Restricted Free Agent Zac Bailey

[Cleric]

$1M is very common contract. Over 30 players are on $1M or more and there will be even more with the new CPA, even Brisbane have 2 of them and have offered Bailey $1M. Thilthorpe, Dawson and Rankine will be on $1M+ with their next contract. Thilthorpe will definitely get offered $1.5-2M on the open market though.

True but in 2026, no Crows player has a contract at a million a year. This has given us plenty of cap space, and has allowed us to front end contracts while we had the money.

 

[Cleric]

It's less about not being able to afford him, and more about not wanting to make him (easily) the highest paid player at our club. Neale has a contract in front of him but is probably on his way out; that money would comfortably cover the difference between what we're offering Bailey and what he'd accept.

Andrews and McCluggage are deservedly the highest players at the club and are reportedly making around $1mil a year. Paying Bailey the $1.4mil that Adelaide are would make him (IMO undeservedly) comfortably our highest paid player.

We won back to back flags and signed two big money free agents in positions of need. I think our cap management is fine.

Didn't Adelaide try to pay Petty $1 million a year? Part of Adelaide not "screwing" their cap is they've missed on some of their bigger $$ targets. Credit to them for appearing to get Bailey over the line.

Thats the decision Brisbane have to make. A team will always pay overs to get a player, but its also dangerous to let good players go because of money when you have the ability to pay them. Sydney went two players less on their main list to help pay the wages of their players and keep them.

Its harder to find another Zac Bailey than to pay the one you have more.
People said the same thing when we got Eddie Betts. No small forward was worth 550k a year. It would destabilise the team by having him as one of the highest paid players. Now in hindsight do you think Carlton would have matched the Adelaide offer? Absolutely they would have.

 

[Cleric]

Sounds like an argument for academies...

Im all for Adelaide having an academy.
Im also not against the northern academies as I think the more talent the Northern clubs can get from Qld and NSW means more chance of the SA clubs being able to get the SA kids.
I think its important for all interstate clubs to have a strong % of local kids in their teams. It creates a culture of state pride and keeps downward pressure on their caps.

Take Thilthorpe, he was a Crows tragic, and one of his greatest childhood memories was watching Crows games with his Nana, as she loved the club. Playing for Adelaide was a dream for him. Now he is living that dream, and knowing his Nana would be loving him playing for us, we dont have to worry about having to over pay to keep him.
His last contract he didnt even entertain offers, and took way unders what the market would have paid him to stay here.
Playing for the Crows means more for him than an extra 500k a year.

That means so much for a club as it makes their cap better, reduces losing good players, and creates a culture of players who supported the club, playing for the club.