesbit

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 26, 2001
Posts
10,494
Likes
5,273
Location
Tasmania
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#5
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

Slightly less Tritagi, but you have to wonder how well the Swans will cope after putting over 1.1 million a year into Mumford, Seaby, McGlynn and Kennedy. All are solid players, but none scream out "star" to me.

Heard a rumour a certain dual-brownlow medalist basically told them to get him another shot before he retires, and is basically on rookie wages (ala Harley in 09?). No idea of validity, (personally think Hall's $$$ leaving a bigger opening), but remains to be seen I guess.

Duncan looks a ripper too. One of the commentators said he'd been on your list for 3 years....just confused, or is he an ex-rookie or mature ager or something?
 

YIIIABLETTT

Team Captain
Joined
Sep 1, 2007
Posts
577
Likes
1
Location
Glenelg
AFL Club
Geelong
#8
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

Mumford has been playing very well and looked superb against the roos yesterday, personally i think its a loss and that he is and will be a better player than blake. But at the end of the day the salary cap restrictions forced our hand and there was nothing else we could do. And we have managed to get Mitch Duncan as compensation so cant have any complaints there
 

Simon_Nesbit

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 26, 2001
Posts
10,494
Likes
5,273
Location
Tasmania
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#9
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

First year draftee straight from the u-18s. You must be thinking of Motlop maybe, although it is only his second year this year.
Yeah that's what I thought...only saw about half of your game last week and this comment made me think twice....given his size and quick adaption to AFL, I thought perhaps I'd just overlooked it at draft time.
 

And_ROOS

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Posts
7,904
Likes
5,679
Location
On the Road to A.G
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Geelong
#10
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

Mumford has been playing very well and looked superb against the roos yesterday, personally i think its a loss and that he is and will be a better player than blake. But at the end of the day the salary cap restrictions forced our hand and there was nothing else we could do. And we have managed to get Mitch Duncan as compensation so cant have any complaints there
Most will be of the opinion that Simpson will be better then Mumford and Blake in the end anyway.
 

S for September

All Australian
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Posts
615
Likes
127
Location
Geelong
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Melbourne Heart, Everton
#11
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

Mummy was awesome yesterday, and showed he is far ahead of Blake. Will hurt watching him play for Sydney for the next 5-10 years. :(
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

randyzany

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Posts
3,588
Likes
1,186
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
#14
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

who cares about moneyford?

poor mans ben hudson

If taking Sydney's generous offer (but still relatively modest by AFL standards) makes Mummy a money hungry mercenary than I can't wait to hear what pearler you'll come up with for GAJ if decides to run around for the GC for 2 M a season (or close to it). :rolleyes:
 

Brasil2007

Club Legend
Joined
May 14, 2007
Posts
2,807
Likes
3
Location
Port Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Snootles
#17
The figure I heard was something like $1.2 million over three years, more money than has ever been thrown at an essentially untested player.

You can't keep everyone, it's about taking lemons and making lemonade. Based on what I've seen of Mitch Duncan it's exactly what we've done.
 

Brasil2007

Club Legend
Joined
May 14, 2007
Posts
2,807
Likes
3
Location
Port Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Snootles
#19
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

Heard a story that part of Mumford's decision to follow the money was because his sister(?) is quite unwell and it was a great opportunity to help her out with her medical bills.
I hadn't heard that. To me it's a no brainer though, as a footballer you only have to look at Matty Egan to see how a first class career can end in a second.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Posts
31,422
Likes
55,507
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Moderator #21
Sydney aren't paying him that much for what he offers now; as with any ruckman, you hope to have them when they're at their best at 27-28 years old.

Mumford is still only 24.

It will be very annoying watching him run around for Sydney in 3-4 years time.

Unfortunately, we just couldn't match that kind of coin.
 

GrandBlue

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 18, 2008
Posts
9,328
Likes
1,743
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspur
#22
I think Mumford really wanted ToG. The Cats should have sacked Blake (unless he was under contract) and used the money to pay Mumford. He's obviously a better ruckman and displays aggression toward the ball, unlike Blake, who looks lazy.
 

rocker_oz33

Hall of Famer
Joined
May 15, 2007
Posts
35,118
Likes
24,823
Location
Rockin in a free world.
AFL Club
Geelong
#23
Re: Mumford' "fortune"

Blake is the perfect ruckman in our team he taps it.. That's all he has to do.
hahaha yep l got home after the game and turned the telly on and Blake had that shot at goal and the commentator's said this will bring the house down. And yeah he missed and commentator's how many kicks for Blake they said only one and then someone said it looks like it too.and then they said his job is to tap and hand pass.
 

randyzany

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Posts
3,588
Likes
1,186
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
#24
I think Mumford really wanted ToG. The Cats should have sacked Blake (unless he was under contract) and used the money to pay Mumford. He's obviously a better ruckman and displays aggression toward the ball, unlike Blake, who looks lazy.
Can't wait for Round 7, that match should settle the argument once and for all. :thumbsu:
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Posts
1,466
Likes
12
Location
Kensington
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
United, 49ers, Pistons, Wings, Jays
#25
I think Mumford really wanted ToG. The Cats should have sacked Blake (unless he was under contract) and used the money to pay Mumford. He's obviously a better ruckman and displays aggression toward the ball, unlike Blake, who looks lazy.
Hot dog, we have a weiner.

I'd like to think we'd have gotten rid of Blake & held on to Mummy if their contracts were up at the same time.

Blake has been utterly, utterly crap so far this year. Was a huge part in the momentum shift against Freo last week.
 
Top Bottom