GOODBYE MR. CHIP FRAWLEY

[daisycutter 29,627]

They did. But unfortunately that is not where he is going. The system is the system and by the looks of it we lose out. I think we are used to it. However, on a brighter note i believe Danger is to make a decision by the end of the weekend.

here's hoping clint

[SaberFang 7,151]

"It's most satisfying to be a one club player. I love the Melbourne Football Club."

- Robert Flower

[What 18,810]

"It's most satisfying to be a one club player. I love the Melbourne Football Club."

- Robert Flower

Nothing more needs to be said

[Goodvibes 3,596]

"It's most satisfying to be a one club player. I love the Melbourne Football Club."

- Robert Flower

We probably shouldn't link these two events but it's bloody hard not to. Good thing for Chip that he didn't plan on announcing his move tomorrow.

Edited October 2, 2014 by Goodvibes

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

don't know if it is true, but it was reported that freo made a much bigger offer to frawley which would have equated to band 1

even melbourne it seems offered more than what we think the dorks offered

yet it seems none of this is taken into consideration

I find it EXTREMELY hard to believe he would have left cash on the table like that.. Freo finished 4th FFS

it would certainly be against the trend of every other greedy [censored] in the comp

[SaberFang 7,151]

Really not sure what Chip would be thinking leaving over $1.5m on the table by going to Hawthorn instead of Fremantle. Arguably Freo and Geelong are closer to falling than the Hawks, but all the rumors pointed to Frawley wanting to secure his future but not at the expense of success.

For him to burn the Cats you'd have to think Hawthorn simply must have offered more. Why would he spend the year teeing up a deal with Rivers and Scott then choose to go to the Hawks for less money? He would have success at any of the 3, why not pick the one offering the most cash?

Bizarre if he's really prepared to sign for way unders just because Hawthorn are best placed right now to win again next year. Like, really... $650k x 6 or 7 years at Freo. $450k x 4 years at Hawks? Either the figures are way off or Frawley is dumb as a post. $3.9m vs $1.8m... it's not hard.

If his manager only scored him that after all his idiotic campaigning all year, he should be sacked. Jesse Hogan is being paid more and hasn't played a [censored] game!

Edited October 2, 2014 by Lamashtu

[LegsLeoncelli 162]

Slob Hutchison just said on Footy Classified that it's the club's fault for front end loading Frawley's last contract.

Surely slob realizes that restricted and unrestricted free agency is basically the same, because it's highly unlikely that a club will force a player into a contract to play in a team that they have just attempted to leave.

The sooner the AFL does away with that particular facade the better.

[John Crow Batty 8,871]

Chip must have flunked maths at school.

[the grint 71]

After tonight, this just makes me sick to my stomach. Disgraceful.

[SaberFang 7,151]

I'm confused by what Hutchy's argument is on Footy Classified. He talks about pick 3 being a fait accompli but that Melbourne are getting away with robbery and it's unfair on all the teams beneath us. Then he goes on to say him leaving is entirely our fault for front loading his contract.

Then he and Garry start arguing unintelligibly while Caro rabbits on about how the free agency system stinks. Barrett doesn't like it either. They all agree though that he hasn't left for money.

So... slightly confusing. What is Hutchy arguing exactly? He's well connected to the AFL but was he arguing we're getting pick 3 or we're not and it's our fault for front loading him (before the freaking rules were introduced for Christ's sake)?

[WERRIDEE 5,479]

For him to burn the Cats you'd have to think Hawthorn simply must have offered more. Why would he spend the year teeing up a deal with Rivers and Scott then choose to go to the Hawks for less money? He would have success at any of the 3, why not pick the one offering the most cash?

Bizarre if he's really prepared to sign for way unders just because Hawthorn are best placed right now to win again next year. Like, really... $650k x 6 or 7 years at Freo. $450k x 4 years at Hawks? Either the figures are way off or Frawley is dumb as a post. $3.9m vs $1.8m... it's not hard.

If his manager only scored him that after all his idiotic campaigning all year, he should be sacked. Jesse Hogan is being paid more and hasn't played a [censored] game!

Where is the 4 years at $450k coming from? In haven't seen it anywhere, was it on Footy Classified? It doesn't make sense the Hawks have the money and why wouldn't they be giving him 5 years like the rest have?

[deanox 9,945]

Someone needs to point out that front loading was the only sensible option we had.

At the time of that contact there was no such thing as free agency so we could not have foreseen the difference the final year of his contact would make.

The AFL impose a salary cap minimum which meant we HAD to front load so we would meet the cap despite having a crap playing list.

Until the start of this year, the MFC believed that Frawley would be a RSA as the system would average his contract.

His age alone should ensure we get band 1, as he is only half way through his career.

Edited October 2, 2014 by deanox

[Machsy 2,858]

That's right.

At the time, there was no FA, nor even mooted rules, so front loading contracts was in fact prudent.

[sue 9,107]

We just have to hope against hope that sense will prevail. But we know the AFL is more likely to bow to the big clubs especially when the media has whipped their supporters into a frenzy based on ignorance. I'm sure a poll on how many of those supporters know how the tier system works would show less than 1% did.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,400]

Really not sure what Chip would be thinking leaving over $1.5m on the table by going to Hawthorn instead of Fremantle. Arguably Freo and Geelong are closer to falling than the Hawks, but all the rumors pointed to Frawley wanting to secure his future but not at the expense of success.

