Franklin -The Movie

[billyboob]

I had a call from my 70yo uncle last night.. He has been an AFL lover and umpire since the 50's.. He grew up in Sydneys west and has supported the Swans since they moved up to Sydney. He called to tell me that he is leaving the Swans for GWS. That the whole Buddy deal is very un-Swans like. I couldn't argue. I have been on the fence about the whole thing but am starting to think why the $%^ did we do it.. If Buddy wanted to play for us why the hell did we have to pay the ridiculous money we did.. Give him a 3 year contract like is sensible.. I can see wilderness years to come.. I just hope the Swans can make some hay in the meantime........

a. Because Goodes is not going to be around for much longer.
b. There weren't any other 'marquee' players knocking on our door.
c. Buddy is the type of player, like Goodes was (still is?) who can turn a game around (OK even I don't know if I'm pulling that out of my .... I think what I'm trying to say is Buddy = rare player who brings confidence to whole team?)
d. Swans management are the type of people who can and have pulled this off before (don't tell me the about the lions wilderness years).

Pick and choose I guess. Preferably from a or b as I'm more confident in those. I mean a is a no brainer. I should never do this again. Thought it was funny at the time.

[liz]

I had a call from my 70yo uncle last night.. He has been an AFL lover and umpire since the 50's.. He grew up in Sydneys west and has supported the Swans since they moved up to Sydney. He called to tell me that he is leaving the Swans for GWS. That the whole Buddy deal is very un-Swans like. I couldn't argue. I have been on the fence about the whole thing but am starting to think why the $%^ did we do it.. If Buddy wanted to play for us why the hell did we have to pay the ridiculous money we did.. Give him a 3 year contract like is sensible.. I can see wilderness years to come.. I just hope the Swans can make some hay in the meantime........

I can understand why people have reservations about the length of the contract, I still have lingering concerns but we won't know for several years if these will have an impact. But there are a couple of factors that influenced the way the contract was structured.

One is that we almost certainly couldn't afford to pay Buddy what we think he is worth over the next three or four seasons (in terms of salary cap). His current pay is therefore being backloaded for when a) the club expects the salary cap to be significantly higher b) Goodes, O'Keefe will be lower c) Tippett's deal will have expired (and he either stays for less to make up for the fact he's being a bit overpaid at the moment) or he moves on somewhere else if another club is willing to wave a cheque book at him.

Secondly, the contract was structured to put off Hawthorn from matching it. If they had chosen to, we'd have had to trade for him. That would probably have cost a couple of Rohan, Hanners, Reid, Parker as well as a high draft pick. Remember that Carlton gave up pick 3 plus Kennedy and another pick for Judd. We didn't have a pick remotely close to pick 3, so would have had to give up decent players for a "fair trade".

[liz]

a. Because Goodes is not going to be around for much longer.
b. There weren't any other 'marquee' players knocking on our door.
c. Buddy is the type of player, like Goodes was (still is?) who can turn a game around (OK even I don't know if I'm pulling that out of my .... I think what I'm trying to say is Buddy = rare player who brings confidence to whole team?)
d. Swans management are the type of people who can and have pulled this off before (don't tell me the about the lions wilderness years).

Pick and choose I guess. Preferably from a or b as I'm more confident in those. I mean a is a no brainer. I should never do this again. Thought it was funny at the time.

I don't think it is just Franklin's potential matchwinning ability. It's his whole onfield persona. He may not be consistent but he can do things almost no other players can do, and that's the kind of thing that brings crowds in the door. The roar when he took the mark from Jetta and kicked his first goal was reminiscent of the old Plugger days.

It's also worth remembering that the Swans are very much competing with GWS for the hearts and minds of AFL supporters in Sydney. Not the rusted on Swans fans, but the next generation of core fans, especially the kids. While I don't think the Swans signed Buddy just to spite GWS -- there are plenty other legitimate reasons to want Buddy - it can't have been lost on the club that had they not been able to accommodate him, he'd now be running around a little further west.

