Top Tigers take massive pay cut!

Remove this Banner Ad

sandeano

Premiership Player
Oct 7, 2001
3,264
2,347
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Space
Read all about it... (this is what you call loyalty, kids)

From THE AGE (Carro Wilson) 12/10/01

Top Tigers' pay slashed

By CAROLINE WILSON

Eight Richmond footballers, headed by club leaders Wayne Campbell and Duncan Kellaway, have agreed to pay cuts worth $500,000 in total next season in their determination to keep Darren Gaspar at Tigerland.
Not only have Campbell and Kellaway agreed to drop $350,000 between them in 2002 as part of new extended deals to retain Gaspar and Ben Holland, but six of their teammates, including Joel Bowden and Kellaway's brother Andrew, have each agreed to pay cuts next season totalling $150,000.

Bowden, the younger Kellaway, Greg Tivendale, Matthew Rogers, Mark Chaffey and Craig Biddiscombe all responded to a call from Richmond chief executive Mark Brayshaw to each defer $25,000 until 2003 to release the Tigers from a potential salary cap blowout.

In 2000, before Richmond re-signed its No.1 priority Brad Ottens, the Tigers' list was the second highest-paid in the AFL. Had Campbell, Duncan Kellaway and the six others not agreed to the 2002 pay cuts, the Tigers were staring at spilling over next season's total player payments by $500,000, a situation that would have resulted in club champion Gaspar quitting the Tigers for Fremantle.

While Gaspar now has a generous new $2.5-million, five-year deal and is often described in football circles as a mercenary, his decision to remain at Tigerland has cost him $900,000. Fremantle had offered him $3million over five years along with a marketing allowance of $400,000.

Holland, too, will drop $500,000 to stay at Richmond. Adelaide had offered him close to $1.3 million over three years but he has accepted a three-year deal with the Tigers worth an estimated $800,000.

But perhaps the most significant sacrifice has been made by defender Duncan Kellaway, who reportedly received a visit from Brayshaw the day after the grand final as the first of a long list of players asked to take a pay cut. Not all agreed to do so, but Kellaway provided a positive start in a heated and occasionally damaging nine days of meetings.

Kellaway has extended his contract from two to three years with his payments increased by only $60,000 overall in an agreement that will almost halve his earnings in 2002.

But the 28-year-old has told the club he will not accept the final $60,000 should his body not withstand football's rigors beyond 2003. Given the staggering monetary demands of many top players following the new five-year media agreement, it is worth considering the unusual behavior of the Kellaways.

Not only has Duncan offered to return money to the club should he retire early, but younger brother Andrew late last year refused the contract offered to him by the club because he said it was too generous.

The younger Kellaway, having just been named an All-Australian and club champion in 2000, said he did not feel he could justify the new deal, which was subsequently lowered. He is one of the six players who have agreed to a $25,000 pay cut for 2002.

Brayshaw, who would not be drawn on any financial details, agreed that it had been a remarkably stressful time for the club's off-field staff and playing list. "In the end, though, I believe we have seen a great show of unity," he said.

"It's something the board and I were very proud of and it was reflected in Ben Holland's and Darren Gaspar's decision to make sacrifices to stay with the club."

One casualty has been veteran ruckman Brendon Gale, who was not prepared to accept a pay cut to put himself through another pre-season.

Brayshaw refused to discuss last week's angry meeting between himself and skipper Campbell but the pair are believed to have met four days ago and made peace with each other.

"Wayne has worked furiously behind the scenes with club officials to keep Gaspar and Holland, knowing he was doing so at his own cost," Brayshaw said.

Campbell's new four-year deal, which has not yet been signed but includes large finals' incentives, enables him to reap close to $1.2 million but earn about 40 per cent less in 2002 than in 2001.

Campbell is believed to have told the club that Gaspar be retained at all costs and the captain was prepared to significantly reduce his initial asking price as a result.

Of the six other players who agreed to defer payments from 2002 to 2003, Brayshaw said he had been heartened by their willingness to make short-term sacrifices to retain Gaspar and Holland.

"No footballer likes getting a late-night telephone call from their CEO at this time of the year," said Brayshaw. "But there was a genuine urgency within the playing group to make sure we held together a list we believe has the potential to deliver big things down the track."

