Surely it isn't over 9 years. It's not like they can front load it as they already have several other players in long term and high wage deals. Reid, hannenbury, Tippett etc. I wouldn't believe this story yet. However if it is, we should throw pick 2 at them for Parker and bird, as well as a pick from them. Make some big offers.

It just shows the club ethics thoug doesn't it- sign players on deals worth less than market price promising team success, keep all of them together, and as soon as a chance comes along, blow that saved money on a player with marketability. I really hope it blows up in there face as much as I've respected the swans over the past decade. This goes against the fabric of the game and shows free agency as purely a system for the rich to get richer, and the poor to get poorer!

How quickly can the "Bloods" culture disintegrate now that Roos is gone?

Not just Roos, but Bolten as a player.

By Sydney adding Tippett and Buddy they risk losing Hannebury, Rohan, Jetta, Parker or another young talent down the track.

Why should players stick together just to fund big money players like Tippett and Buddy?

For one, what precedent does that set by the club in respect of lower tier players that could be on more at other clubs?

This isn't a good move by Sydney, Tippett wasn't a good move and neither is Buddy, it will break their culture down in the long term.

Not just Roos, but Bolten as a player.

By Sydney adding Tippett and Buddy they risk losing Hannebury, Rohan, Jetta, Parker or another young talent down the track.

Why should players stick together just to fund big money players like Tippett and Buddy?

For one, what precedent does that set by the club in respect of lower tier players that could be on more at other clubs?

This isn't a good move by Sydney, Tippett wasn't a good move and neither is Buddy, it will break their culture down in the long term.

We can only hope you are correct

Probably not that different to collingwood paying cloke so much. All of a sudden all their quality players arnt so settled. If it happens, good, means more opportunities for us.

The Swans will have the second best forward line in the league

The Swans will have the second best forward line in the league

Jesse Hogan > The Universe

The Swans will have the second best forward line in the league

Who has the first?

Don't understand why there's so much hand wringing going on over this...

Related outcomes from this include:

-Adams will now stay at GWS, so the little chance we had has now completely gone

-GWS still have that money to throw around at other free agents, including some we'd be chasing

-Mummy now on the trade table, even further lessens the value of Jamar and Spencer who we were rumoured to be offering up

-Hawthorn likely to get a very high compo pick for Buddy, pushing our second round pick and any pick we get through trade after about pick 9 back

Buddy going to GWS would have been good for us.

You got the analogy wrong (hand wringing = angst, as mentioned), but your points are generally spot on. This move is bad for Melbourne.

GWS now has more money to try to attract the same players we're going to be interested in (GWS has money, we have Roos and the city of Melbourne. That's the true material difference between the clubs right now, IMO).

They're also more likely to be able to keep any players they were possibly going to lose, such as Adams, given they now have more money to up their offers.

The Mumford one I'm not so sure about, given the rumours all seem to link him to Hawthorn (seemingly as part of a trade, and to replace Bailey).

One thing that particularly irritates me about this is that the AFL coaches kicked up a stink when we applied for another Priority Pick (i know we don't really deserve one) being the worst side in the AFL for years, which the Priority Pick may help as get off the bottom and perhaps win more than 2 games and help us be competitive, ultimately bringing more money to the clubs we play. Which the AFL rejected our application.Yet they let this rubbish go on, with Sydney ( a consistent top 4 side) being able to secure Tippett and now Buddy (perhaps) through the use of this extra million dollars they receive in the salary cap due to "expensive living" in Sydney, all approved by the AFL. Absolute joke.

Right on brother. We couldn't even get a one off "being shite" allowance. It feels like the top four is almost settled before the season begins proper. It may well be time for AD to resign. IMO we will look back on what's happening here and pinpoint it as the moment the competition lost its "competitive"

Jesse Hogan > The Universe

Unless Jesse Hogan belongs to a different universe than ours, this statement is impossible.

Unless Jesse Hogan belongs to a different universe than ours, this statement is impossible.

Jesse Hogan is a black hole that is about to devour the competition.

This time next year there might not be an AFL, scary thought!

Go JESSE!

