Kane is teeing off

about Trac's contract?

The bloke really is so predictable these days.

Yep, its a long contract, yep, its worth lots of money. He would be on teh radio right now saying, its a worry that Petracca signed only for 2 years.. Melbourne should have put a long term offer to him.. Melbourne are on notice .. blah blah blah.

A couple in the media right now are embarrassing themselves with their rhetoric aimed at Melbourne. 

 

 

Just now, Demon3 said:

The bloke really is so predictable these days.

Yep, its a long contract, yep, its worth lots of money. He would be on teh radio right now saying, its a worry that Petracca signed only for 2 years.. Melbourne should have put a long term offer to him.. Melbourne are on notice .. blah blah blah.

A couple in the media right now are embarrassing themselves with their rhetoric aimed at Melbourne. 

 

 

Exactly he's the sports equivalent of a shock jock - his only aim is to get people listening/watching. It's clickbait for radio.

Back off, his parent's christened him Kane... he's been cursed since birth.

Did he carry on when Port gave Ollie a 6 year contract until he is 32?

No!

And I bet if Port had secured Petracca's signature on a 7 year contract until he is 33 he would say it was a great coup.

Cornes is a dope.

Not defending Kane but I'm not a fan of the long term contracts.  In this case I think it's probably ok because right now it builds stability and adds to the good news story snowball for us and he's (reportedly) being paid much less than other clubs would be prepared to pay him.  Having him locked away for life does so much for membership, for being a destination club and to put to bed the rumours that would otherwise have plagued Melbourne and Petracca his whole career.  But that's probably my Melbourne Bias talking.

Other than Dusty, there's not too many 7+ year deals that have worked for the club and plenty of them that have gone the other way (or at least so far) e.g. Grundy, Kelly etc.

Hope to the (Demon) Gods that it works out for us / him.

Oh no, Karen Cornes is having another cry.  We had better renegotiate Tracs contract now, three years should do it.

 

 

Just now, deelusions from afar said:

Not defending Kane but I'm not a fan of the long term contracts.  In this case I think it's probably ok because right now it builds stability and adds to the good news story snowball for us and he's (reportedly) being paid much less than other clubs would be prepared to pay him.  Having him locked away for life does so much for membership, for being a destination club and to put to bed the rumours that would otherwise have plagued Melbourne and Petracca his whole career.  But that's probably my Melbourne Bias talking.

Other than Dusty, there's not too many 7+ year deals that have worked for the club and plenty of them that have gone the other way (or at least so far) e.g. Grundy, Kelly etc.

Hope to the (Demon) Gods that it works out for us / him.

No thats fine if your not a fan of long term contracts, i reckon 5 years is probably a good length, but Kanes double standards, no accountability ramblings are the thing that annoys me and most people i reckon. 

Anyway, i think Christian will keep playing well,, and imagine if we lost him over a couple of years to a rival side Cornes and teh like would smash us for not doing enough to keep him. 

5 minutes ago, deelusions from afar said:

Not defending Kane but I'm not a fan of the long term contracts.  In this case I think it's probably ok because right now it builds stability and adds to the good news story snowball for us and he's (reportedly) being paid much less than other clubs would be prepared to pay him.  Having him locked away for life does so much for membership, for being a destination club and to put to bed the rumours that would otherwise have plagued Melbourne and Petracca his whole career.  But that's probably my Melbourne Bias talking.

Other than Dusty, there's not too many 7+ year deals that have worked for the club and plenty of them that have gone the other way (or at least so far) e.g. Grundy, Kelly etc.

Hope to the (Demon) Gods that it works out for us / him.

Agreed. Obviously long term contracts are gambles on both sides. Club is gambling that Trac can perform to a high standard for a long period. Trac is potentially turning his back on a small fortune for some more security. I'd certainly prefer the security of it were me...

 

One thing that I always cringe at is when a player signs on till the start of their free agency.

 

Also the demand will force the supply. The more players that get signed to long term deals, they more you'll have to if you want to keep your stars.

Edited May 6, 20213 yr by Josh

7 minutes ago, deelusions from afar said:

Not defending Kane but I'm not a fan of the long term contracts.  In this case I think it's probably ok because right now it builds stability and adds to the good news story snowball for us and he's (reportedly) being paid much less than other clubs would be prepared to pay him.  Having him locked away for life does so much for membership, for being a destination club and to put to bed the rumours that would otherwise have plagued Melbourne and Petracca his whole career.  But that's probably my Melbourne Bias talking.

Other than Dusty, there's not too many 7+ year deals that have worked for the club and plenty of them that have gone the other way (or at least so far) e.g. Grundy, Kelly etc.

Hope to the (Demon) Gods that it works out for us / him.

