Travis Cloke

[Morro]

Those were heavily front loaded I've been told, with McGuane in particular on SFA this year.

And we disagree. If think people have gotten so used to us being at the bottom rung of the cap, they are assuming its situation normal for us. This was the norm because we had the wonderful combination of shit older players and a whole lotta young players. As our players move out of the 18-20 mark, start getting second contracts, we will see much of this buffer eroded, and more so by the 21-23 year olds who start looking for the career defining pay day contracts in their mid 20's. Even if they agree to stay on $350k, its a big increase on $150k (which some of them will still be on).

As I mentioned earlier, March has said the priority is retention, and anything left over will be used to attract free agents. He also said that the reported amounts Cloke wants would make him coming to us unlikely. To me thats him saying he either comes at a reduced wage or we need to lose a player to fit him in (which he doesn't want to do).

Ok lets agree to disagree, we have bot made our points and neither of us have come around to the others way of thinking. Can we agree on this?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Ok lets agree to disagree, we have bot made our points and neither of us have come around to the others way of thinking. Can we agree on this?

Of course, we are on a forum, be boriing if we always agreed with each other.

 

[Morro]

Of course, we are on a forum, be boriing if we always agreed with each other.

Nah I wish everyone shared my view, would make my life much easier

 

[TigerTime88]

I think people hear forget that we can also to a 3rd party deal with some of our corporates. Plus we were paying 92.5% of the cap....plenty of room to accomadate if we want to.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I think people hear forget that we can also to a 3rd party deal with some of our corporates. Plus we were paying 92.5% of the cap....plenty of room to accomadate if we want to.

AFL has tightened that loophole - will not allow anymore Visy style deals

 

[_DBF_]

I think people hear forget that we can also to a 3rd party deal with some of our corporates. Plus we were paying 92.5% of the cap....plenty of room to accomadate if we want to.

There is only something like a 700k difference between min and max. Graham and McGuane's contracts were heavily front-loaded so they are on SFA this year, meaning we really only have 1 mil free. Deledio goes up to 600 k from whatever, Cotch gets an increase soon, Sheds, Robbie N (if we want to keep) will all demand increases. Doesn't leave much room for a high-profile grab.

I don't know how some clubs do it tbh. Oh wait, VISY

AFL has tightened that loophole - will not allow anymore Visy style deals

We can just give them all a Jeep and be done with it, they can sell it if they like.

 

[LOZWILDA]

And in 2.5 years time when Cloke begins to flounder and Griffiths is dominating along with Vicary, Martin, Cotchin, etc We are still stuck with Cloke for another 3 years!!
Yes up side is good! but the risk has massive consequences if it fails.
He had his chance to come to us when he started his career.
Remember what happened last time we got into a player raiding frenzy with Collingwood?
If he was in some sort of form and was a consistent shot on goal then I would have no problem, but I just don't rate him that highly.

 

[Calcium Man]

Don't disagree , but Clokes personal form or lack of , for the reasons you raised wont be improved because he moves to us .

His lack of form still would add another 40-50 goals for us this season plus another 60 odd contested marks. Considering we lost so many games by less than 20 points i would say his down year would have seen us in finals

 

[Calcium Man]

Of course, we are on a forum, be boriing if we always agreed with each other.

i think the reality is if we get Cloke it wont be for a mill and the board, Benny and the Football department i trust will do its due diligence and pay him well while also being able to pay the rest of the list well.

Also the ASA rises to 650k or something next year, with us paying the minimum salary cap i cannot imagine we have dipped into that much the last couple of seasons

 

[Wacky Tiger]

i think the reality is if we get Cloke it wont be for a mill and the board, Benny and the Football department i trust will do its due diligence and pay him well while also being able to pay the rest of the list well.

Also the ASA rises to 650k or something next year, with us paying the minimum salary cap i cannot imagine we have dipped into that much the last couple of seasons

This is absolutely what it comes down to for me. I havent been able to say this before but i have full confidence in what Benny and his crew are doing. If this happens to include Cloke then thats excellent, if it dosent then im happy with that.

 

[Roachy8]

AFL has tightened that loophole - will not allow anymore Visy style deals

So did Carlton have to re-structure Judd's deal to fit with the new parameters or were they not applied retrospectively?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

i think the reality is if we get Cloke it wont be for a mill and the board, Benny and the Football department i trust will do its due diligence and pay him well while also being able to pay the rest of the list well.

