Jump to content

Wait for this to be rorted!

george_on_the_outer
george_on_the_outer
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Talk that Collingwood are working out a settlement to rid them of Beams and clear up cap space for this year and next. Apparently this could free up $1.5m

  • Quote
    •  
    22 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

    Talk that Collingwood are working out a settlement to rid them of Beams and clear up cap space for this year and next. Apparently this could free up $1.5m

    Is it any different to the Lamumba situation, where we were denied any 'get out'?

  • Quote
    18 minutes ago, FireInTheBennelly said:

    Is it any different to the Lamumba situation, where we were denied any 'get out'?

    Yes, our president doesn't have a radio show where he can s*** all over the AFL management if he doesn't get his way.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
     
    41 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

    Yes, our president doesn't have a radio show where he can s*** all over the AFL management if he doesn't get his way.

    Hah-hah! Another slice of accuracy from MR!

  • Quote

    AFL also later clarified that the contract of any free agent move must be paid out in full even if the player retired, this doesn't apply to any other contracts, it started with buddy but now applies to all free agents 

    Edited by Garbo

  • Quote

    Still don’t see the issue.

    We paid out Colin Garland when both parties agreed to terms.

  • Quote
    21 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

    Still don’t see the issue.

    We paid out Colin Garland when both parties agreed to terms.

    Did he free up $1.5m space?

  • Quote
    17 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

    Still don’t see the issue.

    We paid out Colin Garland when both parties agreed to terms.

    I think the difference is that while there is a formula for paying out injured players as to how much goes into which salary cap it gets murky with long term contracts such as Franklin. Not sure about Beams but it is a discretionary exercise for the AFL.

    Rance was of course different. Whatever he was paid went into the salary cap. May have been some discussion over amounts into different year's caps

  • Quote
    •  
    3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

    Will the Salary Cap survive this issue, long term?

    I must be dumb - I still cannot see the rort here.

    If player A has 2 years left on his contract at $500K per year. He retires and club pay him out $250K for this year.

    Surely the club has the right to add $250K to their payment purse this year and $500K next year?

    Could someone please explain the issue here? As I said, I must be dumb

  • Quote

    8 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

    Did he free up $1.5m space?

    Was he due to be paid 1.5m?

    6 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

    I think the difference is that while there is a formula for paying out injured players as to how much goes into which salary cap it gets murky with long term contracts such as Franklin. Not sure about Beams but it is a discretionary exercise for the AFL.

    Rance was of course different. Whatever he was paid went into the salary cap. May have been some discussion over amounts into different year's caps

    The issue with free agents - most particularly restricted free agents - is that you could offer them a huge contract with no intention of ever paying it so their existing team doesn't match it. So for cap purposes that amount has to be locked in to stop that loop hole. 

    To pay someone out in different years they have to stay on the list (main or rookie). You can't just kick money to future years without holding a list spot. Someone like Rance retiring on his own accord will have the contract changed for the year in which they retired and that should be it. Rance has a list spot for this year, he's settled on an amount to get paid for his 2 months or so work, maybe with some extra for being a loyal servant and that's done. Beams is likely more complicated because he seems to have physical and mental issues as well as possibly concerns over behaviour, but if they reach a settlement to pay him less to not play then that's fine.

    5 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

    Will the Salary Cap survive this issue, long term?

    Yes. It's called a salary cap, if players are retiring and agreeing to part ways with money owed (in return for retiring) then they are giving up salary. Logical that the cap reflects what players have agreed to settle for rather than hold clubs to a salary that will never be paid.

  • Quote
    7 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

    I must be dumb - I still cannot see the rort here.

    If player A has 2 years left on his contract at $500K per year. He retires and club pay him out $250K for this year.

    Surely the club has the right to add $250K to their payment purse this year and $500K next year?

