16 hours ago, Demons11 said:

You’re kidding mate.

He is still better than any fwd we have. 

I haven't seen him do it consistantly for 18 months. So you would have him in a heart beat? to rub all his bad habits on and off the field onto our players.

Please.

#finished

PS. The guy doesnt train.

4 minutes ago, Win4theAges said:

I haven't seen him do it consistantly for 18 months. So you would have him in a heart beat? to rub all his bad habits on and off the field onto our players.

Please.

#finished

PS. The guy doesnt train.

He was All Australian captain last year and kicked 60 goals in 19 games.  

Not bad for a bloke who doesn’t train. 

Sydney also have the best culture in the AFL

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Bigger BS.

Re writing history is an art form for some.

I have never to my memory denigrated a player, other than this bloke, who has left us for greater financial reward and there have been plenty over the years.

This bloke is a scumbag. His lying is there for all to see. To our dying President, to the members when he said I am staying and want to be a one club player, to his team mates, even to the public at large. when he was interviewed at Sydney Airport with his family and said he was just having a look around and then the next day a video was being sold at outlets with him in his GWS gear. We know the video wasn’t made that night. I suspect he even lied to GWS about his injury to get to Hawthorn just  like he did with that terrible knee injury he had, which disappeared when he left us for GWS.

To me this bloke is scum.

 

Well said Mr. Leg

Sydney have to reap what they have sown. A 10 year contract. No compassion from me there.

But I would take a match-winning, 6 feet 5 inches, quick, goal-kicking, freakish super-star any time. Yes, there are times when he is unbelievably selfish and yet there are times when he is ruthlessly selfless. He draws attention to himself and is also able to bring team mates into the game.  Is he past his best? Yes. But 85% of Buddy is still about 120% of other footballers.

The only question for me would be cost.

1 hour ago, Demons11 said:

He was All Australian captain last year and kicked 60 goals in 19 games.  

Not bad for a bloke who doesn’t train. 

Sydney also have the best culture in the AFL

Please elaborate @Demons11...

2 hours ago, Demons11 said:

He was All Australian captain last year and kicked 60 goals in 19 games.  

Not bad for a bloke who doesn’t train. 

Sydney also have the best culture in the AFL

Yeah but look what has happened to the Swans now.   Clarko is no fool.

Read the age article guys. He'll be 33 to start next season with 3 years and 4 million dollars worth of contract to go.

Even if the Swans agree to give him up for no cost in a trade and pay 500k a season so they've got salary cap room you're looking at 2.5M/3 so over 800k a year.

I know it's a different sport but LeBron James is a different level of superstar even from the Buddy level and he's 34 and can't do what he used to do and the Lakers are paying for it.

Ageing superstars are very difficult to fit in to a side in a way that works for everyone. Geelong suffered by being too accommodating to Ablett last year and now he's back in a limited half forward role he and the team are vastly improved. To get a similar result out of Buddy is even harder given he's more of a structural player as a tall. You could do it but to make it value for money you'd need the money to be massively less than it is.

48 minutes ago, Maldonboy38 said:

Sydney have to reap what they have sown. A 10 year contract. No compassion from me there.

But I would take a match-winning, 6 feet 5 inches, quick, goal-kicking, freakish super-star any time. Yes, there are times when he is unbelievably selfish and yet there are times when he is ruthlessly selfless. He draws attention to himself and is also able to bring team mates into the game.  Is he past his best? Yes. But 85% of Buddy is still about 120% of other footballers.

The only question for me would be cost.

Out of curiosity ..what's your offer then

At present the cost is around $1M for each of four years. Swans would trade him tomorrow at that price and probably throw in a second round draft pick.

Just now, DeeSpencer said:

Read the age article guys. He'll be 33 to start next season with 3 years and 4 million dollars worth of contract to go.

Who else do they have on they're list that might interest us...  instead of that  OLD  Budster.

This guy is suggesting that you would need to pay the Swans with draft picks to take Buddy.

Boy is he off the mark.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-2019-toms-take-why-the-sydney-swans-and-lance-franklin-should-explore-a-trade/news-story/722955f723ec269ba3da0382e8cf6815

Mind you he does suggest Buddy would need to take  a pay cut as part of the deal...(durrr.... why)

4 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

My apologies Dame Gaga.  HWSNBN refers to Scully in the posts suggesting we should have made a play for him.

That is a good point re Buddy being private and this is probably all media click bait.

Edit: HWSNBN= He Who Shall Not Be Named when Scully became a .persona non grata

Thanks for taking the trouble in making it clear you were responding to the posts about Scully. Perhaps I wasn't clear as well. I did understand what you meant. I just wanted to make the observation there was no point in pursuing a player who was not interested in playing for our team, similar to what you made about S. We do not know what Buddy's desires are. He may like to do an Ablett and return to Hawthorn, but we can only speculate. He may want to stay at the Swans because they have looked after him well. As I said earlier, he does not share much of himself, so we do not know what he will want to do.

