Tom Boyd

[Wild Bill]

Reminds me of Dawes mk2 but if they can get any decent output from him it's all they can do. Can't imagine he'd ever got close to being worth his paycheck, but it ain't his fault.

Big contracts come with big expectations - the pressure will continue to build on the kid unless he can start performing.

 

[legend166]

I hope none of the Bulldogs fans in here criticised the Franklin deal. Compared to this contract Franklin's was a slam dunk certainty.

 

[Dizzy Stuff]

I'd be surprised if Boyd ever reaches Browns level. He's unco and doesn't seem to know what he's meant to be doing out there. Tom Boyd has more vfl experience than ben brown lol

This game is about winning premierships, not the future (as nafan figjam supporters are suddenly realizing). Given your reliance on Bob Murphy, you may as well start your rebuild now too buddy.

??? We're 4 and 1 without Bob (not to mention a host of others) ... going okay.

 

[grouse mate]

Would we make the same trade again of we had our chance over? Of course we would.

At worst, the trade was a symbolic punch thrown back both to GWS's harvesting of all young talent as well as a club in a crisis with our captain and coach walking out and the club in disaster mode, salvaging something.

At a medium level, we will have a solid structural forward who can also rotate through the ruck, maybe playing a similar role to what Tippett has at Sydney being both a key forward and a 1st ruck at various times over the last few years.

At best, if Boyd lives up to his potential demonstrated at the U/18 level, we will have one of the best key forwards in the game which nearing the end of his contract with the salary cap to be 40-50% increased from now on a bargain basement price.

The third scenario could still happen especially given Tippett and Hawkins' (the two players he's most similar to) relatively lengthy period of time before becoming dominant. The second is most likely. The first whilst unlikely doesn't really matter because we don't have any salary cap issues whatsoever.

Considering he's been injured for the last month what else could the thread be created for?

Could the trade not have gone through if you guys only offered him $500K with incentives based on form?

Also what planets CPI are you basing a 40-50% increase in the salary cap in a 5 year period?? Totally dreaming.

 

[grouse mate]

On exposed form Redpath is a far more influential player, lets not forget he missed close to 2 years with knee reco's as a 19 yo. Some of the tripe written on the Dogs board about him prior to the past 2 weeks is disgraceful.

 

[captain cotch 9]

As long as the dogs can keep all of their young players, Boyds contract isnt really a problem.
Its just embarrassing more than anything at this stage.

 

[captain cotch 9]

The dogs basically gave up Griffen & Marchbank for Boyd.
How would the dogs be going now if Griffen was in the middle or off the HBF

 

[who_let_the_dogs_out]

The dogs basically gave up Griffen & Marchbank for Boyd.
How would the dogs be going now if Griffen was in the middle or off the HBF

Griffen's back has been rooted the last 3 years, which is why we were happy to send him on his way. Has played about 2 decent games for the giants in his time there. Crocked.

 

[who_let_the_dogs_out]

I hope none of the Bulldogs fans in here criticised the Franklin deal. Compared to this contract Franklin's was a slam dunk certainty.

What's Franklin got to do with Boyd? One had achieved flags and was one of the best players in the comp, of course he was a certainty.

Boyd came to the club contracted to the giants, a year after being drafted with pick 1. It was always going to cost a bit getting him to the dogs. We'll just have to wait and see if he lives up to the potential.

Easy for the haters to be taking potshots at him now, injured and not in the best 22. Give it a few years and see where he's at.

 

[Colonial]

Griffen's back has been rooted the last 3 years, which is why we were happy to send him on his way. Has played about 2 decent games for the giants in his time there. Crocked.

You and i must have very different memories.
The dogs were anything but "happy".

He has played well a bit more than 2 games. Hasnt been stuck in the VFL.

 

[who_let_the_dogs_out]

You and i must have very different memories.
The dogs were anything but "happy".

He has played well a bit more than 2 games. Hasnt been stuck in the VFL.

But his back IS rooted (which we were concerned about) and in the twilight of his career. Our form has greatly improved since he pissed off.

Glad you're happy with him though

 

[Dogsman16]

The dogs basically gave up Griffen & Marchbank for Boyd.
How would the dogs be going now if Griffen was in the middle or off the HBF

Griffen leaving was the best thing to happen to our club. Instead of 2 or 3 midfielders doing all the work we now have one of the deepest midfields in the AFL because we have 8 to 10 guys who are good in there. Not to mention his back is absolutely stuffed. And it sounds like Marchbank leaving.

Sure debate the financial sum we spent to get him (and it's a fair argument) but I'd rather have Boyd than what we gave up.

