Surely we have money for more stars?

[DeeDay 0]

Incorrect, the Vets List rule changes and now only $100k of vets salary will go off the Cap (as opposed to the 50% it used to be)

Freo may be able to afford Cloke now, but when their young guns develop, where's their money going to come from

My mistake, I guess that works out even better for Freo..

[Parma 28]

Throw everything we have at Travis CLOKE. He and CLARK can take pressure off our young tall forwards while making us competetive when we go forward.

[Chook 15,022]

Throw everything we have at Travis CLOKE. He and CLARK can take pressure off our young tall forwards while making us competetive when we go forward.

We already are competitive when we go forward. We're usually not competetive around stoppages, so we need some great clearance mids.

[Steamin Demon 394]

Tell him he is dreaming......

It's been widely reported and stated by the club that we have heavily front loaded contracts thus enabling us to hold onto and recruit stars of the game.

What you call dreaming Rhino, I call facts.

Before you comeback with a quick retort, you know as much about Melbournes salary cap as you read in the paper.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

And you know more Steamin? I am sure you're widely reported is as reliable as the Hun.

I responded to a poster that said we had cash, loads of cash. This is in complete contrast to the dire situation that the Club reported when the sponsor situation. This was widely reported too. But you may have missed that in your earnest pursuit of "facts".

[Little Richard 6,265]

No idea about contract status or that sort of thing, but I really like Matt Suckling from the Hawks. Can run, has good agility and one of the best kicks in the whole league. This is what we need (among others)... any chance?

[Ron Burgundy 8,585]

Dangerfield has been mooted before, but he looks very happily ensconced in the Crows' revival as we speak.

He might have been close to Neil Craig, but he's found the new coach invigorating and motivating - he's playing with freedom and audacity.

I'd think about Andrew Moore from Port who was taken @ #9 and has had a few issues with settling in and injury. Eastern ranges boy who wants to come home.

Further, throw some coin at Josh Caddy - he would be a great pick up!!

I have no idea how good he is, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that Andrew Moore was really hopeful of being picked up by the Dees in that draft.

[Steamin Demon 394]

And you know more Steamin? I am sure you're widely reported is as reliable as the Hun.

I responded to a poster that said we had cash, loads of cash. This is in complete contrast to the dire situation that the Club reported when the sponsor situation. This was widely reported too. But you may have missed that in your earnest pursuit of "facts".

When does sponsorship have anything to do with player recruitment/retention? Salary cap cash is what UTAH was saying we have plenty to throw around. The fact remains we have front loaded contracts that enable us to compete when free agency comes in. FACT.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

So given you only read the papers how do you know how much money we have set aside? You dont. FACT. The Club have advised are front loading the contract to pay for the rotation of players into higher payment contracts and to possibly compete with free agency in the future. We dont know the extent of bidding that will occur in free agency so there is another unknown.

The ability to fund the increasing cost of non salary operations (eg coaching, facilities, medical support and rehab) via sponsorship is an important issue in player recruitment and retention. As it was the delay in signing sponsors resulted in a number of player development issues being shelved due to funding concerns.

[Guest gidon]

The club has stated that they are front loading contracts for when Free Agency comes into play. The club also threw last years Operating Profit (around $700 thousand) into front loading contacts.

From the horses mouth.

[jumbo returns 6,741]

I have no idea how good he is, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that Andrew Moore was really hopeful of being picked up by the Dees in that draft.

Very close family and from the same team as Sam Blease, Gys, Aaron Young and Kieran Harper. Dominated more than these boys at that level. Very highly sought after by Mark Williams....good footy brain and great skills.

[GRUN DEE 69]

Andrew Walker! I would like him in a Dees jumper. Wont happen though!

[BAMF 4,421]

So given you only read the papers how do you know how much money we have set aside? You dont. FACT. The Club have advised are front loading the contract to pay for the rotation of players into higher payment contracts and to possibly compete with free agency in the future. We dont know the extent of bidding that will occur in free agency so there is another unknown.

The ability to fund the increasing cost of non salary operations (eg coaching, facilities, medical support and rehab) via sponsorship is an important issue in player recruitment and retention. As it was the delay in signing sponsors resulted in a number of player development issues being shelved due to funding concerns.

Rhino, my post was obviously in relation to the salary cap.

We know that we have had trouble over the past few years reaching the minimum salary cap payments. We know that the players are on massively front loaded contracts.

Your point about sponsorship is odd. We have just signed 2 major sponsors for the next few years. We have also just signed up some of the minor sponsor partners.

We have received a very large sum of money from the AFL from the TV rights deal.