Also the ASA rises to 650k or something next year, with us paying the minimum salary cap i cannot imagine we have dipped into that much the last couple of seasons

I won't repeat myself again (I know I'm boring everyone!), but the side we have been fielding is young or dumb, which is why we were paying the minimum. As we get more skilled players into the mid 20's, our cap pressure will increase considerably.

This is a good thing though. The delist list this year is virtually all players outside our typical 22. Go back just 2-3 years and we were delisting some of our regulars.

So did Carlton have to re-structure Judd's deal to fit with the new parameters or were they not applied retrospectively?

Not an expert on this, but I believe Carlton argued since their deal is established, AFL approved, and important to the structure of his remuneration, it would be unfair to strip it from his new deal, and I believe the AFL agreed. Don't quote me on this though, haven't really followed it closely, as I kinda assumed it would be AFL endorsed regardless.

Interesting one will be Cloke. Eddie already making noises he will be closely looking at any corporate deal Cloke gets if/when he crosses to the Blues.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

His lack of form still would add another 40-50 goals for us this season plus another 60 odd contested marks. Considering we lost so many games by less than 20 points i would say his down year would have seen us in finals

He has never kicked 40-50 nor taken 60 marks in a side when he hasn't been the primary target and never will .
Don't forget this debate commenced after you gave reasons , what I don't believe and you have failed to provide evidence , that his form would dramatically improve by coming to Richmond .
I don't believe there is any evidence nor past history of #1 forward moving to another club as the second forward and improving their personal output .

 

[Rubber Hips]

cloke will stay or go to carlton with malthouse.

Agree...and when both Cloke and Malthouse are at the blues, they will spend their time thinking about the tigers and how they wish they were at a solid club

 

[Morro]

He has never kicked 40-50 nor taken 60 marks in a side when he hasn't been the primary target and never will .
Don't forget this debate commenced after you gave reasons , what I don't believe and you have failed to provide evidence , that his form would dramatically improve by coming to Richmond .
I don't believe there is any evidence nor past history of #1 forward moving to another club as the second forward and improving their personal output .

Who says he would be the 2nd forward ?

Do you think he would see himself as such?

When did a CHF cross to another club with a Coleman FF? Just wanting somea clarity on these big statement is all.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Who says he would be the 2nd forward ?
I used some foresight.

Do you think he would see himself as such?
Don't care what he thinks and it has absolutely no revelance whether he thinks he is 1st or 2nd forward the reality is he wouldn't have the ball directed to him as often as he does at Collingwood , with Jack in the same side and the majority of our forward entries would still go through Jack.

When did a CHF cross to another club with a Coleman FF? Just wanting somea clarity on these big statement is all.

good point.

 

[Morro]

good point.

I just think you assumptions are too big mate. It's just as possible his output would improve having a gun forward next to him as it is his output would decrease.

Also he is big fwd who demands the footy, he could easily get more ball directed at him than jack.

It's also possible that all the stupid kicks directed at jack when he has 3 opponents would now go clokes way and instead of a simple rebound out of our fwd line we might actually get a scoring opportunity.

 

[Groupie_]

And in 2.5 years time when Cloke begins to flounder and Griffiths is dominating along with Vicary, Martin, Cotchin, etc We are still stuck with Cloke for another 3 years!!
Yes up side is good! but the risk has massive consequences if it fails.
He had his chance to come to us when he started his career.
Remember what happened last time we got into a player raiding frenzy with Collingwood?
If he was in some sort of form and was a consistent shot on goal then I would have no problem, but I just don't rate him that highly.

ViCarey!!! I like it !

 

[Blaz]

Vickery may end up being a better player than Cloke... you never know.

 

[_RT_]

After going back and forth between wanting Cloke and not wanting him, I've finally decided that I don't want to see him come to us. I just posted up 2 sides in the Season 2013 thread and looking at them I just can't see how Cloke fits in to them without it hurting us in one way or another down the track. This year we've seen Griffiths start to develop at CHB, and the addition of Chaplin, that means we're going to have to find somewhere for a bloke like Astbury. IMO given that we gave him the number 12 and built him up as the next big thing, perhaps we should look at giving him another crack at CHF. Alongside Riewoldt and Vickery, the 3 of them strike me as a formidable forward line set up. That also means that we would be able to take our time with Elton, who would be next in line, and really develop his game and body to be ready to take over in case Astbury doesn't work out.

