Player Watch Nathan Freeman

[Tbone McGraw]

Alan richardson pretty keen on freeman on "talking footy" but says a deal has to be done.

 

[Robroy22]

Alan richardson pretty keen on freeman on "talking footy" but says a deal has to be done.

Yep....and said that the Saints were "advised of his availablity" prior to them seeking him out.

 

[nahnah]

I've slept on it, thought about it for over a week and I've always come to the same conclusion. The kids a fk-wit, take the second rounder and be done with it.

 

[larrikan]

Yeah I think Richardson said that the deal was a long way from done. Can I read into that St Scum want him cheaper than we are prepared to let him go for but they will still pay the fwit $300,000? Amusing times, trade times.

So we play tough...we owe the kid no favours...deal or pre season draft...risk going to Carlscum or he puts a price on his head that prices him out of the market. Funny for a kid who has played NO AFL games! Can I say that again- NO AFL games!

Freeman is talked about as an outside speedster...he has spent two years with dodgy hammys/scar tissue blah blah blah...TWO YEARS! Wow his outside speed is amazing...wait he has none!!! He can't run! He's a spud! A legend in BF and his own mind! Surely, explosive speed and chronic hammies don't go well together. Maybe he can bend over and blow his own....wait he can't...his hammies are dodgy.

Can I say it again?...He has played NO AFL games! FFS

 

[jasonwilde]

You think a 19 year old kid is gonna choose clubs based on what his parents want...

Yes.

(Not that you were replying to me but the answer to this question is yes)

 

[pablo disco bar]

Marsh? Bad hammies

Yeah I think Richardson said that the deal was a long way from done. Can I read into that St Scum want him cheaper than we are prepared to let him go for but they will still pay the fwit $300,000? Amusing times, trade times.

So we play tough...we owe the kid no favours...deal or pre season draft...risk going to Carlscum or he puts a price on his head that prices him out of the market. Funny for a kid who has played NO AFL games! Can I say that again- NO AFL games!

Freeman is talked about as an outside speedster...he has spent two years with dodgy hammys/scar tissue blah blah blah...TWO YEARS! Wow his outside speed is amazing...wait he has none!!! He can't run! He's a spud! A legend in BF and his own mind! Surely, explosive speed and chronic hammies don't go well together. Maybe he can bend over and blow his own....wait he can't...his hammies are dodgy.

Can I say it again?...He has played NO AFL games! FFS

Marsh has bad hammies also

 

[PicaBoo]

All about the $$$. Even his lack of opportunities reason : Read not enough games to trigger his performance based contract.

 

[watt price tully]

If the kid wants to go then so be it. Age of entitlement is a silly & limited notion in my view. In this day & age clubs are all too ready to rid their stocks of players. I would prefer Freeman to stay with us & I'm disappointed but i don't think he owes "us" that is Collingwood anything.

1. Footy is now a business;
2. A player would be stupid not to look out for themselves in many respects given that Footy is their livelihood & given the short duration of a footy career - would you turn down an extra $100,000 - $150,000 a year - I don't think I would;
3. At the same time the time spent being a professional footy player means they miss out on other "life" opportunities given the time that need to devote to football;
4. He did not create the conditions where this can be done, the AFL with the assistance of the clubs & players have all contributed to this situation;

Did we not take enough care before, during & after his injury & his rehabilitation. The latter can be an awfully difficult time - were we switched on to his mental state at the time?

Remember last year & all the injuries we sustained & many of us blamed Bill Davoren. I recall when Freeman first did his hammy it was described as "tore the hammy off the bone" & there were some comments that he pushed Freeman too far at the time. Combine that with Freeman's concern about his medical management at collingwood makes this interesting:

Having noted that, I just found this online from the Tasmanian Examiner from a few years ago:

He (Bill Davoren) said the results answered critics who believed he pushed his athletes too far

http://www.examiner.com.au/story/645129/louises-run-is-seventh-heaven/

Interesting.

 

[PicaBoo]

If the kid wants to go then so be it. Age of entitlement is a silly & limited notion in my view. In this day & age clubs are all too ready to rid their stocks of players. I would prefer Freeman to stay with us & I'm disappointed but i don't think he owes "us" that is Collingwood anything.

