Salary cap restraints

[CaptainDangerfield]

Yesterday on KG & Cornesy Rucci said the Crows will be are restricted come trade time because of sc restraints???? I'm confused. Surely with the following actual and possible retirments we should have plenty of room. Can anyone shed some light???

Carey approx $350
Burns approx $200
Smart approx $200
Stevens approx $250 ( You think it would be at least this, considering he signed a 2 yr contract in 2003 after an outstanding 2002 ).
Dabrowski approx $700 ( Ha ha ).

Given the average wage is about $130 you would think the figures I have listed for Burns and Smart would be around the mark.

 

[tribey]

Burns approx $200

Ronnie wouldn't have been on that much surely...

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Alright let's say Ronnie was on $150, that's still 950.......Fantassia and Reidy would have plenty of room in the salary cap to swap our first rounder and 400 a year for Clive Waterhouse. God I hope we don't pursue Ottens too strongly as he hasn't lived up to his potential and now appears to be injury prone..Isn't it sad when Sep is fast approaching and you ( me) are looking forward to the draft more than finals???

 

[bluecrow]

Not to forget Geelong were paying some of Ronnie's too, weren't they?!

But yeah I wouldn't think salary cap would be TOO much off an issue this year (less than previous years anyway), given those retirements.

 

[Scott_1971]

Its not like any of the current list has pushed for a payrise...

 

[macca23]

Yesterday on KG & Cornesy Rucci said the Crows will be are restricted come trade time because of sc restraints???? I'm confused. Surely with the following actual and possible retirments we should have plenty of room. Can anyone shed some light???

Carey approx $350
Burns approx $200
Smart approx $200
Stevens approx $250 ( You think it would be at least this, considering he signed a 2 yr contract in 2003 after an outstanding 2002 ).
Dabrowski approx $700 ( Ha ha ).

Given the average wage is about $130 you would think the figures I have listed for Burns and Smart would be around the mark.

I think the figures are somewhere along these lines:

Carey $300k
Burns $80k (Geelong paying $200k of his contract)
Smart $100k (on veteran's list, so only half counts)
Stevens $250k

That's still $730k. Say we replace them with 4 draft choices @ 40k max each = $160k. That still leaves a spare $570k which is slightly more than Macca gets.

I think Rucci is talking out of his arse as usual.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Smart approx $200

He was nowhere near that much.

I think you guys will find that the deals that Roo, Goody, McLeod and Hart signed last year are designed in such ways that their salary starts increasing in their 2nd year. So all the cap space that we will have freed up by retirements this year will be "eaten up" by the contracts of other players.

We are extremely close to 100% this year and I reckon we are a fair chance of getting over the cap because of all the injuries we had this year.

 

[DaveW]

I think you guys will find that the deals that Roo, Goody, McLeod and Hart signed last year are designed in such ways that their salary starts increasing in their 2nd year. So all the cap space that we will have freed up by retirements this year will be "eaten up" by the contracts of other players.

You'd think other clubs would have learned from Essendon's idiocy.

 

[Crow-mosone]

Burns' salary is entirely on our cap, but the cashflow comes from elsewhere.

I can't see how we're going to be tight, we don't have any big extensions kicking in, and have plenty of retirements.

have we backloaded any stupid contracts?

otherwise, maybe it's just a message early to Max Stevens and co.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I think the figures are somewhere along these lines:

Carey $300k
Burns $80k (Geelong paying $200k of his contract)
Smart $100k (on veteran's list, so only half counts)
Stevens $250k

That's still $730k. Say we replace them with 4 draft choices @ 40k max each = $160k. That still leaves a spare $570k which is slightly more than Macca gets.

I think Rucci is talking out of his arse as usual.

Also, what we "lose" on Smart by only counting half of his salary on the cap, we will more than "gain" with Roo going on the vets list. We should have the most room we have had for some time under the salary cap.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Also, what we "lose" on Smart by only counting half of his salary on the cap, we will more than "gain" with Roo going on the vets list. We should have the most room we have had for some time under the salary cap.