With Campbell's long but reduced new deal and Nick Daffy traded to the Swans in an agreement that will result in a percentage of the 1998 club champion's contract being covered by Richmond, only two of the famously hefty deals signed in 1999 remain alive next season.

Matthew Richardson, who will earn more than $600,000 next year, and Matthew Knights, who will earn more than $400,000 in what is expected to be his final season, will take up $1.1 million of the salary cap between them.

The Tigers, who have no player receiving a testimonial next season, are believed to have pushed the AFL to allow Knights a farewell season in 2002, which would remove an estimated $100,000 from the club's total player payments.

The AFL refused the request, insisting that such agreements must be included in existing contracts.

Richardson was not asked to take a pay cut but negotiations for a new contract beyond 2002 must surely loom as problematic for the Tigers, given that the 201-centimetre 21-year-old who stands alongside him in the forward line also comes out of contract next year.

The plan to retain Ottens will soon swing into action.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Interesting that the most overpaid Richmond player, big girl Matty Richmond..er..Richardson, isn't one of those taking a pay cut.
 
Originally posted by GOALden Hawk
Pretty big pay cut by some of the players...I wonder how happy they REALLY are?

You have to wonder given how unhappy Campbell was a few days ago. One minute he's throwing crutches around and the next it's a love in. Interesting.......
 
Originally posted by sandeano
One casualty has been veteran ruckman Brendon Gale, who was not prepared to accept a pay cut to put himself through another pre-season.
Interesting that the head of the players' union wouldn't take a cut - can't be setting an example like that for the kiddies.
 
Re: Re: Top Tigers take massive pay cut!

Originally posted by Danny Chook Fan Club
Interesting that the head of the players' union wouldn't take a cut - can't be setting an example like that for the kiddies.

Well this is the man who talked up player strikes and other action when the players were offered 'only' a 5% pay rise.

I just find it hard to believe that Wayne Campbell, after having a pretty good 2001 - could be happy about having to take such a big pay cut. Richmond can release all the propaganda through Caro they like but the fact is if Darren Gaspar has cost his teammates a lot of money, and in one case, a chance to play in 2002. Joel Bowden, AA in 2001, great season, yet forced to take a cut of $25,000!

Caro craps on about how great Gaspar was in not going to the Dockers - fact is he is still earning $500,000 a year!!! Not bad for a bloke who is under 30 and playing the game he loves.
 
fair crack of the whip poeple geez!
i think you will find is that these pay cuts are for this year only and there payments will be adjusted over the next 2-3yrs to catch up to what they missed out on this year.seems to me a sound management deal there.pain short term gain long term.
we have succeeded in keeping all the players we think will make the nucleous of the side in the future if we lost gasper and holland its fair to say it would have set us back a few years.
cheers!
 
Does anyone remember the negative article USC wrote when several leading Kangaroo players did exactly the same... "Cash Strapped Kangaroos" appeared 423 times if my memory serves me correct... Fu(k I hate this bitch even more then any football club or player in the league...
 
AFL footy is getting more and more like pro sports in the USA where restructuring of contracts to stay under the salary cap is commonplace. This is nothing new and is probably more common than what people know. The only difference is that in America the salaries are published for everyone to see whereas here we don't allow that. Contracts over there are often for 5 or more years with large signing bonuses and low base salaries that are backloaded so that the large dollars are normally in the 6th or 7th year and are not usually paid to the player. The signing bonus is spreadout over the life of the contract to minimise the hit on the SC. The huge figures that we read of $100 million dollar contracts and the like are usually nothing like that as the really big money is usually never earned.
 
Originally posted by sandeano
Read all about it... (this is what you call loyalty, kids)

From THE AGE (Carro Wilson) 12/10/01

Top Tigers' pay slashed

By CAROLINE WILSON


Bowden, the younger Kellaway, Greg Tivendale, Matthew Rogers, Mark Chaffey and Craig Biddiscombe all responded to a call from Richmond chief executive Mark Brayshaw to each defer $25,000 until 2003 to release the Tigers from a potential salary cap blowout.


So what happens in 2003?