For him to burn the Cats you'd have to think Hawthorn simply must have offered more. Why would he spend the year teeing up a deal with Rivers and Scott then choose to go to the Hawks for less money? He would have success at any of the 3, why not pick the one offering the most cash?

Bizarre if he's really prepared to sign for way unders just because Hawthorn are best placed right now to win again next year. Like, really... $650k x 6 or 7 years at Freo. $450k x 4 years at Hawks? Either the figures are way off or Frawley is dumb as a post. $3.9m vs $1.8m... it's not hard.

If his manager only scored him that after all his idiotic campaigning all year, he should be sacked. Jesse Hogan is being paid more and hasn't played a [censored] game!

So how much are we paying Hogan, 500k? Edited October 2, 2014 by Al's Demons

[Demoneyes 562]

Slob Hutchison just said on Footy Classified that it's the club's fault for front end loading Frawley's last contract.

Surely slob realizes that restricted and unrestricted free agency is basically the same, because it's highly unlikely that a club will force a player into a contract to play in a team that they have just attempted to leave.

The sooner the AFL does away with that particular facade the better.

And that is where the AFL should have stepped in and said "Right, you guys have given Frawley a 5 year deal worth 400K plus a year so therefore whether you pay more of that in the first couple of years doesn't matter. It should be based on the average.

[jnrmac 20,109]

Slob Hutchison just said on Footy Classified that it's the club's fault for front end loading Frawley's last contract.

Surely slob realizes that restricted and unrestricted free agency is basically the same, because it's highly unlikely that a club will force a player into a contract to play in a team that they have just attempted to leave.

The sooner the AFL does away with that particular facade the better.

Also, free agency came in after we front loaded his contract....

[nutbean 8,838]

Someone needs to point out that front loading was the only sensible option we had.

At the time of that contact there was no such thing as free agency so we could not have foreseen the difference the final year of his contact would make.

The AFL impose a salary cap minimum which meant we HAD to front load so we would meet the cap despite having a crap playing list.

Until the start of this year, the MFC believed that Frawley would be a RSA as the system would average his contract.

His age alone should ensure we get band 1, as he is only half way through his career.

apparently we are still front loading some contracts. other wise we struggle to meet the minimum cap requirements.

[demon-4-life 467]

Thank you for your contribution to this club Chip. Wish you all the best and all the success in the future.

[Dockett 32 1,239]

Sorry but simply cant buy $450k. Surely more. He's been shopping himself all year. Either someone would be telling fibs, which would definitely needed to be looked at, or he's been offered something after his playing days. ( Flimsy assistant coaching role for a few years to average the real earnings up, or the like. Third party deals are outlawed these days so they tell us). Just a personal opinion but reckon the life after footy card is linked to some these arrangements which should be added back to salary cap IMO)

[Lucifers Hero 40,010]

Denham is reporting: '...a day after he finally confirmed he was leaving the Demons, Frawley is understood to have accepted a longstanding four-year deal worth about $2.5 million from the Hawks...' If reliable, this will get us pick 3!

That is about $650K so Frawley has done fairly well for himself.

[Dockett 32 1,239]

What does "longstanding" mean?

[nutbean 8,838]

Really not sure what Chip would be thinking leaving over $1.5m on the table by going to Hawthorn instead of Fremantle. Arguably Freo and Geelong are closer to falling than the Hawks, but all the rumors pointed to Frawley wanting to secure his future but not at the expense of success.

For him to burn the Cats you'd have to think Hawthorn simply must have offered more. Why would he spend the year teeing up a deal with Rivers and Scott then choose to go to the Hawks for less money? He would have success at any of the 3, why not pick the one offering the most cash?

Bizarre if he's really prepared to sign for way unders just because Hawthorn are best placed right now to win again next year. Like, really... $650k x 6 or 7 years at Freo. $450k x 4 years at Hawks? Either the figures are way off or Frawley is dumb as a post. $3.9m vs $1.8m... it's not hard.

If his manager only scored him that after all his idiotic campaigning all year, he should be sacked. Jesse Hogan is being paid more and hasn't played a [censored] game!

Apparently you haven't learned the lesson of not listening to unsubstantiated rubbish. Frawley didn't burn Geelong, didn't spend the year teeing a deal with Rivers and Scott. I am sure that his manager has had discussions with Geelong and may well have got an offer months ago. But as I have been blabbing on about incessantly, why on earth would you make a commitment early in a free agency environment. You hold off committing until the last moment and let the bidding war escalate.

[Felix 92]

Denham is reporting: '...a day after he finally confirmed he was leaving the Demons, Frawley is understood to have accepted a longstanding four-year deal worth about $2.5 million from the Hawks...' If reliable, this will get us pick 3!

That is about $650K so Frawley has done fairly well for himself.

Fingers crossed.

[Pennant St Dee 13,252]

What does "longstanding" mean?

I have longstanding pain as a Dees supporter which has lasted since 2006