That has been taken into account when Roo's contract was extended

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

That has been taken into account when Roo's contract was extended

You cannot "increase" a players salary when they go under the vet list under the 1 contract. eg. Say Roo was getting $400K this year, then suddenly earns $600K next year when on the vets list. This was banned by the AFL due to I think some practices Essendon were doing.

Regardless of how you look at it comparing 2004 v 2005, we will be losing more experienced / higher earning players & our gain more by having Hart/Roo on the vets list v Hart/Smart.

 

[naughty monkey]

Burns' salary is entirely on our cap, but the cashflow comes from elsewhere.

I can't see how we're going to be tight, we don't have any big extensions kicking in, and have plenty of retirements.

have we backloaded any stupid contracts?

otherwise, maybe it's just a message early to Max Stevens and co.

pretty sure it's the other way round.
i.e. $200k of Burns salary is attributed to Geelong's salary cap, whilst the money is actually coming out of the Crows pocket. This was the main rerason they picked him up (only "costing" the Crows $80k towards their TPP)

 

[naughty monkey]

another factor affecting salary cap is that the Crows only had 37 on the main list. Next year they must have 38. That will cost them at least the minimum ($50K?).

McLeod got a pay rise as well didn't he? Anyone know by how much

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

If we are anywhere struggling to stay under the salary cap in 2005 with all the retirements & Roo going onto the Vets list, there is something seriously wrong with our management.

 

[Crow-mosone]

pretty sure it's the other way round.
i.e. $200k of Burns salary is attributed to Geelong's salary cap, whilst the money is actually coming out of the Crows pocket. This was the main rerason they picked him up (only "costing" the Crows $80k towards their TPP)

you might be right, but in most sports the sum of the contracts are added to work out the cap - saves monkey business.

 

[naughty monkey]

If we are anywhere struggling to stay under the salary cap in 2005 with all the retirements & Roo going onto the Vets list, there is something seriously wrong with our management.

Crows won't struggle to stay under, it's just that they won't have a lot to spare to headhunt a star.

 

[Baldrick]

Some more should be freed up if Stinger goes. How much is he on?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Crows won't struggle to stay under, it's just that they won't have a lot to spare to headhunt a star.

My point is that we should have plenty spare - where the heck has it all gone if there isn't much room to move?

 

[johnnypanther]

If we are anywhere struggling to stay under the salary cap in 2005 with all the retirements & Roo going onto the Vets list, there is something seriously wrong with our management.

my complete agreement on this - how could a side that is not a premiership threat in 2005 and undergoing a rebuilding/renovating phase (with retirements of Smart,Carey,Burns, Stevens possibly, and Ricciuto & maybe Hart moving to Vets list) allow itself to struggle with a salary cap (if that is indeed the case).?
A further argument for Clarke to retire (freeing up more salary) and allowing the club to give more match time to Biglands and Hudson

 

[Andre]

my complete agreement on this - how could a side that is not a premiership threat in 2005 and undergoing a rebuilding/renovating phase (with retirements of Smart,Carey,Burns, Stevens possibly, and Ricciuto & maybe Hart moving to Vets list) allow itself to struggle with a salary cap (if that is indeed the case).?
A further argument for Clarke to retire (freeing up more salary) and allowing the club to give more match time to Biglands and Hudson

Except most of the contracts would have been signed in 2001/2002 when you felt you were just off being a premiership threat. So players would have gotten good (possibly over the top) contracts. After a crappy season you should be looking to sign/extend as many contracts as possible (of those kept) - pointing at every stage of negotiations to how the side performed as reason to pay less.

 

["flash"]

Ronnie wouldn't have been on that much surely...

I believe Geelong still payed half of his 1st year salary and this season would have been based ongames played etc