1. Footy is now a business;
2. A player would be stupid not to look out for themselves in many respects given that Footy is their livelihood & given the short duration of a footy career - would you turn down an extra $100,000 - $150,000 a year - I don't think I would;
3. At the same time the time spent being a professional footy player means they miss out on other "life" opportunities given the time that need to devote to football;
4. He did not create the conditions where this can be done, the AFL with the assistance of the clubs & players have all contributed to this situation;

Did we not take enough care before, during & after his injury & his rehabilitation. The latter can be an awfully difficult time - were we switched on to his mental state at the time?

Remember last year & all the injuries we sustained & many of us blamed Bill Davoren. I recall when Freeman first did his hammy it was described as "tore the hammy off the bone" & there were some comments that he pushed Freeman too far at the time. Combine that with Freeman's concern about his medical management at collingwood makes this interesting:

Having noted that, I just found this online from the Tasmanian Examiner from a few years ago:

He (Bill Davoren) said the results answered critics who believed he pushed his athletes too far

http://www.examiner.com.au/story/645129/louises-run-is-seventh-heaven/

Interesting.

Davoren might be right for endurance but sprinting, turning and bashing is not part of a triathlon last time I checked. And there's the criticism in his training that I have heard so far. Not fit for everyone we got on our list. Including Freeman.

 

[Matt_352]

Good riddance to the money grubbing heck

 

[watt price tully]

Good riddance to the money grubbing heck

Don't hold back, what do you really think about Freemans move?

 

[Kappa]

Good riddance to the money grubbing heck

inb4 99% of people on this forum would change work places for more money.

 

[Bard]

inb4 99% of people on this forum would change work places for more money.

Idk about changing workplace but I'd happily just go to a workplace for some money atm

Inb4streetcorner

 

[doodles98]

inb4 99% of people on this forum would change work places for more money.

99% of people on this forum don't represent an AFL football club as a player for their job. What you're saying works fine if Freeman was moving from BHP to RIO Tinto. Although actually I'm sure BHP would also feel pissed off if he had spent the last 2 years on paid sick leave with them before he left.

 

[JollyBallsUp]

Its time for everyone to except that Freeman will be a saint by the time the trade period if over. The question is what deal will the 2 clubs conjure up to satisfy both patties? I doubt based on what Collingwood have said straight after Freeman made his announcement that he wanted to be traded that they will except a straight out second round pick. So the question is what deal do you all think will allow Freeman to make his way to the Saints?

What would it take for us to get hold of StKilda's pick 5? Would Freeman and our pick 25 get the job done?

 

[OniAu]

Hope we get something decent for him , hope St Kilda also remember they put us through the ringer when we tried to Trade for Ball

 

[ppoiter]

Its time for everyone to except that Freeman will be a saint by the time the trade period if over. The question is what deal will the 2 clubs conjure up to satisfy both patties? I doubt based on what Collingwood have said straight after Freeman made his announcement that he wanted to be traded that they will except a straight out second round pick. So the question is what deal do you all think will allow Freeman to make his way to the Saints?

What would it take for us to get hold of StKilda's pick 5? Would Freeman and our pick 25 get the job done?

5 is impossible, although we might just get Sydneys round 1 if things go right for us. Would put us in the ballpark for Weideman

 

[STK2020]

Its time for everyone to except that Freeman will be a saint by the time the trade period if over. The question is what deal will the 2 clubs conjure up to satisfy both patties? I doubt based on what Collingwood have said straight after Freeman made his announcement that he wanted to be traded that they will except a straight out second round pick. So the question is what deal do you all think will allow Freeman to make his way to the Saints?

What would it take for us to get hold of StKilda's pick 5? Would Freeman and our pick 25 get the job done?

 

[didaksrightfoot]

99% of people on this forum don't represent an AFL football club as a player for their job. What you're saying works fine if Freeman was moving from BHP to RIO Tinto. Although actually I'm sure BHP would also feel pissed off if he had spent the last 2 years on paid sick leave with them before he left.

Do we have to keep going over this:

Freeman is more a "Commodity" than an "Employee". To an AFL club he is little more than a resource that is part of their product. When a club no longer feels he is "profitable" as a commodity, they will spit him out. Clubs use players only for their own benefit (and vice-versa, players only use clubs for their own benefit as well).

Freeman's time at the club whilst injured has little to do with the club "sticking by him", it was the club recognising it's investment, and wanting to get returns from it. If at any point a club thought an injury would be career ending, I garauntee they would be "encouraging" someone to retire (or to do so when their contract ends).

