Buddy hypothetical

[dejavoodoo44]

If that were to unfold, I would love to see that. The Bud deserves a flag with us......and then we could all go and stand outside Mike Fitzpatrick's house and chant an expletive laden version of our club song through megaphones for days on end. That would be glorious!

Cheer, cheer the red and the white.
We're out on your lawn,
All day and all night.

[Meg]

Cheer, cheer the red and the white.
We're out on your lawn,
All day and all night.

Lift our middle finger high,
Shake down the vengeance from the sky

[Ruck'n'Roll]

The Bud deserves a flag with us......

I can think of a few more deserving cases, but in all seriousness, why do you think that it's "The Bud" in particular, who deserves a flag with us?

[stevoswan]

I can think of a few more deserving cases, but in all seriousness, why do you think that it's "The Bud" in particular, who deserves a flag with us?

Obviously all the Swans older players deserve a flag but Bud came to us to win flags, the AFL made sure we didn't and he has been a loyal servant throughout all the crap the league has thrown at us since we recruited him.....so yes, Bud deserves a Swans flag as much as anyone else at the club. Why.....you don't agree? You somehow think The Bud is NOT deserving?

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Not deserving? No I didn't say that.
Less deserving? Hell yes!

"Bud came to us to win flags" - Pull the other one it plays Jingle Bell's. We may have hired him to win a flag, but he came, quite literally, to the highest bidder. Any other assertion is at the best fanciful - at the worst felonious.

[Meg]

Not deserving? No I didn't say that.
Less deserving? Hell yes!

"Bud came to us to win flags" - Pull the other one it plays Jingle Bell's. We may have hired him to win a flag, but he came, quite literally, to the highest bidder. Any other assertion is at the best fanciful - at the worst felonious.

To the highest bidder?

His motivation to move to Sydney (the city) was to be with his partner (now wife and mother of their two children).

That gave him two choices: GWS who were very keen to get him; and the
Swans.

From various insights over the years since Buddy arrived HE was keen to come to the Swans. (And why wouldn’t he be given the choice between Giants and Swans). To make that preference a reality the Swans had to make an offer that knocked the competitors out of contention (GWS and Hawthorn who had the right to match).

So it’s true that Swans made the highest offer. But the implication that what the Swans offered was Buddy’s motivation to come to us is an assertion not backed by known facts.

And I believe my explanation is neither fanciful nor felonious.

[Captain]

To the highest bidder?

His motivation to move to Sydney (the city) was to be with his partner (now wife and mother of their two children).

That gave him two choices: GWS who were very keen to get him; and the
Swans.

From various insights over the years since Buddy arrived HE was keen to come to the Swans. (And why wouldn’t he be given the choice between Giants and Swans). To make that preference a reality the Swans had to make an offer that knocked the competitors out of contention (GWS and Hawthorn who had the right to match).

So it’s true that Swans made the highest offer. But the implication that what the Swans offered was Buddy’s motivation to come to us is an assertion not backed by known facts.

And I believe my explanation is neither fanciful nor felonious.

If he was so keen to get to us for reasons other than money, why did we make the highest offer? Dumb management at the Swans? Charity?

[Meg]

If he was so keen to get to us for reasons other than money, why did we make the highest offer? Dumb management at the Swans? Charity?

Had to mount a knock-out blow on Hawthorn. And it was the length of the contract that did that.

[cherub]

If he was so keen to get to us for reasons other than money, why did we make the highest offer? Dumb management at the Swans? Charity?

It's how restricted free agency works. The offer from the club where the player is incumbent has to be exceeded by the acquiring club.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

I think we're operating on different paradigms Meg.

But the implication that what the Swans offered was Buddy’s motivation to come to us is an assertion not backed by known facts.

The question is: What known facts?

Buddy's pronouncements as to his motivations are NOT facts, they are merely pronouncements. No more, nor less, factual than the pronouncements of any public figure.

I am not suggesting that his pronouncements are false at all. Just that the only actual fact is the value and duration of his contract.

I think you may be seeing implications where they weren't made. I make no comment on his motivation/character etc. or the value for money provided.

He may have wanted to come to Sydney, in his shoes I certainly would have.
And as has been noted, the Swans did need to top the Hawthorn offer.
But by how much? I can't think of any free agent that's ended up staying at his existing club. Did we top the Hawthorn offer or did we over-the-top the Hawthorn offer?

The $10 million needed to induce a move to Sydney, is hard to reconcile with the get to Sydney and win flags motivation ascribed to him.

[Meg]

I think we're operating on different paradigms Meg.

The $10 million needed to induce a move to Sydney, is had to reconcile with the get to Sydney and win flags motivation ascribed to him.

The ‘win more flags’ is a quote from an interview with Buddy taken out of context. (Much loved and quoted by Hawthorn fans during their three-peat run.)

Buddy gave that response in answer to a journo’s question about why he chose Swans over GWS (not why he moved). I suspect that was a polite way of fending off the question - rather than saying he didn’t fancy playing with the Giants.

