A question that has been asked many times before, but is now gaining some serious traction. With Buddy's reduced input this year, due to injury, and the subsequent tumble down the ladder of the Swans, did Sydney trade away their future for the 'now'?
While undoubtedly Buddy will go down as one of the all-time greats of the game, the elusive premiership that was promised by his arrival now seems like a distant memory. With his contract increasing every year and his output not improving, in hindsight this seems like a blunder by the club that prides itself on culture - the 'Bloods' culture. Giving all that money to one man (or two if you include Tippett), whilst players like Brownlow Medalist Tom Mitchell, Toby Nankervis (premiership ruckman), Dan Hanneberry, Gary Rohan, Nic Newman and Shane Mumford were pushed out, seems to have created a situation where that once renowned culture is now showing cracks. An inability to attract big name players due to salary cap issues caused by players like Franklin (and previously Tippett), have led to circumstances where players like Mills and Parker are regressing at a steady rate. While I don't think it is solely Franklin and his pay causing this, I do think it plays some part when such a big chunk of the cap is being used for one man.
It can be argued that Franklin's recruitment increased membership, marketing and corporate profitability for the club since his arrival (he really does bring fans through the gates), but for the long-term outlook, where membership sales could drop once the Swans bottom out, has the the short-term gain been worth the possible long-term downturn? I'd argue no, but that remains to be seen.
I think the Swans have been a brilliant club, and Geelong have a good history with them (no bad blood), so this doesn't come from a place of malice. I am genuinely concerned that one of the stalwarts of the competition in terms of competitiveness, is now dropping off due to salary cap mismanagement from those in a position of power, with delusions of grandeur.
I would argue that retaining Mitchell, one of Nank or Mumford, Hanneberry and Rohan, would be preferable to 3-5 years of Franklin, and a now retired Tippett. With players like McVeigh, Kennedy, Jack, Smith, Grundy and of course Franklin coming into the twilight of their careers, it does seem to beg the question - 'where to from here?'
What are other's thoughts?
TheRednWhite Would love to know where you stand?
While undoubtedly Buddy will go down as one of the all-time greats of the game, the elusive premiership that was promised by his arrival now seems like a distant memory. With his contract increasing every year and his output not improving, in hindsight this seems like a blunder by the club that prides itself on culture - the 'Bloods' culture. Giving all that money to one man (or two if you include Tippett), whilst players like Brownlow Medalist Tom Mitchell, Toby Nankervis (premiership ruckman), Dan Hanneberry, Gary Rohan, Nic Newman and Shane Mumford were pushed out, seems to have created a situation where that once renowned culture is now showing cracks. An inability to attract big name players due to salary cap issues caused by players like Franklin (and previously Tippett), have led to circumstances where players like Mills and Parker are regressing at a steady rate. While I don't think it is solely Franklin and his pay causing this, I do think it plays some part when such a big chunk of the cap is being used for one man.
It can be argued that Franklin's recruitment increased membership, marketing and corporate profitability for the club since his arrival (he really does bring fans through the gates), but for the long-term outlook, where membership sales could drop once the Swans bottom out, has the the short-term gain been worth the possible long-term downturn? I'd argue no, but that remains to be seen.
I think the Swans have been a brilliant club, and Geelong have a good history with them (no bad blood), so this doesn't come from a place of malice. I am genuinely concerned that one of the stalwarts of the competition in terms of competitiveness, is now dropping off due to salary cap mismanagement from those in a position of power, with delusions of grandeur.
I would argue that retaining Mitchell, one of Nank or Mumford, Hanneberry and Rohan, would be preferable to 3-5 years of Franklin, and a now retired Tippett. With players like McVeigh, Kennedy, Jack, Smith, Grundy and of course Franklin coming into the twilight of their careers, it does seem to beg the question - 'where to from here?'
What are other's thoughts?
TheRednWhite Would love to know where you stand?
