Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

[chef]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

We'd sacrifice getting an A grade forward because it might hinder the progress of two fringe kids who are yet to debut and are no certainties to make it? That doesn't make sense to me.

I'm worried that if we chase Cloke we'd skew our player payments and TBH I'd rather a skillful midfielder on ~half the money (Boak on $500-$600k anyone?).

Moloney sounds like a solid moneyball suggestion - he'd definately add something to our side.

The trouble with Boak is he isn't a FA.

He's going to cost the earth in terms of a trade as hasn't he still got another year to go on his contract?

[Mofra]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

The trouble with Boak is he isn't a FA.

He's going to cost the earth in terms of a trade as hasn't he still got another year to go on his contract?

Refer to The Age article quoted earlier - he's out of contract at the end of this year, although Geelong would be a better chance to nab him than we would.

Moloney is available as a FA - was there an article with a comprehensive list not long ago?

[KT31]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

Eddie met with Clokes manager today and for sure a under the table deal will be done.

[The Coon Dog]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

Eddie met with Clokes manager today and for sure a under the table deal will be done.

Thanks Chops!

[chef]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

Eddie met with Clokes manager today and for sure a under the table deal will be done.

Really can't see that happening, maybe a third party but no club would be stupid enough to go outside the rules anymore with the punishment they would get.

I think Eddie would be explaining the big picture about being a one club player and how Collingwood can help him in later life.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

Really can't see that happening, maybe a third party but no club would be stupid enough to go outside the rules anymore with the punishment they would get.

I think Eddie would be explaining the big picture about being a one club player and how Collingwood can help him in later life.

There are so many ways around the salary cap I couldn't see it being a major issue for someone like Eddie

[chef]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

There are so many ways around the salary cap I couldn't see it being a major issue for someone like Eddie

Third party yes(which are technically part of the cap), but not under the table deals.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

Third party yes(which are technically part of the cap), but not under the table deals.

I had quite a bit to do with a fairly high profile indigenous player (now Long retired) on a professional basis a few years back. His club president gave him $20K for a piece of 'original aboriginal artwork'. It was a stick figure on a piece of butcher's paper.

All of this guys bills from us were paid by an indigenous community group. The player's club 'donated' money to the community group who then used a % of the money to pay players expenses for them.


When Nick Riewoldt was negotiating his last contract,St. Kilda claimed they were at their cap and couldn't pay him any more. Ricky Nixon told SEN that St. Kilda needed to get 'more imaginative'.

Richmond were buying the beer for their social club from Nathan Brown's pub. I'm sure they could have gone directly to CUB and got it cheaper. What about the property deal between Clint Casey and Ben Holland? There's plenty of them.


The penalties for breaching the cap are serious and clubs would need to be very careful about how it is set up, but I have no doubt that it still goes on.

[FrediKanoute]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

This is always going to be the killer with free agency.....how do you police the cap, without employing an army of forensic accountants.

[Remi Moses]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

Interesting to see The Cloke's have knocked back Collingwood's 4 year deal.
Reportedly they've offered 700 and the Cloke's want a 5 year deal!the old Man's playing serious hardball

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

Really can't see that happening, maybe a third party but no club would be stupid enough to go outside the rules anymore with the punishment they would get.

I think Eddie would be explaining the big picture about being a one club player and how Collingwood can help him in later life.

This is the big issue about free agency and the salary cap.

What we need is someone to blow the whistle (like Ben Holland on Casey at Richmond) and for the AFL then to have the determination to actually impose the appropriate penalty.

A big step to ironing out the inequalities would be achieved if the AFL took control of the gate takings for EVERY game and split it evenly between the clubs.

Be nice to see Collingwood play a game in Darwin every now and then to promote the game as well.

[Mantis]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

A big step to ironing out the inequalities would be achieved if the AFL took control of the gate takings for EVERY game and split it evenly between the clubs.

Be nice to see Collingwood play a game in Darwin every now and then to promote the game as well.

You really think the AFL care about the small clubs? They just keep us in the comp as it means they have more bargaining power at TV rights time.... more games per week = more TV exposure = more money.

And why do Collingwood need to play in Darwin? They have a great deal to play games in Melbourne and don't need to do it for the financial reasons we do.

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

You really think the AFL care about the small clubs? They just keep us in the comp as it means they have more bargaining power at TV rights time.... more games per week = more TV exposure = more money.

And why do Collingwood need to play in Darwin? They have a great deal to play games in Melbourne and don't need to do it for the financial reasons we do.

No Mantis I don't think the AFL care beyond keeping teams afloat so that they can maximise their TV rights etc.

My suggestion of Collingwood in Darwin is merely about thinking about every team carrying their equal share of travel.
If the gate takings were equalised no-one would NEED to go there and it would be just the promotional aspect that was used.

The current set up gives clubs like Collingwood better exposure and simply multiplies their position of strength.

I know I am just dreaming.

[hujsh]

Re: Would we could we? Free Agency Ponderings #239

This is the big issue about free agency and the salary cap.

What we need is someone to blow the whistle (like Ben Holland on Casey at Richmond) and for the AFL then to have the determination to actually impose the appropriate penalty.

A big step to ironing out the inequalities would be achieved if the AFL took control of the gate takings for EVERY game and split it evenly between the clubs.

Be nice to see Collingwood play a game in Darwin every now and then to promote the game as well.

They take it even further in the NFL with revenue sharing so it's not so crazy an idea. As you said above though it is just a dream and is no chance of happening.