Salary cap issues

[Carmo]

Yer, normally the crows management are pretty forthright and what they said gets rid of one lot of speculation and distraction, however the way they said it raises another lot....

I can only hope we paid overs to try and stave of the GC and GWS raid, now that spectre is gone we can get back a bit more sensible. Given we paid overs but still got hit pretty bad I would hate to have seen what would happen if we hadn't. I think knowledge of our pay structure must have made us attractive targets to the raiders. So in hindsight having a bad year in 2010 was a really bad, bad outcome. Not just in the season but for keeping our talent on our list. By the time we knew our season was shot, there would have been little chance for altering contracts and the act of doing this we would have revealed our hand - that is panic we are going to be raided and then the players could have used this to ramp up prices so we couldnt go there. Then GC is coming in and we have a flat pay structure, lots of talented youth and far less hope for a premiership or even finals. Money is flashed, crows suddenly dont seem as attractive and off you go. Press repeat for 2011.

If we'd have had the good year in 2010 that everyone expected after 2009, we are in finals, we have young talented list, so we expect more finals so people hang around, we keep our flat structure and GC and GWS come n go without much impact.

 

[1970crow]

melb could offer clarke a heap because they had plenty set aside for scully. i'd expect they'd have enough for davis as well. we shouldn't be anywhere near our cap, but we are because trigg is an incompetent ceo who affepts mediocrity from his workforce.

 

[PyroCrow]

I think its just a bit of misinformation from the club personally. Maybe Trigg means that we are up to a cap level that we are comfortable with atm and don't plan to spend over that. We did have to extend some contracts this year (e.g Walker) so that might affect our spending. The club would be trying to free up space for next year to keep some of our more expensive players (e.g Danger and Tippett). Also we might be trying to get Davis to lower his price if we are genuinely interested. Regardless, he will probably get picked up by one of the WA teams.

 

[Dirty Bird]

melb could offer clarke a heap because they had plenty set aside for scully. i'd expect they'd have enough for davis as well. we shouldn't be anywhere near our cap, but we are because trigg is an incompetent ceo who affepts mediocrity from his workforce.

Please explain to me why it's Trigg's fault when it would of been the responsibility of David Noble and perhaps Phil Harper Maria Ballestrin, Ann Pilkington and Graeme Dunstan for sorting out player contracts and the like.

 

[FR0GGY]

I have no idea where the Davi$ for 350 to stay came from, I heard a figure higher than this and it's less than half his GWS pay.

You might be getting confused with the reported 350k that Leon Davis wants?

 

[cmndstab]

I wonder if we opted to pay our players less in 2010 to accommodate the salaries of Goodwin/McLeod/Edwards/Burton, with the idea being that we would pay slightly more than the players annual salary in 11/12 when the profile of the list was much younger?

Poor management if that's the case, given the entrance of GC17 and GWS, but I still wonder.

 

[1970crow]

Please explain to me why it's Trigg's fault when it would of been the responsibility of David Noble and perhaps Phil Harper Maria Ballestrin, Ann Pilkington and Graeme Dunstan for sorting out player contracts and the like.

so you don't understand the basics of the 'chain of command' concept. he may not be directly responsible for contracts. but he is responsible for the employee who is. either way, someone has screwd up and he is ultimately as complicit, or moreso, than any or all of the others.

 

[jenny61_99]

I remember when the prospect of losing Tippett and Dangerfield was on the cards everyone in here screamed "pay them whatever they want, but just get the job done". Well they did, and we are now faced with this situation (supposedly). I have to say I also read it to say we didn't think Davis was worth $350,000 - and we'll clearly need room to move next year with the prospect of Tippett being lured back home once again.

 

[cammo84]

It's quite possible that Trigg is taking the next few years into consideration when he makes these comments. We may be able to afford Davis in 2012, but what about 2013 and beyond? They may be allowing for some pay rises to certain players in the next few years and playing it safe by not taking a player we don't really need.

 

[macca23]

It's quite possible that Trigg is taking the next few years into consideration when he makes these comments. We may be able to afford Davis in 2012, but what about 2013 and beyond? They may be allowing for some pay rises to certain players in the next few years and playing it safe by not taking a player we don't really need.

I think this is closer to the truth.

Tippett and Danger come out of contract at the end of 2012. We may have to pay Tippett silly money to keep him from going home, plus Dangerfield will be assaulted with cash from several Victorian teams trying to lure him home.

As the season emerges, there could be others coming out of contract as well who may have real break-out years which would demand more money.

The reason why I give this theory more credence than no salary cap room is that Noble's comments when asked about Davis have never been made on a financial basis, but rather on whether he is a good fit at this point of time.

As list manager, it's Noble's job to balance the salary cap, not Trigg's, so if the doubts on Davis were for monetary reasons, I would have expected Noble to have raised this issue rather than whether he is a good fit.

 

[CrowCro]

Not really unfair, because Victorian clubs never have to deal with the fact that there are up to 10 clubs in a players home state throwing offers at him to move home. The most they have to deal with is two clubs fighting for a players services. Look at the Gunston scenario - he wanted to go home and theoretically there could have been a bidding war between 5 or 6 clubs. If Gibbs wants to move back to his home state, he's got to choose between Adelaide and Port. The larger the field, the more chance of a juicy offer being presented to the player, hence the interstate clubs need a little bit extra to balance things out.

Yes Vic clubs have to pay mor to keep Bryce Gibbs in VIC etc. This is not entirely true bacause the bigger cities especially football cities like Melbourne are footy mad. These guys can all score good corporate jobs after football and they have opportunities in media and othet things. The other benefit is they may only have up to three or four interstaters of value on their list. These days we have to pay even the average VICS more and we have alot more on our list as most of the players come from the TAC cup.