Additionally, this is a job with a very limited career length - its basically a maximum of 10-12 years of money earning potential, except that most players won't get anywhere near that. On top of that, as someone who spent his first two years injured, Freeman would be acutely aware that this career can also come to an end at any point. I would say it could be as high as a 50-50 chance that this next contract he signs may end up being hist last one. Without going through the numbers, my guess is that the future for players who don't play a game in their first 2 seasons isn't particularly rosy.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Freeman doing what is best for himself and his family - and there is also absolutely nothing wrong with the Club doing what is best for them. (because lets be honest - that is what Clubs always do).

Not to diminish too much the "human" side of clubs and football, but make no mistake that this is about big business - for both clubs and players.

 

[Crazy Tails]

Guys there is no deal involving Freeman that lands us the Saints pick 5.

They will either use it on Carlisle or take it to the draft. That selection is way to valuable to use on a speculative trade. The absolute best we could hope for is their 2nd rounder if it gets late and they blink before us.

At worst he walks to Saints via the PSD and we get nothing. He just needs to refuse medicals at other clubs and he will easily make it to Saints first PSD pick.

The Saints have us over a barrel on this one unfortunately and Freeman has screwed us.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Do we have to keep going over this:

Freeman is more a "Commodity" than an "Employee". To an AFL club he is little more than a resource that is part of their product. When a club no longer feels he is "profitable" as a commodity, they will spit him out. Clubs use players only for their own benefit (and vice-versa, players only use clubs for their own benefit as well).

Freeman's time at the club whilst injured has little to do with the club "sticking by him", it was the club recognising it's investment, and wanting to get returns from it. If at any point a club thought an injury would be career ending, I garauntee they would be "encouraging" someone to retire (or to do so when their contract ends).

Additionally, this is a job with a very limited career length - its basically a maximum of 10-12 years of money earning potential, except that most players won't get anywhere near that. On top of that, as someone who spent his first two years injured, Freeman would be acutely aware that this career can also come to an end at any point. I would say it could be as high as a 50-50 chance that this next contract he signs may end up being hist last one. Without going through the numbers, my guess is that the future for players who don't play a game in their first 2 seasons isn't particularly rosy.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Freeman doing what is best for himself and his family - and there is also absolutely nothing wrong with the Club doing what is best for them. (because lets be honest - that is what Clubs always do).

Not to diminish too much the "human" side of clubs and football, but make no mistake that this is about big business - for both clubs and players.

Disagree with the premise of this.

I just don't see how a clubs can be successful by treating players as commodities, and how players can be successful by treating clubs as soulless organisations who who pay them money for services.

Players have got their mates around them, the potential to play in finals (or not), the potential to get games of footy (or not), the potential of winning premierships (or not), the potential to get the best out of themselves (or not), the potential to stay close to home or travel elsewhere, the potential to work in an environment they like or is familiar to them.

Have a look at the migration of players around the AFL in any given season. Last year there were 34 players out of around 800 who went to a new club. How many of those were due to money? Did James Frawley move from Melbourne to Hawthorn for money? Did Allen Christensen move from Geelong to Brisbane for money? Did Jack Crisp move from Brisbane to Collingwood for money?

The number of players who chase money because they could earn more elsewhere is minuscule.

In fact, I'd say that players would generally chase more money elsewhere if they're unhappy where they are.

Franklin got a massive payrise by going to Sydney - but he was also wanting to get out of the fishbowl that was Melbourne.

Tippett got a massive payrise by going to Sydney - but he was wanting to get out of Adelaide.

Beams got a massive payrise by going to Brisbane - but he was wanting to be with his family.

Judd got a massive payrise by moving to Carlton - but he was wanting to get out of the toxic environment of WCE.

Greenwood got a payrise by moving to Collingwood - but he didn't think he was being appreciated at North Melbourne

There is generally something else

 

[ThePhantom777]

Agree that if you get on with your team mates and have a great group who enjoy training and playing together, you want to go in and do the hard work. Last thing I'll say about Freeman........ GAGF

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Disagree with the premise of this.

I just don't see how a clubs can be successful by treating players as commodities, and how players can be successful by treating clubs as soulless organisations who who pay them money for services.

Players have got their mates around them, the potential to play in finals (or not), the potential to get games of footy (or not), the potential of winning premierships (or not), the potential to get the best out of themselves (or not), the potential to stay close to home or travel elsewhere, the potential to work in an environment they like or is familiar to them.