GWS backed off due to 'due diligence'. If they had used that yardstick a couple of years ago they wouldn't have wasted millions to spite Melbourne and then could have outbid other teams when the time came. Just sayin...

Busy at work today and when I came up for air Buddy was on his way north but instead of GWS, it's Sydney.

A bit of karma there seeing GWS getting snookered by another club but it's sad for the competition.

One day, clubs will die as a result of this.

Removing Sydney's salary cap concessions would have to be done over 2-3 years, it can't be done feasibly in one season. The AFL needs to act.

Let's not forget that there is nothing stopping them from doing exactly the same year after year. Players retire from all clubs every year but talk about having the luxury to trade in a superstar every year. Not bad.

Busy at work today and when I came up for air Buddy was on his way north but instead of GWS, it's Sydney.

A bit of karma there seeing GWS getting snookered by another club but it's sad for the competition.

One day, clubs will die as a result of this.

- yes it's good to see GWS get beaten but who is their next target?

- scary thing is Hawks have 1.1mil spare in their cap

- as previously stated hopefully this forces out some of their mids

- clubs won't die, Geelongs module has still been the most successful of recent times

As for the AFL acting on it, surely you're kidding?

As for the AFL acting on it, surely you're kidding?

Kidding, dreaming, thinking out loud. Not sure who did it but I thought I read the AFL commission was presented with reasons why we shouldn't receive a priority pick. Then they should also be presented with a case against Sydney. As supporters of the game we can cop the Suns and Giants getting allowances in its many forms but timeframes must apply. Two flags in recent years to the Swans says it all.

Edited October 1, 201311 yr by Al's Demons

"But sources at the Hawks and rival clubs suggest the deal may be almost double that at $10 million over nine years"

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/hawthorn-star-lance-franklin-set-to-join-sydney-swans-after-gws-withdraws-offer/story-fn69a32t-1226730745667

What I don't get is the 9 year deal for a player who was born in January of 1987... that means he will be contracted until he is 36 years old... and there are not too many Fletchers or Tucks in this game.

And while I'm going think back to 2004, Jonathan Brown rushed into an all-in at 3/4 time grabbed someone in a headlock from behind then flung them to the ground and landed on top of them. This incident could have turned out worse than it did. Brown was charged with rough play but got off because play had technically stopped. That sort of crap is for courts off law not independent sporting tribunals. Then a few years later Barry Hall strikes Matt Maguire off the ball and also got off under dubious circumstances.

My neighbour who is well placed with the swans just told me he couldn't say anything on Saturday but he was told last week Buddy had already signed (apparently he signed last week, rules what rules?).

As I have said above equalisation is just a farce the AFL does not care about clubs like ours and they should just say so instead of pretending this is all for the good of the competition.

Let's not forget that there is nothing stopping them from doing exactly the same year after year. Players retire from all clubs every year but talk about having the luxury to trade in a superstar every year. Not bad.

Especially since the Free Agency concept is now a moveable feast.

This is very dissappointing, in a year where the AFL is allegedly commiting to equalisation it beggars belief that Sydney can afford to have Goodes, Tippett, Franklin, Kennedy, Hanneberry, Jack, Richards, McVeigh, Malcevski, Reid, O'Keefe, Jetta and Shaw all fitting into the same cap that we fit our players. Something is broken, there is no way a premiership team should be able to afford to keep all its required players together without a hint of any leaving while adding the two most sort after KPFs in the AFL in two years. Even if they pay the maximum cap with their allowance we are still paying 90% to our team which won 2 games this year! Also there is no way that Bolton (as a veteran part of his salary would have been outside the cap right?), White, Mattner, Morton and Mumford were getting paid 1.1million + 4 draftee contracts this year. Each of them would have to be on at least 345k. This seems so wrong.

What I don't get is the 9 year deal for a player who was born in January of 1987... that means he will be contracted until he is 36 years old... and there are not too many Fletchers or Tucks in this game.

something seems suss here

i would like to see the contract T&C's

They already have a lot of premiership (and dual premiership) players from 2 very recent flags.

Then on top of that they paid more than anyone else could afford for Tippett to walk to them in a draft.

How can $1.4 million a year still be available in the salary cap?