Demons facing salary cap cuts

[Jarka 767]

I think it reflects the fact that after consecutive finals series from 04-06 we, as a club, overrated our list and retained too many players that were on good coin for too long, ie Bizzell, Ward, Godfrey. Not to mention Pickett's Super.

We thought we were at 11pm when in fact we were at 3am.

Playing finals is one thing, hell, half the competition gets to play them every year, but it's how you peform in them that should be the way a club and its players should be judged.

With that in mind I fail to understand how this club could be even close to 100% of the salary cap.

What it does though is to reconfirm that we are finally headed in the right direction.

[Jarka 767]

He is and thats why I said I don't think they will ask. Just saying he seems like he loves the club and would if he was asked.

/start rant

No player should be asked to take a pay cut, if a club is stupid enough to pay over the odds for said player then that's the club's problem. Having said that if a player manager is stupid enough to successfully arrange a contract that is clearly above said players ability then they're not doing their client any favours, in the end all that will happen is that enormous pressure will be put on the player to perform better.

/end rant

[H_T 3,047]

/start rant

No player should be asked to take a pay cut, if a club is stupid enough to pay over the odds for said player then that's the club's problem. Having said that if a player manager is stupid enough to successfully arrange a contract that is clearly above said players ability then they're not doing their client any favours, in the end all that will happen is that enormous pressure will be put on the player to perform better.

/end rant

I wouldn't have thought Green would be asked anyway, he has delivered this year regardless of wins and losses. He shouldn't be asked.

[John Dee 445]

This is a beat up of mammoth proportions. The AFL has said, quite reasonably, that we will not be getting extra financial assistance if we are demonstrating that we are paying over the minimum. This is then followed by a complete and utter [censored] about how we are going to struggle to achieve the cuts.

92.5% of 8.5M is 7.8625M; difference 0.6375M or $6,375,000.

Injury payments this year are approximately $300,000, the second year in a row that they have been very high. We should expect a decrease in this payment once we remove a few 30 somethings, but we should budget for a sum of some proportion next year; difficult to quantify.

TJ $200,000 - done;

Neitz $300,000 in salary cap - done

Yze $200,000 in salary cap - done

The complicated rules regarding veterans can be explain by some learned poster; I think it is 1/2 for the first, 1/3 for the second ...

Holland, Weetra and anybody else you want to mention, not even covered yet and we are already under the minimum; we will have to start giving players payrises to meet the AFL's demands.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

No player should be asked to take a pay cut, if a club is stupid enough to pay over the odds for said player then that's the club's problem. Having said that if a player manager is stupid enough to successfully arrange a contract that is clearly above said players ability then they're not doing their client any favours, in the end all that will happen is that enormous pressure will be put on the player to perform better.

Good point. Unfortunately some MFC players have managed to shake off that pressure easily and not performed up to contract terms.

Food for thought:

1. For players coming out of contrract and who we want to retain we may have to pay them more.

2. Not all long term injured on the list drew on injury payments this year. The figure may have been higher this year than reported and expectations of falls in that figure may be pre mature.

However we should see some salary relief from higher paid senior players retired or retiring this year.

[Redleg 40,926]

Do they pay out the last year of Nathan Carrolls contract to free up a spot on the list?

Yes.