 

[Mofra]

Could the trade not have gone through if you guys only offered him $500K with incentives based on form?

We were struggling to make the 95% minimum cap before the Boyd deal and are still front-loading contracts.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Could the trade not have gone through if you guys only offered him $500K with incentives based on form?

Also what planets CPI are you basing a 40-50% increase in the salary cap in a 5 year period?? Totally dreaming.

Firstly, it's rumoured (not confirmed) on our board that there are some incentives in the last 2-3 years of his contract. Not necessarily in the he gets bonuses if he kicks 100 goals but more in the sense that if he isn't established in the best 22 he doesn't get the full amount.

You're also kidding if Boyd wouldn't have commanded a similar contract even if he had played a similar year as he did with us last year at GWS, but stuck it out with GWS and seen out his initial two year contract. We just got in a year early and clubs like St Kilda and Carlton were lining up to offer him 900+k a year.

40-50% increase over 5 years is on the basis of 10% increase next year with the new TV deal and new Collective Bargaining agreement and then 7% increases year on year for the next four years which is what I've heard from people within the AFL industry.

 

[Bald]

I'd be surprised if Boyd ever reaches Browns level. He's unco and doesn't seem to know what he's meant to be doing out there. Tom Boyd has more vfl experience than ben brown lol

This game is about winning premierships, not the future (as nafan figjam supporters are suddenly realizing). Given your reliance on Bob Murphy, you may as well start your rebuild now too buddy.

You mean the same Brown that plays in the same forward line as Petrie and Waite? The absolute best/worst case scenario is that Brown gets the third defender.

I'm not going to open a can of worms against a north melbourne supporter purely because our two clubs never agree, but if the third best defender goes to Tom Boyd, he is a better player than Brown, give the boy a chance to develop, get to the age of Brown before making comparisons, then we'll talk.

 

[ManOfClay]

The dogs basically gave up Griffen & Marchbank for Boyd.
How would the dogs be going now if Griffen was in the middle or off the HBF

You speak as if we had a choice with griffen

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

You've gotta splash out to secure future gun players, you can't wait until they're already there. Makes it so much harder to lure them away. It's a gamble, and Boyd has all the hallmarks to become a decent forward, time will tell.

You've changed your tune in a single post.

 

[Sando22]

Too early to call at this stage.
As good as Redpath was yesterday, he's had a few extra years in the system so give Boyd time.
No doubt he's on too much coin but if he produces, it will be well worth it.

 

[A Swallow]

You've changed your tune in a single post.

What? Not at all. Clubs have to make an assessment on who they think will be a future gun, and then throw cash at them.

I think he will be decent, if he lives up to his cost though, I don't know.

Not that hard to understand, the two points aren't linked as you've suggested. Clearly all the people who liked the post understood.

 

[StillAtLarge]

I hope none of the Bulldogs fans in here criticised the Franklin deal. Compared to this contract Franklin's was a slam dunk certainty.

Wait until you're paying his salary inside the cap when he's been retired for two seasons!

 

[immortalmike]

The dogs basically gave up Griffen & Marchbank for Boyd.
How would the dogs be going now if Griffen was in the middle or off the HBF

You're acting like keeping Griffen was ever an option.

 

[Underdog]

If Boyd can be a 40 goal FF and a decent target on the way to a grand final appearance, it will result in them achieving more than they have in decades.

 

[Apex36]

Boyd will be good, but will need time to put it all together, similar to Hawkins. Seems to have slimmed down this year to increase his mobility, which is a good thing in today's game. That mark he took against us flying in front of the pack in the preseason was super impressive.

He not currently worth anywhere near the money he's getting, but at a minimum, he'll be one of the better key forwards in the comp in a few years. Definitely has all the tools.

 

[VineyIsLORD]

We were struggling to make the 95% minimum cap before the Boyd deal and are still front-loading contracts.

This is why it sucks the AFL doesn't make clubs publish their caps.

Context like this gets routinely missed (also, it would be nice to know which players are on 'ambassadorial' contracts outside the cap)

 

[Mofra]

This is why it sucks the AFL doesn't make clubs publish their caps.

Context like this gets routinely missed (also, it would be nice to know which players are on 'ambassadorial' contracts outside the cap)

The main problem is that you get a cap reduction in the following year in any year you don't make the 95% minimum - basically teams are better off over-paying someone on their list than they are losing the ability in future years to pay 100% of the cap (or 105% in the year after paying 95%>

Salary caps aren't static, especially as we negotiate towards a new CBA.