Have a look at the migration of players around the AFL in any given season. Last year there were 34 players out of around 800 who went to a new club. How many of those were due to money? Did James Frawley move from Melbourne to Hawthorn for money? Did Allen Christensen move from Geelong to Brisbane for money? Did Jack Crisp move from Brisbane to Collingwood for money?

The number of players who chase money because they could earn more elsewhere is minuscule.

In fact, I'd say that players would generally chase more money elsewhere if they're unhappy where they are.

Franklin got a massive payrise by going to Sydney - but he was also wanting to get out of the fishbowl that was Melbourne.

Tippett got a massive payrise by going to Sydney - but he was wanting to get out of Adelaide.

Beams got a massive payrise by going to Brisbane - but he was wanting to be with his family.

Judd got a massive payrise by moving to Carlton - but he was wanting to get out of the toxic environment of WCE.

Greenwood got a payrise by moving to Collingwood - but he didn't think he was being appreciated at North Melbourne

There is generally something else

Just to clarify, I do generally agree with your premise, and I was taking a "black-and-white" approach to this, but it is more as a response to people calling Freeman a "money grubbing heck" amongst other things. A lot of this thread seems to be ripping into a kid because he is not saying "No" to an extra $150k per year - and I think that is being incredibly unfair.

For the most part, I think players do want to stay with their teammates and stay loyal to their clubs, but there is a limit to that "loyalty". A lot of the guys who left for more money did so for close to double (or more) than their original salaries. You are not a "money grubbing heck" for doing that - you are an intelligent human being who, if you take into consideration all the factors into making your decision, are probably doing the best thing for yourself and your family.
From reports the original offers to Freeman were something like 300k/yr vs 150k/yr - he would be stupid to not at least consider that... and everybody else would do the same thing.

Now if the difference wasn't as significant, then I reckon most players would prefer to stay... unless there is some other reason they want to leave (as you listed). But we aren't talking about a small difference in pay here - we are talking about a massive difference. (And lets be honest - although our "conditional contract" would look attractive if someone was playing every game - for someone in Freeman's position, this would look very hard to achieve at this point).

 

[Anzacday]

Heard 3rd hand, (I know, I know) the treatment of his hammy was not an issue and has nothing to do with him leaving.
Apparently he was offered to do the "Germany thing" too.
Despite what Connors says, IT IS about the money.
Only reason I post this is I was/am pleased to hear our treatment of him was up to scratch and not a contributing factor.

 

[JollyBallsUp]

Just to clarify, I do generally agree with your premise, and I was taking a "black-and-white" approach to this, but it is more as a response to people calling Freeman a "money grubbing heck" amongst other things. A lot of this thread seems to be ripping into a kid because he is not saying "No" to an extra $150k per year - and I think that is being incredibly unfair.

For the most part, I think players do want to stay with their teammates and stay loyal to their clubs, but there is a limit to that "loyalty". A lot of the guys who left for more money did so for close to double (or more) than their original salaries. You are not a "money grubbing heck" for doing that - you are an intelligent human being who, if you take into consideration all the factors into making your decision, are probably doing the best thing for yourself and your family.
From reports the original offers to Freeman were something like 300k/yr vs 150k/yr - he would be stupid to not at least consider that... and everybody else would do the same thing.

Now if the difference wasn't as significant, then I reckon most players would prefer to stay... unless there is some other reason they want to leave (as you listed). But we aren't talking about a small difference in pay here - we are talking about a massive difference. (And lets be honest - although our "conditional contract" would look attractive if someone was playing every game - for someone in Freeman's position, this would look very hard to achieve at this point).

I disagree. Whilst I understand that football is a business and players are not shown any loyalty by clubs, but clubs expect the players to remain loyal to them. At the end of the day clubs are held accountable by their members with the main aim is to be as successful as the leagues rules will dictate. The club overrides the player in the overall scheme of things. We as supporters will support anyone who wants to wear our jumper and Freeman does not want to wear the jumper any more.

Whilst Freeman maintains he is leaving for better opportunities most of us don't believe this to be the case. Freeman has not been denied any opportunities at Collingwood as be has not put himself in a position to know where he sits in the scheme of things. If he was going to StKilda for better opportunities than it should not take 300k to convince him. I would much rather he be more upfront with us all and tell us that the length of contract and the money was too good to refuse. Personally I see Freeman as a significant risk.