We are no longer making repayments on our debt.

If you are telling me that Cam Schwab has failed to budget to pay 100% of the salary cap then I will run over there and through him out the door.

We dont know the extent of bidding that will occur in free agency so there is another unknown.

We know that the bidding war will be determined by how much room clubs have in the salary cap.

[The Chazz 4,077]

Andrew Walker! I would like him in a Dees jumper. Wont happen though!

I seriously question some views, with this one being at the top of the list.

The OP talked about how we should have a fair bit of money up our sleeve to throw at players during FA, yet the best name you can come up with is 1AW? If we are serious about spending big money on someone, they have to be a game breaker and Walker isn't one.

Why don't we look at some of the better players in the league and target them? We are crying out for a bona fide star, let's get him rather than 2nd and 3rd rate players (we have enough of them!).

[Waltham33 475]

We have been a basket case for a long time. Although we might have the money, what other incentive is there for big name players? Hopefully that changes

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

We know that we have had trouble over the past few years reaching the minimum salary cap payments. We know that the players are on massively front loaded contracts.

Your point about sponsorship is odd. We have just signed 2 major sponsors for the next few years. We have also just signed up some of the minor sponsor partners.

We have received a very large sum of money from the AFL from the TV rights deal.

We are no longer making repayments on our debt.

We dont know the extent of scope in the salary cap after front loading so its naive to just stay we have stacks of cash. And the free agency outcomes will be warped by the scope for GWS and GC participation.

I have explained the issue on sponsorship. We have only signed sponsorship late the piece with some of the contracts on ashort term basis. This was clearly later than budgeted. The AFL funding and the debt reduction comments are irrelevant because they have either been budgeted for or no longer exist. And I made no comment on CS.

[BAMF 4,421]

We dont know the extent of scope in the salary cap after front loading so its naive to just stay we have stacks of cash. And the free agency outcomes will be warped by the scope for GWS and GC participation.

I have explained the issue on sponsorship. We have only signed sponsorship late the piece with some of the contracts on ashort term basis. This was clearly later than budgeted. The AFL funding and the debt reduction comments are irrelevant because they have either been budgeted for or no longer exist. And I made no comment on CS.

We know that Cam Schwab said that we could match the Scully deal if we wanted to. Meaning we had bucket loads of room in the cap. We know since then we have signed Mitch Clark on a largely front loaded contract since. So each year we will be paying him considerably less. We are still offering front loaded contracts, which means we can always move to back ended contracts when room gets a bit tighter.

Where has the club stated that we were forced to shelve development programs due to the delay in sponsorship deals? Are these programs back up and running now that we have signed sponsors?

It was my understanding that the sponsors contract was standard 2 - 3 year deals? I'm happy to be proven wrong.

I fail to see how AFL funding is irrelevant. It's incoming money. Incoming money gets budgeted across the club. Paying 100% of the salary cap would have been budgeted for.

[The Chazz 4,077]

We know that Cam Schwab said that we could match the Scully deal if we wanted to. Meaning we had bucket loads of room in the cap. We know since then we have signed Mitch Clark on a largely front loaded contract since. So each year we will be paying him considerably less. We are still offering front loaded contracts, which means we can always move to back ended contracts when room gets a bit tighter.

Where has the club stated that we were forced to shelve development programs due to the delay in sponsorship deals? Are these programs back up and running now that we have signed sponsors?

It was my understanding that the sponsors contract was standard 2 - 3 year deals? I'm happy to be proven wrong.

I fail to see how AFL funding is irrelevant. It's incoming money. Incoming money gets budgeted across the club. Paying 100% of the salary cap would have been budgeted for.

I think the Webjet sponsorship is 12 months, with a 2 year option after that.

Other than that I agree with what you are saying.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

We know that Cam Schwab said that we could match the Scully deal if we wanted to. Meaning we had bucket loads of room in the cap. We know since then we have signed Mitch Clark on a largely front loaded contract since. So each year we will be paying him considerably less. We are still offering front loaded contracts, which means we can always move to back ended contracts when room gets a bit tighter.

Where has the club stated that we were forced to shelve development programs due to the delay in sponsorship deals? Are these programs back up and running now that we have signed sponsors?

It was my understanding that the sponsors contract was standard 2 - 3 year deals? I'm happy to be proven wrong.

I fail to see how AFL funding is irrelevant. It's incoming money. Incoming money gets budgeted across the club. Paying 100% of the salary cap would have been budgeted for.

And paying 100% of the Salary cap would have been premised on the basis of getting the AFL money as planned. I dont see how its adds an unplanned plus to the cashflow

Webjet is for one year with an option of further time.

