Restricted Free Agent Zac Bailey

[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.

 

[JasRulz63]

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.

Rightly or wrongly, I guess the list management team have decided that Bailey isn't someone we want to overpay even if it means we lose him.

You have a much more important and hard to replace player coming out of next year with Logan Morris. If you were going to overpay anyone, it would be him. Continuing to overpay players creates upwards pressure on future negotiations.

 

[Crouch]

Derpa derp Dom is a dick; do we get more of that this year?

Dom? That guy who got owned so badly it basically led to Reid’s promotion to the AFL? I'm sure he will be providing us with much lols this year.

 

[JasRulz63]

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.

Like I said this is an argument as to why academies exist. Brisbane has priority access to their zone via the academy, where as Adelaide don't have the same sort of access. Yet by my rough count, Adelaide has essentially the same number of South Australians as Brisbane has Queenslanders despite not getting priority access.

Without the academy system, I doubt it the numbers would be so even, and then your point re salary cap benefits becomes more pertinent.

 

[Elixuh]

Who is the Croms current list manager, who do we have to negotiate with this year?