- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Posts
- 6,391
- Likes
- 11,782
- Location
- Brisbane
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
Moderator
#1,576
Over the last 7-8 years we have been a side that hasn't made finals, with a large list turnover full of lots of kids and fringe players that has had to pay 95% of the salary cap. It wouldn't be too unfair to say that pretty much every player on our list has been getting paid more than what they would have received at just about every other club in the competition, sometime grossly more when based on their output. Even someone like Rockliff who's output has been at a level above most of our list would still have been getting overpaid by a large chunk when compared to players of similar level at other clubs (like Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney etc).
So basically Rockliff has been paid well above market rate for a large portion of his time with us. Now that we have a new assessment of worth and contract value that has started putting the breaks on overpaying players, and for the first time in his career Rocky is now looking at a salary decrease, rather than an increase like he has received every other time his contract has come up, suddenly the club is being criticised by some for shafting him or treating him poorly, all the while espousing the virtues of Rocky's "loyalty" over the years.
Some will point to the club being a basket case and poorly run over that time, and he has remained at the club despite that. However that line of thinking ignores the fact that he has been paid at a level that would compensate for that and well above what he could have received elsewhere. Now that the club has resolved a large chunk of those issues (this has come from many of the players including rockliff) and are now reducing the amount they are willing to offer players because they don't have to compensate them for issues that have been resolved, Rockliff is now exploring his options to move elsewhere for increased money (allegedly I will admit). Yet some people count that set of circumstances as being indicative of unquestionable loyalty to the club on Rockliff's behalf? That seems to be in contradiction to what appears to be occurring.
Now the above assumes that he actually is looking for more money or the like, which I don't actually know for sure, but its the way its appearing at the moment which is all I can base it on currently. Personally I don't have anything against Rockliff exploring his options, or leaving to go somewhere else for more money than what he can get with us, because in the same situation I would be extremely hard pressed to leave a a fair few hundred thousand dollars on the table if an offer came to move employers. However this talk about Rockliff being "loyal" over his time with the club would seem to me to be a bit of a fantasy borne out by the fact that we've lost so many players, we're just grateful someone stuck around all the while ignoring the fact we've paid them over the odds to stay.
If Rocky re-signs with us for more money and a smaller term contract then he could have gotten elsewhere, then that will be a show of loyalty and will be recognition that the club has fixed a large share of the issues players have been overpaid to ignore over the years. But as for showing loyalty so far I just don't see how someone reaches that conclusion TBH.
So basically Rockliff has been paid well above market rate for a large portion of his time with us. Now that we have a new assessment of worth and contract value that has started putting the breaks on overpaying players, and for the first time in his career Rocky is now looking at a salary decrease, rather than an increase like he has received every other time his contract has come up, suddenly the club is being criticised by some for shafting him or treating him poorly, all the while espousing the virtues of Rocky's "loyalty" over the years.
Some will point to the club being a basket case and poorly run over that time, and he has remained at the club despite that. However that line of thinking ignores the fact that he has been paid at a level that would compensate for that and well above what he could have received elsewhere. Now that the club has resolved a large chunk of those issues (this has come from many of the players including rockliff) and are now reducing the amount they are willing to offer players because they don't have to compensate them for issues that have been resolved, Rockliff is now exploring his options to move elsewhere for increased money (allegedly I will admit). Yet some people count that set of circumstances as being indicative of unquestionable loyalty to the club on Rockliff's behalf? That seems to be in contradiction to what appears to be occurring.
Now the above assumes that he actually is looking for more money or the like, which I don't actually know for sure, but its the way its appearing at the moment which is all I can base it on currently. Personally I don't have anything against Rockliff exploring his options, or leaving to go somewhere else for more money than what he can get with us, because in the same situation I would be extremely hard pressed to leave a a fair few hundred thousand dollars on the table if an offer came to move employers. However this talk about Rockliff being "loyal" over his time with the club would seem to me to be a bit of a fantasy borne out by the fact that we've lost so many players, we're just grateful someone stuck around all the while ignoring the fact we've paid them over the odds to stay.
If Rocky re-signs with us for more money and a smaller term contract then he could have gotten elsewhere, then that will be a show of loyalty and will be recognition that the club has fixed a large share of the issues players have been overpaid to ignore over the years. But as for showing loyalty so far I just don't see how someone reaches that conclusion TBH.