On 4/17/2019 at 2:30 PM, TGR said:

Hawthorn supporters (with Buddy) and Geelong supporters (with Ablett), didn't get stupendously irate like MFC supporters with Scully.  If we had calmed down to a rational level (a kid was offered the deal of a lifetime that we would have encouraged our kids to accept; and the club forced him to lie essentially), and our medical team was on par with Hawthorn's, Scully would have come back.  No doubt whatsoever.

Probably because they were champions of the club, not a fly-in fly-out player who gave the bare minimum service.

I'd have him back if we needed a toilet cleaned.

17 minutes ago, Supermercado said:

Probably because they were champions of the club, not a fly-in fly-out player who gave the bare minimum service.

I'd have him back if we needed a toilet cleaned.

... plumbing the depths, Super-m.

 

By the way,  would you hire him,  or just tip him,  head first, in the deep end ? ?

This all started as a hypothetical from Robert Murphy on SEN about 4 days ago. 

I heard him talking about it this morning having a big laugh...

4 hours ago, DV8 said:

Yeah but look what has happened to the Swans now.   Clarko is no fool.

What’s happened them? They are having 1 down year and playing a heap of kids.  

The fact buddy is on 1m is not hurting them.  1m is f..k all in footy.  

I wish the Dees bad years were as good as the Swans. 

Edited April 18, 20196 yr by Demons11

4 hours ago, DV8 said:

Yeah but look what has happened to the Swans now.   Clarko is no fool.

Yeah you’re right the Hawks are flying now.  

They are paying 850 a year for Jaeger, what a great investment. 

1 hour ago, Demons11 said:

What’s happened them? They are having 1 down year and playing a heap of kids.  

The fact buddy is on 1m is not hurting them.  1m is f..k all in footy.  

I wish the Dees bad years were as good as the Swans. 

The Swans have been a better managed club compared to us,  over recent decades.

 

Buddy has been good for maintaining gate turnover...  but not for silverware.

I think he detracts from their potency,  as a team.

I think a few of us choked on our cornflakes at the beginning when the Swans gave a 9 year, somewhat back-ended $-wise deal to Buddy. At the time they didn't have salary cap to spare after signing Tippett, so they had to back end. It was a financially risky deal at the time, that after the loss of the COLA now looks like dotcom boom silliness.

The Swans set themselves up for the 2020-2022 financial troubles by leaving that $3.9Mil to pay in those years. There was never much doubt that, no matter what a great player Buddy is (was?), that he was never going to be the 'rip a game apart, week in/week out' type in his mid 30's that he was in his mid 20's.

There is not a club in the land that would take Buddy for 3 years for those $. Not a chance. The only chance would be if the Swans were to pay a substantial part ($500k+), and even then I'm not convinced anyone would bite at Buddy for 3 years at ~$800k. He is now an impact player who is likely to become even more sporadic in output.

No thanks in answer to the original question.

And the warning for any clubs thinking of offering 10 year deals to anyone in this risky game is... DON'T.

Just as an aside, one of the biggest problems hitting the Swans now is recruitment and retention of mid tier players. Jake Niall saw this coming in 2017 when he wrote 'The combination of no COLA and the Tippett-Franklin deals (which prompted COLA’s removal) means the Swans can’t pick up many mid-range players from other clubs.' 

Edited April 18, 20196 yr by Aus in Engerland
put bit not bite - minor edit

How many strikes does he have?

6 hours ago, FireInTheBelly said:

How many strikes does he have?

More than 1 when he left the City of Melbourne...

I hope he kicks 8 tomorrow night and hurts some Tiger bodies along the way.

8 hours ago, FireInTheBelly said:

How many strikes does he have?

300, and he's only got 75 left before the authorities clamp down hard!

 

12 hours ago, Aus in Engerland said:

Just as an aside, one of the biggest problems hitting the Swans now is recruitment and retention of mid tier players. Jake Niall saw this coming in 2017 when he wrote 'The combination of no COLA and the Tippett-Franklin deals (which prompted COLA’s removal) means the Swans can’t pick up many mid-range players from other clubs.' 

I can't help thinking that when the effects of this really starts to bite, the AFL will somehow manage to find a way to give salary cap relief to the Swans. Maybe indirectly, or maybe they'll brazenly erase the $$$$ left over when Buddy hangs up the boots.

On COLA, the concept was okay, but the AFL didn't think it through. Instead of allowing normal contract negotiations and then the AFL paying each player 10% on top, they let the clubs stockpile the collective 10% to splurge on one or two players. (The Swans can't really complain about the end of COLA, though, as it was them that tried to warp the system.)

33 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

300, and he's only got 75 left before the authorities clamp down hard!

Part of the whole COLA deal. The only way people can deal with living there.

20 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Out of curiosity ..what's your offer then

At present the cost is around $1M for each of four years. Swans would trade him tomorrow at that price and probably throw in a second round draft pick.

Good question - difficult to answer.

You wouldn't pay him more than $500K now and that is not going to happen, unless the Swans paid him $2m in a single season which leaves less in the following years. Not sure if it is within current AFL Player's Association rules to change the contract like that mid-term.

We won't end up with him, but he remains effective wherever he plays. Absolute gun.