He also said that playing alongside Adam Goodes was a factor: that I do believe.

[Markwebbos]

I think we're operating on different paradigms Meg.

The question is: What known facts?

Buddy's pronouncements as to his motivations are NOT facts, they are merely pronouncements. No more, nor less, factual than the pronouncements of any public figure.

I am not suggesting that his pronouncements are false at all. Just that the only actual fact is the value and duration of his contract.

I think you may be seeing implications where they weren't made. I make no comment on his motivation/character etc. or the value for money provided.

He may have wanted to come to Sydney, in his shoes I certainly would have.
And as has been noted, the Swans did need to top the Hawthorn offer.
But by how much? I can't think of any free agent that's ended up staying at his existing club. Did we top the Hawthorn offer or did we over-the-top the Hawthorn offer?

The $10 million needed to induce a move to Sydney, is hard to reconcile with the get to Sydney and win flags motivation ascribed to him.

I always thought the $10million etc was required not to entice Buddy, but to outbid the Hawks because he was a RFA

[Meg]

I always thought the $10million etc was required not to entice Buddy, but to outbid the Hawks because he was a RFA

This is also my understanding.

(From memory) Hawthorn reportedly offered Buddy a six-year contract which was considerably more generous in the early years than the deal we offered (and paid) for the same years. Might have been more generous in total over the whole six years than our first six, can’t remember, not important enough to research.

Swans couldn’t offer big money in early years because of some big contracts on our books at that time (Tippett in particular). (And take into account on a discounted rate of return dollars paid in early years are worth more than dollars paid later.)

Given Buddy was a RFA and Hawthorn had the right to match, Swans needed to make an offer they were confident Hawthorn would not match. Had Hawthorn matched, Buddy’s only option would have been to go into the pre-season draft where the Swans were not well positioned to pick him - unless Buddy put such a high price on his head that we were the only club willing to pay.

We circumvented that (risky) scenario by making the high offer in the first place. So both Hawthorn and GWS dropped out of the competition.

Further, the contract was not as outrageous as was portrayed (other than the risk of an early career-ending injury). Remember Andrew Ireland had history in negotiating a long, high-paying contract (Alistair Lynch, 10-year contract).

Ireland foresaw that over the years the salary cap would expand significantly as subsequent TV rights deals were negotiated and top player salaries would expand significantly. He was totally right with the Lynch deal - so much so Brisbane renegotiated and paid Lynch more along the way or else Lynch would have been financially disadvantaged compared to other top AFL players.

And Lynch ended up playing one additional year beyond his 10-year deal.

Swans were on a similar path with Buddy’s contract with significant expansion of the salary cap (and some top players at other clubs being paid similar money). Until Covid hit, the consequent financial problems for the AFL and the subsequent cut to player numbers and the salary cap.

Covid has now made the last two years of Buddy’s contract a hefty weight on our salary cap. I for one am not going to criticise Ireland (or the then Board) for not predicting a pandemic.

Swans knew they were taking a risk and judged the potential benefits made the risks worthwhile. I am happy about that - the joy we have got from having Buddy as a Swans player outweigh the cost for me.

[stevoswan]

To the highest bidder?

His motivation to move to Sydney (the city) was to be with his partner (now wife and mother of their two children).

That gave him two choices: GWS who were very keen to get him; and the
Swans.

From various insights over the years since Buddy arrived HE was keen to come to the Swans. (And why wouldn’t he be given the choice between Giants and Swans). To make that preference a reality the Swans had to make an offer that knocked the competitors out of contention (GWS and Hawthorn who had the right to match).

So it’s true that Swans made the highest offer. But the implication that what the Swans offered was Buddy’s motivation to come to us is an assertion not backed by known facts.

And I believe my explanation is neither fanciful nor felonious.

+1

[stevoswan]

I think we're operating on different paradigms Meg.

The question is: What known facts?

Buddy's pronouncements as to his motivations are NOT facts, they are merely pronouncements. No more, nor less, factual than the pronouncements of any public figure.

I am not suggesting that his pronouncements are false at all. Just that the only actual fact is the value and duration of his contract.

I think you may be seeing implications where they weren't made. I make no comment on his motivation/character etc. or the value for money provided.

He may have wanted to come to Sydney, in his shoes I certainly would have.
And as has been noted, the Swans did need to top the Hawthorn offer.
But by how much? I can't think of any free agent that's ended up staying at his existing club. Did we top the Hawthorn offer or did we over-the-top the Hawthorn offer?

The $10 million needed to induce a move to Sydney, is hard to reconcile with the get to Sydney and win flags motivation ascribed to him.

So your saying someone as motivated to play footy at the level Buddy plays, didn't give a rats about winning premierships....was happy to just turn up and do his thing, didn't matter if we won or lost, as long as his bank account was chockers?! Where's your facts to back up that implication? Every player plays to play in and win premierships.....it's why Buddy chose us over GWS, who also would have made him very rich.