2018 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[S.S. Bleeder]

Don’t think that’s correct.

‘The AFL has confirmed that the Swans must include Franklin's contract terms in each of the nine years of the contract, irrespective of how long he plays.

The amounts would remain in those particular years even if they paid him a massive lump sum early.’

So I can’t see what point there would be in paying some of Buddy’s contract early.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...009-2v8qk.html

It doesn't say that $200k can't be taken from one year and put onto another year as part of a contract adjustment. Clubs do that all the time and preventing us from doing that would be detrimental treatment (just like our trade ban).

[S.S. Bleeder]

Doesnt really make sense players have variables in contracts from game bonuses to all aussie selection goals kicked etc
rookies include match payments
Could be plenty of ullage end of year to pay off buddys contract

I think the only caveat for buddys deal is that it is fixed, he cant take a cut to help us sign others or renegotiate to smooth it out

i guarentee Reid would have had a games played clause that would have saved us a little

We should have signed Reid to $50k a game. It would have saved us a fortune.

- - - Updated - - -

And that's how Scott Morrison was elected to be our latest PM.

Also looks like an ABC staff management meeting. Our tax dollars at work.

[Meg]

It doesn't say that $200k can't be taken from one year and put onto another year as part of a contract adjustment. Clubs do that all the time and preventing us from doing that would be detrimental treatment (just like our trade ban).

I read these words to say that the Swans can’t do that. Or at least if they do, it would make no difference to the amounts deemed to have been paid for cap calculations.

You read it differently?

‘The amounts would remain in those particular years even if they paid him a massive lump sum early.’

[Markwebbos]

Surely this is all academic. If the Swans have extra cash one year, they'd front load the contract of any player other than Buddy.

[mcs]

Don’t think that’s correct.

‘The AFL has confirmed that the Swans must include Franklin's contract terms in each of the nine years of the contract, irrespective of how long he plays.

The amounts would remain in those particular years even if they paid him a massive lump sum early.’

So I can’t see what point there would be in paying some of Buddy’s contract early.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...009-2v8qk.html

I hope every other club is being held to the same accord for the long term deals being given out to stars these days, but I won't hold my breath.

[707]

still cant understand why they allocate specific sums so far out ?
say for instance we saved 400k on tippett this year who is to say we couldnt have thrown 250 of that at buddy thus altering all his payments going forward?

Because Buddy was a Restricted Free Agent and therefore Hawks could have chosen to match, the contract must be paid exactly as negotiated. This applies to all players changing clubs as RFA. It's to stop the receiving club structuring the payments to stop the losing club matching, then when the player arrives changing the terms of the contract.

Buddy's exact contract is known because Hawks leaked it. It's $500k in the last year, fact.

[707]

I hope every other club is being held to the same accord for the long term deals being given out to stars these days, but I won't hold my breath.

Only applies to Restricted FA changing clubs, all other contracts parties can agree to vary. Tom Lynch will get paid exactly as per the agreement he signs with us, I mean Richmond.

[stevoswan]

And that's how Scott Morrison was elected to be our latest PM.

[mcs]

Only applies to Restricted FA changing clubs, all other contracts parties can agree to vary. Tom Lynch will get paid exactly as per the agreement he signs with us, I mean Richmond.

I get that 707 and the 'principles' in theory behind it all..... but we all know that consistency is not a strong point of the AFL.

[AnnieH]

I hope every other club is being held to the same accord for the long term deals being given out to stars these days, but I won't hold my breath.

No, they're not.
This was the AFL's way of shutting up Eddie Everywhere after he bitched about us getting Buddy.
Despite the fact that the AFL approved the contract in the first place... then went back and placed restrictions on it.
Seriously, this is a case that can go to fair trading or the ACCC and win.

[barry]

Like what was said before in this thread. It really doesnt matter if Buddy's contract is fixed per year. We can work around that by all the other flexible contracts with all the other players.
Essentially, every year we take salary cap, minus buddy's contract that year, and what is left is dividied up as the "working salary cap" for the rest of the list.
We can easily front load or back load year by year to meet say a Reid on $2m over 3 years.

[Markwebbos]

No priority picks for Carlton or Gold Coast

McLachlan clarifies decision to reject priority pick requests

[AnnieH]

No priority picks for Carlton or Gold Coast

McLachlan clarifies decision to reject priority pick requests

Yeah, well, Carlton have form "tanking" for priority picks... not that it does them any good, but they DO have form.
They can go to buggery.

[Mel_C]

I heard a rumour that Tipoff wants to be relisted.

Annie you caused the Big Footy Swans forum to go into meltdown. Someone read your Tippett "rumour" and posted it there. ????

[KSAS]

Hogan has requested trade to Fremantle, bringing Melbourne into play for May.
Tim Kelly becoming increasingly restless staying at Geelong, with West Coast being rumoured his preferred WA club.
Pruess likely to land at Melbourne as support ruckman for Gawn.