Schwab in the gun

[H_T 2,941]

Sorry but that line from Caroline Wilson simply beggars belief. It serves her argument well but doesn't hold water on a number of levels. If the Age sports reading public accept this then they believe in the tooth fairy and Father Christmas (sorry kiddies). What an absolute disgraceful piece of reporting from someone so senior in their newspaper!

Shameful.

Indeed. Although, I support her facts that they 'barely fired a shot' and Green had 'one possession' until half time.

[Guest hangon007]

Did LTs report get provided to the Board when it was issued and what was done about it?

You should know the answers to that if you are involved with the club.

I know Stynes took hold of the Footy Department some months ago and CC and CS have gone to ground?

Think its public knowledge why CC has been a little quite of late. CS I'm not sure he has "gone to ground" they are your words not ones I would choose.

What was happened since then up to when McLardy called the players meeting last week?

Cant help you there. Sorry. I dont read the newspapers as much as you appear too. Noted you quoted Caro ... ask her.

Edited August 3, 2011 by hangon007

[Dee Fan 3,247]

I found this on Big Footy take it for what you want; the poster seems to have a fair bit of inside info if it's true.

Alot of conjecture and talk going on about the sacking of Dean Bailey, the non-sacking of Cameron Schwab and ultimately alot of chinese whispers going on within the media to actually figure out what is going on. For the first time in AFL history, AFL agents all have a different perspective/view on this and getting too the truth is quite hard to do. For that reason ill make some vague comments without apportioning blame.

All this mess began July last season. The Dees staff expressed major concern about the flexibility of the salary cap given the huge amount of players they have within the same age bracket. The reason teams dont have a team filled with 25 year old superstars is simply because you cant financially afford to fit them all under the cap. With the introduction of two new clubs and free agency the club decided they needed to create a system which they counteract this problem

The system involves one three words : player performance clauses. Im not 100% sure of the system put in place but from what I am told it is a very internally competitive system. The idea behind the plan is we will play players based on a sliding scale of best to worst by invoking certain performance related clauses and spreading players salary amongst based on the performances they put in over a season in relation to those the teammates put in. In other words players were told they would be competing with one another in order to figure out who gets paid what.

This system was officially put in place as of this season according to the club and the players and agents were told to get on board. Alot of players rejected the idea believing it would create disharmony amongst the playing group by competing for wages. Alot of players also believed the plan put in place was simply around in order to keep then underpaid. The players were furious with the plan and alot of players have refused to comply with the new terms

This was brought to ahead last Monday when Brad Green on behalf of the players spoke out against the clubs hierarchy on On the Couch. This led to a discussion with Jim Stynes who was told, the players refuse to play under this salary cap system. Stynes said it had to be scrapped. Schwab was initially blamed for the disharmony and forcing the system on the playing group. It was later revealed through talks that Schwab created the idea and Bailey was the one who enforced it/made the decision to bring it in.

Because of this Bailey copped full responsibility and was sacked. Murmurs are the playing group want both men gone and will go to the club hierarchy and ask them to remove the contract offer in place for Cameron Schwab. Watch this space is all ill say. This is just the beginning

[Webber 10,061]

I found this on Big Footy take it for what you want; the poster seems to have a fair bit of inside info if it's true.

Alot of conjecture and talk going on about the sacking of Dean Bailey, the non-sacking of Cameron Schwab and ultimately alot of chinese whispers going on within the media to actually figure out what is going on. For the first time in AFL history, AFL agents all have a different perspective/view on this and getting too the truth is quite hard to do. For that reason ill make some vague comments without apportioning blame.

All this mess began July last season. The Dees staff expressed major concern about the flexibility of the salary cap given the huge amount of players they have within the same age bracket. The reason teams dont have a team filled with 25 year old superstars is simply because you cant financially afford to fit them all under the cap. With the introduction of two new clubs and free agency the club decided they needed to create a system which they counteract this problem

The system involves one three words : player performance clauses. Im not 100% sure of the system put in place but from what I am told it is a very internally competitive system. The idea behind the plan is we will play players based on a sliding scale of best to worst by invoking certain performance related clauses and spreading players salary amongst based on the performances they put in over a season in relation to those the teammates put in. In other words players were told they would be competing with one another in order to figure out who gets paid what.

This system was officially put in place as of this season according to the club and the players and agents were told to get on board. Alot of players rejected the idea believing it would create disharmony amongst the playing group by competing for wages. Alot of players also believed the plan put in place was simply around in order to keep then underpaid. The players were furious with the plan and alot of players have refused to comply with the new terms

This was brought to ahead last Monday when Brad Green on behalf of the players spoke out against the clubs hierarchy on On the Couch. This led to a discussion with Jim Stynes who was told, the players refuse to play under this salary cap system. Stynes said it had to be scrapped. Schwab was initially blamed for the disharmony and forcing the system on the playing group. It was later revealed through talks that Schwab created the idea and Bailey was the one who enforced it/made the decision to bring it in.