 

[jenny61_99]

Clearly the salary cap is overlooked by some more financial clubs who arrange financial endorsements for players and perhaps some less obvious "incentives".

 

[johnnypanther]

.... The club would be trying to free up space for next year to keep some of our more expensive players (e.g Danger and Tippett). Also we might be trying to get Davis to lower his price if we are genuinely interested. Regardless, he will probably get picked up by one of the WA teams.

Next year, we also have the advantage of salary cap savings due to Doughty retiring, Johncock & Rutten moving to Veterans List, Knights probably getting a reduced contract figure or being "lost" to another club since he will become an eligible free agent, and i believe that the Crows have been rather professional in forward planning for future contracts ie particularly Dangerfield & Tippett for next year.

 

[1970crow]

It's quite possible that Trigg is taking the next few years into consideration when he makes these comments. We may be able to afford Davis in 2012, but what about 2013 and beyond? They may be allowing for some pay rises to certain players in the next few years and playing it safe by not taking a player we don't really need.

that does make sense. but with where the group is now you wuld expct we'd be more likely to have to front end contracts just to meet the cap next year.

 

[Crows#1]

Clearly the salary cap is overlooked by some more financial clubs who arrange financial endorsements for players and perhaps some less obvious "incentives".

Like Judd's "job" at Visyboard?

 

[Crows#1]

That's going to be the big issue next year. Can the Crows manage to keep both Tippett and Dangerfield?
And at what cost?

 

[WAG]

That's going to be the big issue next year. Can the Crows manage to keep both Tippett and Dangerfield?
And at what cost?

It all depends on if Dangerfield has his breakout year we've been waiting for. While he has flashes of brilliance, he tends to drift out of games too much. At this stage, he would be valued on potential still, rather than output. Really hoping under Sando that he will be a part of the Spike and live up to the potential we have all seen!

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Clearly the salary cap is overlooked by some more financial clubs who arrange financial endorsements for players and perhaps some less obvious "incentives".

I'm sick of this cop out.

If third party payments are seriously a major advantage, then let's get with the program and piss with the big boys.

If it isn't, then we can't whinge about it.

Either way it doesn't qualify as anything we can use as an excuse or to erode the success of other clubs.

 

[cmndstab]

I'm sick of this cop out.

If third party payments are seriously a major advantage, then let's get with the program and piss with the big boys.

If it isn't, then we can't whinge about it.

Either way it doesn't qualify as anything we can use as an excuse or to erode the success of other clubs.

Agreed. If under-the-table agreements are fine by the AFL, then let's get involved in them.

We aren't the financial powerhouse we once were, but we're not broke or anything either. We should be able to afford it.

Hell, I'm kind of hoping we're doing it already, and we're just not making a song and dance about it.

 

[jackster83]

Agreed. If under-the-table agreements are fine by the AFL, then let's get involved in them.

We aren't the financial powerhouse we once were, but we're not broke or anything either. We should be able to afford it.

Hell, I'm kind of hoping we're doing it already, and we're just not making a song and dance about it.

I reckon it would be more about the fringe benefits kind of stuff rather than just the cash, especially considering the tax bracket most players would find themselves in. Cars, fuel cards, holidays, dinners, phones, TAFE/uni fees, etc..

Would be almost impossible for the AFL to track most of this stuff.

 

[Smoooothy]

didn't knighta sign a pretty lucrative deal at the end of 2009?

something like 3 years for 1.5 million? (or did i imagine that..)

 

[WALL-e]

Knighta is on a big deal, not sure on specifics, expires end of next year I think.

 

[Freddy Bassett]

I'm sick of this cop out.

If third party payments are seriously a major advantage, then let's get with the program and piss with the big boys.
If it isn't, then we can't whinge about it.

Either way it doesn't qualify as anything we can use as an excuse or to erode the success of other clubs.

We will never be able to piss with Carlton, Collingwood,Essendon etc....

 

[Freddy Bassett]

It is much too my surprise that Stephen Trigg has come out and said we have salary cap restrictions to the point we couldn't sign a player like Davis who is rumoured to want $350k. Our list is so young with some good players but no superstars. I think we needed to make a hard call on someone like Reilly this year to free up some space. His spot is easily replaceable by someone on signifivantly less money unless he is playing for peanuts these days.

I have also always wondered how Hawthorn fot players under the CAP. Something is not right here. They keep bringing players into their mix with big salaries. I heard Gunston got substantially mor ethan here at Adelaide. Interstate teams should have 250k more in ther cap than VIC teams as we always have to pay over the odds to keep players from VIC here.

Excellent thread... How Hawthorn get away with it is a bloody disgrace...

When was the last time a Hawthorn player walked out on the club or threatened too? Even Collingwood in the last year has had issues with Cloke, Pendlebury, Davis, Toovey, Goldsack to name just a few....

The Hawks lost Kennedy when he couldnt get a game 3 years ago! And in that time they found some spare money to recruit Burgoyne and Bruce.... They also grabbed Gibson, Hale and now Gunston....

I will not be surprised if they have a crack atLeon Davis aswell as I read they had a crack at lindsay Thomas and Campbell from North.

The Hawks supporters spin the crap about all the players playing for less... Bullshit! They have played in 1 grand final in the past 20 years... Hardly dynasty stuff...

 

[craig crowing]

Knighta is on a big deal, not sure on specifics, expires end of next year I think.

With Knights -- Tippett and Dangerfield we have been seduced by the promise and sucked in by managers about going to other clubs back home and none of them at this stage deserve the $ being paid to them especially Knights and as previous poster said that time for Dangerfield to play like a star being rated as.
Hope all three thrive under Sanderson but if they do and others do then salary cap gets harder.