    Could someone please explain the issue here? As I said, I must be dumb

    You watch Clubs will back end a final contract to an older player, and extra cap will be available for the following year. 
    the Power Clubs will rort this black and Blue

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    6 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

     

    Yes. It's called a salary cap, if players are retiring and agreeing to part ways with money owed (in return for retiring) then they are giving up salary. Logical that the cap reflects what players have agreed to settle for rather than hold clubs to a salary that will never be paid.

    You are missing the point. 
    Clubs will be writing ✍️ contracts for older players with this scenario as the Template. 

  • Quote

    That was my point DS. 

    The Pies poach a star on big coin back ended, but when it turns sour they aim to ditch the player so as to use the coin elsewhere.

    I would prefer the AFL not agree to this as it clearly favours larger clubs

  • Quote
    10 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

    That was my point DS. 

    The Pies poach a star on big coin back ended, but when it turns sour they aim to ditch the player so as to use the coin elsewhere.

    I would prefer the AFL not agree to this as it clearly favours larger clubs

    Careful rorting could create a huge war chest for clubs, if this goes through, look out. 
    Anyone over 28-29 will be on huge back ended coin

  • Quote

    1 hour ago, Neil Crompton said:

    I must be dumb - I still cannot see the rort here.

    If player A has 2 years left on his contract at $500K per year. He retires and club pay him out $250K for this year.

    Surely the club has the right to add $250K to their payment purse this year and $500K next year?

    Could someone please explain the issue here? As I said, I must be dumb

    The rort:

    "How are we going to lure de Goey from the Pies? They're offering him 5 mil over 6 years. And WCE are offering 6 mil over 7. We can't match that."

    "We'll offer 12 mil over 8 years. His management won't be able to sign fast enough."

    "Sure, but we can't afford that!"

    "No, but we can afford 4 mil over 8 years. We'll back end the 12 mil, and when he's old and useless we'll pay out half a mil and won't have to wear the rest on our salary cap."

     

    ---

    If "player A" is Alex Neal-Bullen, no one is going to upset at us getting an extra 250K back on our cap. People will get upset when "player A" is a star player that clubs will throw ridiculous money at without having to live with the consequences.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
    12 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

    The rort:

    "How are we going to lure de Goey from the Pies? They're offering him 5 mil over 6 years. And WCE are offering 6 mil over 7. We can't match that."

    "We'll offer 12 mil over 8 years. His management won't be able to sign fast enough."

    "Sure, but we can't afford that!"

    "No, but we can afford 4 mil over 8 years. We'll back end the 12 mil, and when he's old and useless we'll pay out half a mil and won't have to wear the rest on our salary cap."

     

    ---

    If "player A" is Alex Neal-Bullen, no one is going to upset at us getting an extra 250K back on our cap. People will get upset when "player A" is a star player that clubs will throw ridiculous money at without having to live with the consequences.

    Absolutely. It will become the new standard in writing contracts. 
    suprised it has taken this long to become an issue 

  • Quote
    1 hour ago, Moonshadow said:

    Did he free up $1.5m space?

    Again, that's irrelevant.

    Free agents are a different case and, as has already been clarified, Sydney is not allowed to pay out Franklyn's contract early and his entire salary will be included in the cap.

    This is simple list management - if a players wants to quit or the club wants them out, you pay them out.  I imagine if KK succumbs to his concussion injuries this year and decides to retire, do you honestly expect our club to pay out the remaining years of his contract in full or would you want to see a reduced settlement??

    Jumping at shadows.

  • Quote
    30 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

    The rort:

    "How are we going to lure de Goey from the Pies? They're offering him 5 mil over 6 years. And WCE are offering 6 mil over 7. We can't match that."

    "We'll offer 12 mil over 8 years. His management won't be able to sign fast enough."

    "Sure, but we can't afford that!"

    "No, but we can afford 4 mil over 8 years. We'll back end the 12 mil, and when he's old and useless we'll pay out half a mil and won't have to wear the rest on our salary cap."

     

    ---

    If "player A" is Alex Neal-Bullen, no one is going to upset at us getting an extra 250K back on our cap. People will get upset when "player A" is a star player that clubs will throw ridiculous money at without having to live with the consequences.