Because of this Bailey copped full responsibility and was sacked. Murmurs are the playing group want both men gone and will go to the club hierarchy and ask them to remove the contract offer in place for Cameron Schwab. Watch this space is all ill say. This is just the beginning

If this is true, and I guess that's a big 'if', then it creates a situation where the players are pushed to compete 'against' each other, as opposed to 'for' each other. As I say, 'if' it is true, it would be the stupidest administrative idea in a long infamous history of stupid ideas, and would explain pretty much everything. Too convenient? Maybe? Good luck on Saturday, Todd!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dee Fan 3,247]

If this is true, and I guess that's a big 'if', then it creates a situation where the players are pushed to compete 'against' each other, as opposed to 'for' each other. As I say, 'if' it is true, it would be the stupidest administrative idea in a long infamous history of stupid ideas, and would explain pretty much everything. Too convenient? Maybe? Good luck on Saturday, Todd!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm thinking it has to be bs surely the club couldn't alter existing contracts and the fact it states the players wanted Bailey sacked is at odds with what they have subsequently said.

[jackaub 1,402]

Seems plausible to me but then I know nothing could be this or something similar

It should be simple for the club now and I really hope G Lyon does it

"Please tell us all the truth and what the problems have been and what the fix will be"

Not only do supporters deserve it the club will only move forward if this happens in absolute transparency

If its buried it will resurface again to derail a great footy club and wreck all hope or success for another 50 years

[Webber 10,061]

Seems plausible to me but then I know nothing could be this or something similar

It should be simple for the club now and I really hope G Lyon does it

"Please tell us all the truth and what the problems have been and what the fix will be"

Not only do supporters deserve it the club will only move forward if this happens in absolute transparency

If its buried it will resurface again to derail a great footy club and wreck all hope or success for another 50 years

Clearly whatever it is won't be left to fester, so I have no doubt all the ills will be sorted out, but how they do that, and how much we are made aware of should be a matter of fine judgement. It is seldom for the best to air all of your dirty laundry. So the whole idea of 'complete transparency', one of the most overused and pretentious corporate/political phrases there is, is a nonsense. The last thing I want is for the world to know all the destructive crap going on at the club. Sort it out, move on, and present a united philosophy.

[beelzebub 22,225]

This the same sticking point currently with SSylvia. It has not only some merit but that this is a stickler for some has some curry. .Id imagine this applies to any NEW contracts. Existing cant be altered.. Dont put it past the idea (as is centuries old ) of someone(s) using others to further their causes. Older influencing the younger more impressionable minds etc.

Ill keep saying it.... seems some just have it far too cushy.

[beelzebub 22,225]

Just as a bit of an aside to this fiasco and its not meant as anything Schwabby apologist in nature but just having a bit of a think about things in some dispassionate way.

Theres obviously disharmorny amongst certains areas of the club. Thats a bit cap'n obvious I concede but its the foundation for a lot. Looking at his in one light i see that there is a group of players who arent on board with a direction the club is taking. These seem to be to a one pl

ayers who were around before Cameron came on board. These also seem to the the instigators of the mutiny aimed directly at Camerons influence in things football.. Im just starting to wonder if teh meddling that hes accused of is nothing more really than the push for performance payments to make up a larger slice of the pie of remunerations. This has been stated and stamped elsewhere as teh method going dforward to ensure the core group are able to be kept going forward. its very likely in reality that the mutineers wont figure largely in any team of say 3-4 years time. Many of these ( older brigade ) are now facing their LAST contract ( in all likelyhood) with Melbourne and are using on-field as collateral for bargaining. This ought and should never be a tool for negotiation.

Speculation of course

So ..one part of the club is effecting a push for change...and anotbher is pushing back.

As old as time itself

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

You should know the answers to that if you are involved with the club.

Am I involved? Never said I was. I buy a membership, attend the odd function and contributed to the DD. No more than you

Think its public knowledge why CC has been a little quite of late. CS I'm not sure he has "gone to ground" they are your words not ones I would choose.

CC's father died about four months ago (about the same time mine did too). It does not appropriately explain his lower profile. There are other reasons. CS has become less visible since JS took "public" hold of the football department. CS's whiteboard sessions have ceased and there are fewer public statements by CS

[Bonkers 915]

This the same sticking point currently with SSylvia. It has not only some merit but that this is a stickler for some has some curry. .Id imagine this applies to any NEW contracts. Existing cant be altered.. Dont put it past the idea (as is centuries old ) of someone(s) using others to further their causes. Older influencing the younger more impressionable minds etc.

Ill keep saying it.... seems some just have it far too cushy.

Wouldn't surprise me re Sylvia. Bit of guesswork here but since the Bulldogs game his form has been shite. Wonder if contract talks started that week?

[Jaded No More 57,947]

This would all be so interesting if it wasn't happening to our club. As it is, it's just damn depressing.

I don't think it hurts pushing our players to perform, but pushing them against each other is just dumb. Seriously, WTF is going on at our club and why are we the only club that seems eternally fractured, or at the very least, publically fractured?!