[The Big Cat]

2014 - RWOwiki[/url]

Surely Tippett's contract goes beyond the end of this year. I also thought Mitchell was signed to a longer deal.

[Meg]

Liz you are spot on in both the above comments. Re Franklin's appeal to kids - one small anecdote. As I walked from the Olympic Park station across to the stadium a young boy about 7 yo, dressed in his Swans guernsey , said to his father "I hope Buddy kicks 13 goals." It made me smile, the magic aura that only a few players bring to the game. Yes Buddy needs to deliver some special matches to maintain the aura but clearly the Swans believe he will.

[dimelb]

c. Buddy is the type of player, like Goodes was (still is?) who can turn a game around (OK even I don't know if I'm pulling that out of my .... I think what I'm trying to say is Buddy = rare player who brings confidence to whole team?)

Pick and choose I guess. Preferably from a or b as I'm more confident in those. I mean a is a no brainer. I should never do this again. Thought it was funny at the time.

I have no argument with this at all. He did it in the GF in 2012. If others had kicked straighter the Hawks might have had two in a row.

[Matt80]

I don't think it is just Franklin's potential matchwinning ability. It's his whole onfield persona. He may not be consistent but he can do things almost no other players can do, and that's the kind of thing that brings crowds in the door. The roar when he took the mark from Jetta and kicked his first goal was reminiscent of the old Plugger days.

It's also worth remembering that the Swans are very much competing with GWS for the hearts and minds of AFL supporters in Sydney. Not the rusted on Swans fans, but the next generation of core fans, especially the kids. While I don't think the Swans signed Buddy just to spite GWS -- there are plenty other legitimate reasons to want Buddy - it can't have been lost on the club that had they not been able to accommodate him, he'd now be running around a little further west.

Wonderful Liz. I also think that the Swans have a genuine off-field match-winner as well. He is the most popular off-field Swan since Warrick Capper in the 80s. He needs to be marketed properly to take full advantage of his profile and pulling power.

Maybe the Swans could bring back Bob Prichard to take full advantage of the Buddy brand, like he did with the Capper brand in the 80s.

[Mug Punter]

I had a call from my 70yo uncle last night.. He has been an AFL lover and umpire since the 50's.. He grew up in Sydneys west and has supported the Swans since they moved up to Sydney. He called to tell me that he is leaving the Swans for GWS. That the whole Buddy deal is very un-Swans like. I couldn't argue. I have been on the fence about the whole thing but am starting to think why the $%^ did we do it.. If Buddy wanted to play for us why the hell did we have to pay the ridiculous money we did.. Give him a 3 year contract like is sensible.. I can see wilderness years to come.. I just hope the Swans can make some hay in the meantime........

Whether you agree with the Buddy deal or not, becoming a Giants supporter over it is very very poor.....

[annew]

I had a call from my 70yo uncle last night.. He has been an AFL lover and umpire since the 50's.. He grew up in Sydneys west and has supported the Swans since they moved up to Sydney. He called to tell me that he is leaving the Swans for GWS. That the whole Buddy deal is very un-Swans like. I couldn't argue. I have been on the fence about the whole thing but am starting to think why the $%^ did we do it.. If Buddy wanted to play for us why the hell did we have to pay the ridiculous money we did.. Give him a 3 year contract like is sensible.. I can see wilderness years to come.. I just hope the Swans can make some hay in the meantime........

I am still in the dark as to what Buddy has actually done in Sydney that is so bad.

[jono2707]

Just something re the back-ending of Budddy's contact based on an assumption of a higher salary cap in years to come. If this is the case, the structure of Buddy's contact will not necessarily mean that we will be able to re-sign players due to the higher cap. A higher cap will mean AFL players will obviously be able to be paid more - Buddy will still be eating up a large chunk of our cap and if he remains one of the highest paid players in the AFL in 3,4,5 + years time, other Swans players will head elsewhere to seek the additional pay an increased salary cap may afford them at other teams.