    Free agent contracts are locked in to the cap to stop that situation happening.

    Your example is also missing about 7.5 million dollars worth of money! 

    Players can only get paid what goes in the cap, so whilst managers might agree to longer term deals like Buddy's and some back-loading of pay to join a good club (like Tom Lynch's) they aren't going to sign deals that will pay their clients peanuts and see them retire with huge sums of money unpaid.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

    You are missing the point. 
    Clubs will be writing ✍️ contracts for older players with this scenario as the Template. 

    Go offer Max Gawn a new contract extension at 500k a year for 5 years and then 1.5 million a year when he's 33. His manager will laugh in your face.

    Players aren't going to defer their payments until they are older and likely to retire any more than any of us would if our bosses suddenly wanted to pay us half as much now and the rest if we still are up to working at 70.

  • Quote

    16 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

    Go offer Max Gawn a new contract extension at 500k a year for 5 years and then 1.5 million a year when he's 33. His manager will laugh in your face.

    Players aren't going to defer their payments until they are older and likely to retire any more than any of us would if our bosses suddenly wanted to pay us half as much now and the rest if we still are up to working at 70.

    They will do it. Contracts will be longer

    Year 1 Front loaded and then progressively Back ended for a “Final” contract  some players will see the contract through, they win, but most won’t

     

     

  • Quote

    The AFL has set a precedent already in these situations that the contract still counts towards the salary cap.  It would be a stretch, even for them, to not at least count his entire salary for this year.  After that becomes more debatable. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Does anyone seriously think the AFL will hold the Swans to all of Buddy's contract if he retires early? Of course they say they will, but as we know, Gil is a fluid fella when it comes to rules.

  • Quote
    •  
    6 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

    The rort:

    "How are we going to lure de Goey from the Pies? They're offering him 5 mil over 6 years. And WCE are offering 6 mil over 7. We can't match that."

    "We'll offer 12 mil over 8 years. His management won't be able to sign fast enough."

    "Sure, but we can't afford that!"

    "No, but we can afford 4 mil over 8 years. We'll back end the 12 mil, and when he's old and useless we'll pay out half a mil and won't have to wear the rest on our salary cap."

    Your scenario on page 1 was feasible but this is fantasy land. If I'm the player I demand you pay me the money when I'm old and useless.  It's a contract, I'm fine with spending 3 years in the rehab group on full pay.  You can delist me but you have to pay me out the full whack.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    15 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

    Your scenario on page 1 was feasible but this is fantasy land. If I'm the player I demand you pay me the money when I'm old and useless.  It's a contract, I'm fine with spending 3 years in the rehab group on full pay.  You can delist me but you have to pay me out the full whack.

    ... or promise me an assistant coaching role or set me up with a good job outside of football, which won't come from the salary cap.

  • Quote

    • Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • PREVIEW: Essendon

      As the focus of the AFL moves exclusively to South Australia for Gather Round, the question is raised as to what are we going to get from the  Melbourne Football Club this weekend? Will it be a repeat of the slop fest of the last three weeks that have seen the team score a measly 174 points and concede 310 or will a return to the City of Churches and the scene where they performed at their best in 2024 act as a wakeup call and bring them out of their early season reverie? 
      Or will the sleepy Dees treat their fans to a reenactment of their lazy effort from the first Gather Round of two years ago when they allowed the Bombers to trample all over them on a soggy and wet Adelaide Oval? The two examples from above tell us how fickle form can be in football. Last year, a committed group of players turned up in Adelaide with a businesslike mindset. They had a plan, went in confidently and hard for the football and kicked winning scores against both home teams in a difficult environment for visitors. And they repeated that sort of effort later in the season when they played Essendon at the MCG. Unfortunately, performances like these went against the grain of what Melbourne has been producing from virtually midway through 2024 and extending right through to the present day. This is a game between two clubs who have faltered over the past couple of years because their disposal efficiency is appalling. Neither of them can hit the side of a barn door but history tells us that every once in a while such teams have their lucky days or come up against an opponent in even worse shape and hence, one of them will come up trumps in this match.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Essendon

      Facing the very real and daunting prospect of starting the season with five straight losses, the Demons head to South Australia for the annual Gather Round, where they’ll take on the Bombers in search of their first win of the year. Who comes in, and who comes out?