At the time of the Polis issue it was reported in the Press that the difficulty in securing a second sponsor had resulted in certain proposed player development programs being shelved. If you dont have the money you cant spend the money. As it is we live hand to fist.

I would be careful with CS's comments in this regard. I underatand that the Club was working hard to hold Scully but on terms that were more affordable to MFC. He is hardly going to come out during those negotiations and publicly state we cant match the GWS offer. There was a game of media bluff going on which is tenuous basis for now assuming we have bucketloads of cash. However you are right that not signing Scully allowed us to sign Clark. But had we signed Scully on megabucks we were going to cause problems with the re negotiations of other players packages.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Boak re-signed with Port last year long term...

We don't need another big forward!! J.Brown wouldn't kick goals with delivery our forward line gets, we need mids only.

Dangerfield is the perfect option.

He fits the age bracket, is a game changer, a leader, is tough, kicks goals, tackles, everything. Perfect fit.

Looks like Boak &/or Patty, may be about the Free Agency timeframe?

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=geelong%20prepares%20for%20star%20chase%20with%20cash&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCoQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heraldsun.com.au%2Fafl%2Fmore-news%2Fgeelong-prepares-for-star-chase-with-cash-picks%2Fstory-e6frf9jf-1226352524240&ei=FGesT8eVJoPYrQeI1uCHAw&usg=AFQjCNFbc5OlucjYoC6QgsEiAUDKHWzOEg&cad=rja

GEELONG is amassing a trading armoury of salary capacity and draft picks to lure an interstate star, Patrick Dangerfield or Travis Boak.

The Cats' salary cap pressures will ease next year and they will go full tilt at improve their playing stocks.

The Herald Sun already has revealed Geelong's interest in Adelaide's Dangerfield. Port Adelaide's Boak - who, like Dangerfield, is from the Geelong region - is also in the premier's sights.

Cats players have taken less than market rates to maintain the quality of their list, and three flags in five years has been the pay-off.

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=geelong%20prepares%20for%20star%20chase%20with%20cash&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCoQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heraldsun.com.au%2Fafl%2Fmore-news%2Fgeelong-prepares-for-star-chase-with-cash-picks%2Fstory-e6frf9jf-1226352524240&ei=FGesT8eVJoPYrQeI1uCHAw&usg=AFQjCNFbc5OlucjYoC6QgsEiAUDKHWzOEg&cad=rja

[sylvinator 96]

We really should be trading for one star midfielder- Dangerfield or Boak are great examples.

We have so much salary cap it's not even funny. we've front-loaded contracts, we've got no decent senior players, our young players haven't come on and deserved the big pay-rises.

Let's get it done. We've got the picks to satisfy any team.

Next year, add Viney and Dangerfield/Boak to our midfield and suddenly our midfield is transformed, just like our forward line has been transformed with Clark

[Viney12 196]

Didn't Boak sign a 3 year extension taking him up until the end of 2013?

[dee-luded 2,959]

Didn't Boak sign a 3 year extension taking him up until the end of 2013?

• Michelangelo Rucci
  
• From: The Advertiser
  
• July 13, 2010
  

http://www.adelaiden...3-1225891081663

Boak, 22 next month (2010), has announced a contract extension with Port.

This has ended all speculation of a move to the new AFL franchise at the Gold Coast or a return to Victoria where he had overtures from Geelong and Essendon.

Boak has played 63 games with Port Adelaide since arriving at the start of 2007 after he was drafted by the Power from the Geelong Falcons with pick 5 in the 2006 NAB AFL Draft.

The length of Boak's extension cannot be revealed due to club policy.

Boak said he was thrilled to call Port Adelaide home for the upcoming years. (2010 ++)

[drdrake 3,194]

Didn't Boak sign a 3 year extension taking him up until the end of 2013?

I thought the same. What we have that only the Bulldogs, GWS and GC may be able to trump is early draft picks. A player and pick 20 will not get Dangerfield or Boak, both clubs will want at least a top 5 pick. Or a top 10 pick with a player but it would be a player and Adelaide aren't stupid to trade for a bloke coming off a knee.

[Jonesbag 487]

Who would want to come to melbourne the way we are atm? We are going to have to rebuild with these draft picks, make sure they are quality. Dont go give them to other clubs for players. If we can get 3 absolute quality mids in this draft then its problem solved, with moloney sylvia trengove grimes jones magner as our top mids then bring in high quality youngsters then next year looks alot brighter.

What if we give up a high pick for dangerfield and he goes and brakes his leg whilst the draft pick we were meant to have becomes the next judd or bartel?