The other thing to consider is that Cloke, at the money that he wants, is going to take a big chunk of the cap each year. With the likes of Cotchin Martin Riewoldt Maric Rance and others coming out of contract over the next 12-24 months we would want to have room to move rather than find ourselves in the position that the Saints & Pies have been recently with too many stars and not enough cash to pay them all what they are worth.

We talk about wanting to see the club have sustained success in the next 5-10 years. To me getting Cloke will be more of a hinderance to that than a helping hand.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

I just think you assumptions are too big mate. It's just as possible his output would improve having a gun forward next to him as it is his output would decrease.

Also he is big fwd who demands the footy, he could easily get more ball directed at him than jack.

It's also possible that all the stupid kicks directed at jack when he has 3 opponents would now go clokes way and instead of a simple rebound out of our fwd line we might actually get a scoring opportunity.

You can't see that with the more key forwards you have within a forward line , the less times it is likely to go through any one of those forwards ?
You also can't see that Jack is more likely to draw a greater percentage of forward entries than Dawes would at Collingwood ?
It's not a assumption, it's common sense and is the exact reason why any club would be looking at Cloke , simply to spread the load / forward line entry avenues .
No issue that he would provide another target , as you say for those occasions when Jack has 3 opponents , but that isn't going to influence whether Cloke is going to get more football delivered through him than he already does at Collingwood .
Which is this whole debate not his worth but the fact his form will improve by moving to us .

 

[THE_GUN]

Last year i was on the Mitch Clarke bandwagon & I was cut down by many on here, With hindsight Mitch would of been the perfect player for us Both as a foward and Relieving ruckman along with Vickery our structure would of been perfect.

This year we have Cloke on the market, sure he doesnt cost us a draft pick but he is not the player that we need as RT mentioned we do have alternatives which are young and showing very very good signs in coming along to fill our 2nd 3rd tall needs in Griffiths,Vickery,Astbury,Elton & even O'Hanlon to an extent.

We dont need Cloke & The Burden he will place on our club for 5 years

 

[1980GFVideo]

Neeld ruled him out, we are no longer the team to make a play like this, Everyone knows he wont go interstate. Maguire backed up what I thought when he said that Malthouse and Clokes are hardly each others favourites.

Where is this guys leverage??.

Is David Cloke going to try and do a Sheedy and use us to get his terms.

Collingwood just need to sit back on this one and let him sign on their terms.

Mind you, he has had the same number of scoring shots as Drew Petrie for 10 less goals in same number of games. Lets face it for a shit season he is not exactly being blown away by players who are considered to be having a great season.

 

[richolovesgoal]

After going back and forth between wanting Cloke and not wanting him, I've finally decided that I don't want to see him come to us. I just posted up 2 sides in the Season 2013 thread and looking at them I just can't see how Cloke fits in to them without it hurting us in one way or another down the track. This year we've seen Griffiths start to develop at CHB, and the addition of Chaplin, that means we're going to have to find somewhere for a bloke like Astbury. IMO given that we gave him the number 12 and built him up as the next big thing, perhaps we should look at giving him another crack at CHF. Alongside Riewoldt and Vickery, the 3 of them strike me as a formidable forward line set up. That also means that we would be able to take our time with Elton, who would be next in line, and really develop his game and body to be ready to take over in case Astbury doesn't work out.

The other thing to consider is that Cloke, at the money that he wants, is going to take a big chunk of the cap each year. With the likes of Cotchin Martin Riewoldt Maric Rance and others coming out of contract over the next 12-24 months we would want to have room to move rather than find ourselves in the position that the Saints & Pies have been recently with too many stars and not enough cash to pay them all what they are worth.

We talk about wanting to see the club have sustained success in the next 5-10 years. To me getting Cloke will be more of a hinderance to that than a helping hand.

With the likely addition of Chaplin, where do you see Griffiths fitting? I would prefer him to Astbury at CHF.

 

[Punt_Road_Roar]

Not that I'm on the side that thinks we should get Travis, but lets face it Reiwoldt would be a much better duo than Chris ****ing Dawes