I agree. I am another who has often said that long contracts are bad news. 
But CP is a generational player. Other players will come to the MFC to play with him. Sure list management is a gamble, but if CP was poached by another Top Club, i think I would give Footy away

We have been pillaged for years 

This thread is evidence of why Cornes has the modus operandi that he does as a sports broadcaster shock jock.  He would be loving this.  Trac's long term contract is a gamble, yes, but this signing is bigger than the contract itself, in terms of what it means to our marketing, attracting and retaining sponsors and increasing membership numbers and membership retention.  In other words, revenue generation.

Look beyond the contract and see the bigger picture.

Edited May 7, 20213 yr by I'va Worn Smith

4 minutes ago, I'va Worn Smith said:

This thread is evidence of why Cornes has the modus operandi that he does as a sports broadcaster shock jock.  He would be loving this.  Trac's long term contract is a gamble, yes, but this signing is bigger than the contract itself, in terms of what i means to our marketing, attracting and retaining sponsors and increasing membership numbers and membership retention.  In other words, revenue generation.

Look beyond the contract and see the bigger picture.

Totally agree. It’s the ripple effect. 

I reckon he's planting an "I told you so" peg in the sand.

I'm sure Trac over the course of 7 years will have a dip in form, at which point he can come out and say "See....."

This bloke has the easiest job in the world I reckon. All he ever has to do is say something provocative toward a group of members, doesn't matter what it is, as long as its contrarian. That's it, job done. He's the Kyle Sandilands of AFL media. 

Causing outrage is a business these days. The saddest part of that is that is works. 

The fact that anyone would start a thread on this is hilarious.

SEN is pulp fiction - it's media trash and has been since Crocmedia moved in and should thus be treated that way.

If you're getting your news from this source and subsequently taking personally, I'd be questioning a range of things...

 

Edited May 7, 20213 yr by Engorged Onion

1 hour ago, TRIGON said:

Back off, his parent's christened him Kane... he's been cursed since birth.

I could never  decide whether being called Kane or Chad was worse.

And all this from a simple Graeme....

2 minutes ago, Left Foot Snap said:

I could never  decide whether being called Kane or Chad was worse.

And all this from a simple Graeme....

Really, I thought Cornes was as low as you could go.

The actual contract has no bearing on his reaction, there was always going to be a sensationalist response from Kane Cornes.

the epitome of an empty vessel.

He’s got some good points.

Theres still some young guns who will be asking for pretty decent contacts in the coming years.

5 years would’ve been perfect.

Im rapt about all our signings & the direction of the club, just hope we have enough money in our cap to keep everyone happy 

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Did he carry on when Port gave Ollie a 6 year contract until he is 32?

No!

And I bet if Port had secured Petracca's signature on a 7 year contract until he is 33 he would say it was a great coup.

Cornes is a dope.

Is that a fact regarding Wines?

Because Tracca has way more ability if true, midfield & a 50 goal a year forward later into career 

37 minutes ago, Left Foot Snap said:

I could never  decide whether being called Kane or Chad was worse.

And all this from a simple Graeme....

Pronounced Grey E Me

While I have questioned some long term contracts, I won't question this for a minute.

Tracc is our Dusty. A once in a lifetime player. In American sports, they would call him a 'franchise player'. 

You could drop him in any team right now, and they would get a massive boost Depending on the cattle they have, most teams would become instantly credible with him in the 22.

As good as Jack and Salo are, I don't think you could say the same about them. They are great add ons for sure and indispensable in their own ways, but they don't fit the description above.

If you want to criticize long term deals, the one offered to Harmes comes to mind. Superficially questioning the abovementioned 2 deals is fine, but I think they are justified upon more forensic examination.

Tracc's deal for mine is a no brainer. I wouldn't question the Tiges for the deal they gave Dusty either.

Edited May 7, 20213 yr by Colin B. Flaubert
Wanted to add an extra sentence at the end re: Dusty.

1 hour ago, deelusions from afar said:

Not defending Kane but I'm not a fan of the long term contracts.  In this case I think it's probably ok because right now it builds stability and adds to the good news story snowball for us and he's (reportedly) being paid much less than other clubs would be prepared to pay him.  Having him locked away for life does so much for membership, for being a destination club and to put to bed the rumours that would otherwise have plagued Melbourne and Petracca his whole career. 

+1

Locking up these extensions now (Oliver, Salem, etc) is also sending a message to the playing group themselves, that this group is in it together. It's a great move for the solidarity of the playing group. Cornes moaning about Melbourne going "too early" is overlooking this essential point, which doesn't apply to clubs who weren't Neelded.

 

One thing I will say about Cornes is that as well as handing it out, he will cop it back, without complaint and usually in good spirit. (Although that really just supports the "shock jock" theory in that it's all done for theatre.)