Guess which 2 boys have the most pressure to perform in 2002?

tick.....tick.......tick......kaboom!
 
Re: Re: Re: Top Tigers take massive pay cut!

Originally posted by GOALden Hawk


...

I just find it hard to believe that Wayne Campbell, after having a pretty good 2001 - could be happy about having to take such a big pay cut. Richmond can release all the propaganda through Caro they like but the fact is if Darren Gaspar has cost his teammates a lot of money, and in one case, a chance to play in 2002. Joel Bowden, AA in 2001, great season, yet forced to take a cut of $25,000!

...


A few points GH:

  1. Campbell will be eligible for the Veterans list at the end of next season, so will probably have his salary loaded up then - not unlike the arrangement for Hird.
  2. Joel Bowden wasn't an All-Australian this year.
 
Re: Re: Top Tigers take massive pay cut!

Originally posted by speedy


So what happens in 2003?

Guess which 2 boys have the most pressure to perform in 2002?

tick.....tick.......tick......kaboom!

Expect Richo to be on a long term contract where he will be on huge money after he turns 30 and can qualify for the veterans list where only half of what he gets will be included.

Expect Knights to either be "retired" next year or moved on to another club, either through trade or draft.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I can't think of a club that would trade for Richardson , in all honesty....he's too old to correct his lousy goalkicking and on-field demeanor, too expensive to fit into side that would already have cap trouble, and too much would be required in return
 
No me either Porthos. Why would you want the leading mark taker (and contested mark taker as well) and the 2nd leading goal kicker in your team.:rolleyes: All this coming back from a career threatening foot injury last season and not playing a full season this year. ;)
 
Originally posted by oh_my_hat
No me either Porthos. Why would you want the leading mark taker (and contested mark taker as well) and the 2nd leading goal kicker in your team.:rolleyes: All this coming back from a career threatening foot injury last season and not playing a full season this year. ;)
I think Richo cops a lot of flak that he does not deserve.He is a great player and one of the best to watch.He does need to improve his body language though.:)
 
oh_my_hat said: No me either Porthos. Why would you want the leading mark taker (and contested mark taker as well) and the 2nd leading goal kicker in your team. All this coming back from a career threatening foot injury last season and not playing a full season this year.
-----------------------------
Those stats are fine, but its not a matter of `liking' to have him....its a matter of affording to, and of being willing to give up enough in return to get him.

As an aside, how many years does he have left, you reckon?
 
Originally posted by dogboy23
I think Richo cops a lot of flak that he does not deserve.He is a great player and one of the best to watch.He does need to improve his body language though.:)

:eek: :eek: :eek: We really must be getting into the off-season now! A Bulldog with something nice to say about the Tigers! :eek: :eek: :eek:
 
Make no mistake about it - Gaspar will cost Richmond more than they can afford in so many ways.

It has only cost a few $ and their captain to date. There are some contract hurdles to jump yet and, like Essendon, they can only defer contract payments for so long. If the salary cap does not increase significantly then promises will be broken, careers will end and a club will unravel.

There are now a few clubs with a strong vested interest interest in lifting the cap and a few with a similarly strong interest in not lifting it. It will be an interesting power play next year.
 
Originally posted by CJH


:eek: :eek: :eek: We really must be getting into the off-season now! A Bulldog with something nice to say about the Tigers! :eek: :eek: :eek:
Since I have been in here I have not seen anything bad written in here about richmond that wasnt warranted.Ive seen alot of bulldogs people in here bag richmond but all of it has been warranted.As for Richo I cannot see why he is so hated. :confused: :eek: :eek:
 
Good grief, this is a depressing article and thread. If you wanted to trace where Richmond's slide began from preliminary finalists to also-rans to wooden spoon contenders, the info in Caro's article would be one of the first places to look.

Two more years of a $500 000 a year player taking the opposition's fourth-best forward, can't wait.

Originally posted by MarkT
Make no mistake about it - Gaspar will cost Richmond more than they can afford in so many ways.

Unfortunately, time has proven that statement to be spot on.
 
Funny thing about this thread, knew it before I opened it.

My eyes went directly to the date of the 1st post. Then directly to the date of the last post.

But hey, whatever floats your little tugboat wagstaff.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top