Thinking that we can pay Buddy a big chunk of his contract in later years without an impact on our ability to keep other players on our list is flawed logic.

[bodgie]

Losing to GWS with Franklin playing for Sydney was not a good look. Losing to GWS with Franklin playing for GWS would have been a much worse look.

[mcs]

I had a call from my 70yo uncle last night.. He has been an AFL lover and umpire since the 50's.. He grew up in Sydneys west and has supported the Swans since they moved up to Sydney. He called to tell me that he is leaving the Swans for GWS. That the whole Buddy deal is very un-Swans like. I couldn't argue. I have been on the fence about the whole thing but am starting to think why the $%^ did we do it.. If Buddy wanted to play for us why the hell did we have to pay the ridiculous money we did.. Give him a 3 year contract like is sensible.. I can see wilderness years to come.. I just hope the Swans can make some hay in the meantime........

Seriously.... you follow a team for 30+ years, and give it all up over 1 player! Players come and go, support should not - that's my opinion anyway. But if he wants to go follow the play toy of the AFL, then go for it!


Seeing we gave Buddy a 9 year contract, surely we should give him more than 1/198 (based on potential games, assuming 22 matches a year and no finals) of his career at the swans before he is written off as a '@@@@@@ up'!

I have faith the club have made a good decision to recruit him. I'm far from convinced by the length of contract or how much we are paying, but I can fully comprehend why they wanted to get him to the club when it became clear he would be interested in coming. Give him time - Rome wasn't built in a day, and new players at a club rarely just 'click' at their first day at the office!

- - - Updated - - -

Just something re the back-ending of Budddy's contact based on an assumption of a higher salary cap in years to come. If this is the case, the structure of Buddy's contact will not necessarily mean that we will be able to re-sign players due to the higher cap. A higher cap will mean AFL players will obviously be able to be paid more - Buddy will still be eating up a large chunk of our cap and if he remains one of the highest paid players in the AFL in 3,4,5 + years time, other Swans players will head elsewhere to seek the additional pay an increased salary cap may afford them at other teams.

Thinking that we can pay Buddy a big chunk of his contract in later years without an impact on our ability to keep other players on our list is flawed logic.

.

It depends Jono on how good we are at keeping our players on reasonable contracts. I agree that the logic may not work 100% as the swans would like, but I do think there will be significant increases in the cap, and if we are clever about it, we should manage to keep most of the people that we wish to keep. Part of that though is remaining up there - its a hell of a lot harder, especially with free agency, to keep the best players on unders $$$ wise if you aren't looking like winning flags!

[RED RAG]

I think signing Buddy for that amount of money was the worst decision by the club in it's Sydney history. Buddy reached his best with Hawthorn and is now on a slow downslide. And the worst result from it was that we couldn't then match or better the offer made to Mummy, which leaves us in the position of having Mike as only ruckman up to it. If Mike gets injured we will be in big trouble.

[Melbourne_Blood]

General consensus would say Buddy's best footy is behind him. He's 27. He started playing awesome footy at 21, most key forwards don't until there 24 -25. I think this is what generates a perception that he's well past his best. He's been a freak for 6-7 years already, so people assume he won't be for another 4-5. There's no solid evidence to base this on. He kicked what, 50-60 goals last year being played a lot up the ground ? He's had some injury issues but his body isn't falling apart. He's played a total of 1 game at his new club, and showed at least some promise in a dismal team performance. Predictions of his demise are Ridiculously premature, and based on very little actual evidence, other than ( media driven) perceptions. He's kicked just under 600 goals , averages over 3 goals a game for his career ( or close enough to), and has turned matches on their heads single handedly. A player like that doesn't suddenly lose his ability at 27 years and 2 months of age.

[bodgie]

yep. let's give it a few rounds hey?