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

.....

Thanks for that. I am always skeptical of Big Footy as a source of information and the BF Op did say his comments were vague.

There appear to be some holes in BF statements:

1. The issue with performance based contracts is that your ability to contain TPP is contingent to an extent on the performance of the players. If each and every player reaches or achieves his performance metric then you salary cap will be breached and a Club does not want to do that. Also if the performance metrics are set too unreasonably then the introduction of PBC just represents a subtle salary haircut that is bound to pizz players and their managers off. This is also not something the Club wants to do.

2.If PBC was Schwabs idea then it should have Schwab and Connolly who should have got Board approval and implemented it with the players. It was not Bailey job as coach to handle player contracts. Given the media are saying that there has been tension between CC/CS and Bailey I cant Bailey performing functions which are clearly out of his coaching remit.Given that Schwab did not even have the decency to inform Bailey of the appointment of Todd Viney to the MFC FD in a critical role then Icant see how they would have worked together on something which Blind Freddie could see to be so potentially poisonous in player relations.

3. And based on what has transpired this year in the leadership, I cant believe Brad Green effectively leading a players revolt.

4. After Saturday's bruise free performance, I certainly dont think the senior players have any leverage in the future of CS. If they had any Darwinian instinct they would make their football talk only and loudest.

I think there is more to come out from MFC once the season is finished.

[Longsufferingnomore 1,463]

Clearly whatever it is won't be left to fester, so I have no doubt all the ills will be sorted out, but how they do that, and how much we are made aware of should be a matter of fine judgement. It is seldom for the best to air all of your dirty laundry. So the whole idea of 'complete transparency', one of the most overused and pretentious corporate/political phrases there is, is a nonsense. The last thing I want is for the world to know all the destructive crap going on at the club. Sort it out, move on, and present a united philosophy.

like every other club does

[Dalrot 85]

I found this on Big Footy take it for what you want; the poster seems to have a fair bit of inside info if it's true.

Considering this post originated from Bigfooty's version of Chiliboy/Nudge, I would take it with a large grain of salt.

[Allen Jakovich 516]

Although it's probably BS, it would explain why the players have been so selfish in the forward 50 this year... that has really stood out to me.

[robbiefrom13 877]

on the other hand, if there's any truth in it, it makes JW's unselfishness worth another thought. Real leadership? Making a point about the system?

[rpfc 27,476]

Or it could be BS...

Bailey enforcing this?

WTF?

why would he be near this stuff?

Where is Harrington? He's the bloke who actually does this stuff.

[e25 5]

It's clearly rubbish.

If he knew all the rest, he'd know that Bailey had nothing to do with contracts.

Besides, if it's so immediately obvious to me that this is a bad idea, then there's no way an AFL coach or administration could miss the inherent serious flaws in this system.

By any tangible metric, this payment system would lead to selfishness and players playing for themselves, rather than each other.

Serious padding of stats would be a major issue.

There's no way Bailey, Schwab or Connolly would miss that.

I wouldn't be surprised if the contracts were inventive based, with bonuses for reaching games played targets and B&F positioning, but the system described is all wrong.

So wrong, it can't possibly be true.

[Demon Dynasty 15,471]

Fair enough. But it does not look good.

And while the players should focus on the football, didnt the article say McLardy called the meeting to air grievances? Why did the Board leave it to now given they should have had the independent report on the FD at the start of the year?

This ^^^

Does this mean the board as a whole has never seen the Andrews' report either formally (as part of a board meeting/presentation) or informally (ie., individually outside of a formal board meeting)? Has any board member seen it i wonder?

Many questions remain yet unanswered. It's going to be a very interesting off season period for this club.....again.

Edited August 4, 2011 by Rusty Nails

[Bang Bang Bang 5,461]

I frequent BigFooty a lot and can confirm that the guy who posted that elaborate theory is full of it. Makes up all sorts of nonsense to create a stir on there, and succeeds.

[jnrmac 18,980]

I believe it to be true that the club ranks the players in 'bands' according to their market worh, development, draft number etc. By doing so they try to manage the overall player payments issue. I have a hunch it is something to do with this and player performance that might be the cause of the friction.

If you think about it Davey and Green are the two highest paid players and have the lowest output - certainly this year. Sylvia is agitating for more and would be within his rights to say "I am performing better than most around here" even though we know it's not consistent etc.

So I suspect the BF post might be confused with this. That's my 2 cents worth.

[Guest dieharderdee]

I find the flaw in this argument is that in the past the club have stated that in order to compensate for the sortfall in latter years they are front loading alot of contracts now how can you front load a contract if you are basing it on their performance in 2 years time. I agree there would be some performance base but no more than usual.

[Real Demon 232]

Caro was onto it early, but it wasn't quite the story back then that it is now:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dees-magic-flickers-20110422-1driv.html

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Nice pick Real Demon.

The issues were bubbling for some time and MFC have not dealt with them. Rather prophetic article from Caro.