        • Thumb Down
      • 258 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 05

      Gather Round is here, kicking off with a Thursday night blockbuster as Adelaide faces Geelong. The Crows will be out for redemption after a controversial loss last week. Saturday starts with the Magpies taking on the Swans. Collingwood will be eager to cement their spot in the top eight, while Sydney is hot on their heels. In the Barossa Valley, two rising sides go head-to-head in a fascinating battle to prove they're the real deal. Later, Carlton and West Coast face off at Adelaide Oval, both desperate to notch their first win of the season. The action then shifts to Norwood, where the undefeated Lions will aim to keep their streak alive against the Bulldogs. Sunday’s games begin in the Barossa with Richmond up against Fremantle. In Norwood, the Saints will be looking to take a scalp when they come up against the Giants. The round concludes with a fiery rematch of last year's semi-final, as the Hawks seek revenge for their narrow loss to Port Adelaide. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

      • 17 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Geelong

      There was a time in the second quarter of the game at the Cattery on Friday afternoon when the Casey Demons threatened to take the game apart against the Cats. The Demons had been well on top early but were struggling to convert their ascendancy over the ground until Tom Fullarton’s burst of three goals in the space of eight minutes on the way to a five goal haul and his best game for the club since arriving from Brisbane at the end of 2023. He was leading, marking and otherwise giving his opponents a merry dance as Casey grabbed a three goal lead in the blink of an eye. Fullarton has now kicked ten goals in Casey’s three matches and, with Melbourne’s forward conversion woes, he is definitely in with a chance to get his first game with the club in next week’s Gather Round in Adelaide. Despite the tall forward’s efforts - he finished with 19 disposals and eight marks and had four hit outs as back up to Will Verrall in the second half - it wasn’t enough as Geelong reigned in the lead through persistent attacks and eventually clawed their way to the lead early in the last and held it till they achieved the end aim of victory.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Geelong

      I was disappointed to hear Goody say at his post match presser after the team’s 39 point defeat against Geelong that "we're getting high quality entry, just poor execution" because Melbourne’s problems extend far beyond that after its 0 - 4 start to the 2025 football season. There are clearly problems with poor execution, some of which were evident well before the current season and were in play when the Demons met the Cats in early May last year and beat them in a near top-of-the-table clash that saw both sides sitting comfortably in the top four after round eight. Since that game, the Demons’ performances have been positively Third World with only five wins in 19 games with a no longer majestic midfield and a dysfunctional forward line that has become too easy for opposing coaches to counter. This is an area of their game that is currently being played out as if they were all completely panic-stricken.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 04

      Round 4 kicks off with a blockbuster on Thursday night as traditional rivals Collingwood and Carlton clash at the MCG, with the Magpies looking to assert themselves as early-season contenders and the Blues seeking their first win of the season. Saturday opens with Gold Coast hosting Adelaide, a key test for the Suns as they aim to back up their big win last week, while the Crows will be looking to keep their perfect record intact. Reigning wooden spooners Richmond have the daunting task of facing reigning premiers Brisbane at the ‘G and the Lions will be eager to reaffirm their premiership credentials after a patchy start. Saturday night sees North Melbourne take on Sydney at Marvel Stadium, with the Swans looking to build on their first win of the season last week against a rebuilding Roos outfit. Sunday’s action begins with GWS hosting West Coast at ENGIE Stadium, a game that could get ugly very early for the visitors. Port Adelaide vs St Kilda at Adelaide Oval looms as a interesting clash, with both clubs form being very hard to read. The round wraps up with Fremantle taking on the Western Bulldogs at Optus Stadium in what could be a fierce contest between two sides with top-eight ambitions. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

      • 273 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All