Collingwood 2020 trade period

[Go_Dogs]

Still a significant amount of talk and rumour around the Pies and their trade period.

Interesting reading the comments from their List Manager that they’ve been trending downwards in performance and rather than bottoming out they wanted to prioritise getting back into the draft. While that seems a reasonable position, it’s impossible to ignore the quality of player they’ve given up, the prices they’ve released them for, and the financial contribution they’re rumoured to be making in an on-going fashion in most instances.

What do we make of their trade period and how many years will this set them back both list and culture wise?

[mjp]

What do we make of their trade period and how many years will this set them back both list and culture wise?

If their goal was to wipe 2million off the salary cap and get some more young players into their match-day team, well - it was a great success. The Treloar stuff was messy and the Stephenson thing just bizarre - but that is all from the outside looking in.

[ledge]

If their goal was to wipe 2million off the salary cap and get some more young players into their match-day team, well - it was a great success. The Treloar stuff was messy and the Stephenson thing just bizarre - but that is all from the outside looking in.

Keeping older players on also works against the excuse of not wanting to bottom out.
It’s all about the salary, sadly though the Treloar and Stephenson trades don’t help with other players being confident with the club, this could rip that club apart if they dumped loved and devoted players.
Bartlett related to getting rid of a serious clubman/player in the 60s at the tigers and the next year the players lost all confidence in the club.
Sometimes players might not be the best players but are an integral part of club culture . I would use Maxwell as pies captain being an example.
From what Treloar has said I would be surprised if he wasn’t in that bracket.

[bornadog]

This is their current draft order:

14, 16, 65, 70, 75, 92

They need points for their academy player.

If they say they wanted to get back into the draft well, to me it doesn't look like it with no second or third round draft picks. I am not sure home many points they need to pick up the NGA kid.

It really looks like they were in cap trouble and needed to off load. Recent big dollars paid to Grundy, Moore and De Goey doesn't help.

[Mitcha]

If they wanted to prioritize getting back into the draft they wouldn't have gifted us those mid range picks for us to match any bid on JUH. As it stands they only have two picks in the top twenty anyway so nothing special about that. Pure salary dump and there is no other way they can try and spin things. Oh and thanks by the way Pies.

[comrade]

Looks like they were trying to uncook the books and managed the communication around it horribly because being honest probably means admitting some huge, rule breaking problems were made in the past.

[1eyedog]

From our perspective Collingwood's trade period has been a roaring success.

[Jeanette54]

The Collingwood fan sites is an interesting read, looking at the various reactions to their trade period. The reactions have varied from feral (as one might expect) to meekly accepting the official club line, ie. akin to putting lipstick on a pig.

One suggestion (without any evidence) is that the club may have received a warning, regarding their salary payments, from the AFL. Maybe this is related to the upcoming cuts, or were they exceeding the current limits with their projected back ended contract commitments ? That might be an plausible explanation for the fire sale.

We all remember what happened to the last club (not too far from our trade success story) rumoured to have received a quiet warning from the AFL, admittedly not concerned with salary caps. That rumour was the precursor to that club self destructing.

I guess what I am saying is watch that space, the fall out from "Salarygate" may be just beginning, or not.

[Rocket Science]

Certainly lovely of them to permit, if not promote the narrative they had to flick Treloar because his wife dared to pursue a career opportunity.

Really savoury stuff.

While they're purging they might like to look at their president.

[Jeanette54]

While they're purging they might like to look at their president.

He hasn't escaped their notice, the peasants are revolting and the tumbrils are being prepared.

[MrMahatma]

I don’t think the “get back into the draft” sell job.

2 of the players they off loaded were young. Real young. One won the rising star 2 years ago. And in real terms, they didn’t actually even get a first rounder for the players they offloaded. Our 14 was for other picks...

It could only be salary cap pressure. Stephenson they could’ve sold as “culture” given his indiscretions of the past, but not Treloar. And the wife and kid commentary is pure nonsense. You don’t give away talent like that for a reason like that. You support and help the talent you have to deliver for you. Mutually beneficial.

I think they’ve stuffed up here. They may have won a “salary cap” battle but Treloar seems a very well regarded, well spoken, genuine club man. Moving him on could well hurt more than the $ it saved.

[Twodogs]

Keeping older players on also works against the excuse of not wanting to bottom out.
It’s all about the salary, sadly though the Treloar and Stephenson trades don’t help with other players being confident with the club, this could rip that club apart if they dumped loved and devoted players.
Bartlett related to getting rid of a serious clubman/player in the 60s at the tigers and the next year the players lost all confidence in the club.
Sometimes players might not be the best players but are an integral part of club culture . I would use Maxwell as pies captain being an example.
From what Treloar has said I would be surprised if he wasn’t in that bracket.

That's Whale Roberts you're talking about? Part of the Teasdale/Roberts/Jackson for John Pitura trade? Possibly one of the only times that the old "we'll give you 3 ordinary players for your superstar" has ever worked. Teasdale wins a Brownlow, Roberts places fifth in the Brownlow the only year he played with South and Francis Jackson plays 100+ games and became one of the prototype rebounding defenders.


He hasn't escaped their notice, the peasants are revolting and the tumbrils are being prepared.

He will be hoisted on his own pettard, I love a good mediaeval analogy.

[GVGjr]

Honesty, this smacks of the Pies knowing they were about to get done for a breech of the salary cap and desperately trying to clear things before getting caught. In whatever way they try and sell this I suspect someone is about to lose a job

[Twodogs]

Honesty, this smacks of the Pies knowing they were about to get done for a breech of the salary cap and desperately trying to clear things before getting caught. In whatever way they try and sell this I suspect someone is about to lose a job

Agreed on both counts. The story will come out one day and it will probably be that Collingwood's books were audited by the AFL and they were told that they would be over the cap. A bit like Essendon in the very early 2000s when they had to let Blumfield and a couple of others go after the AFL told them they were over the cap (or were about to be over)

And someone's head will roll.

[josie]

That's Whale Roberts you're talking about? Part of the Teasdale/Roberts/Jackson for John Pitura trade? Possibly one of the only times that the old "we'll give you 3 ordinary players for your superstar" has ever worked. Teasdale wins a Brownlow, Roberts places fifth in the Brownlow the only year he played with South and Francis Jackson plays 100+ games and became one of the prototype rebounding defenders.



He will be hoisted on his own pettard, I love a good mediaeval analogy.

And one from the bard to boot.

[josie]

Agreed on both counts. The story will come out one day and it will probably be that Collingwood's books were audited by the AFL and they were told that they would be over the cap. A bit like Essendon in the very early 2000s when they had to let Blumfield and a couple of others go after the AFL told them they were over the cap (or were about to be over)

And someone's head will roll.

You are in fine form Twodogs.

[mjp]

I guess what I am saying is watch that space, the fall out from "Salarygate" may be just beginning, or not.

There is zero chance of me looking at a Collingwood Fan site but WHY should there be fall-out?

I actually feel sorry for AFL clubs in this situation. If we use another club as an example - let's go with Carlton - think about this premise.

1/. They need inside midfielders.
2/. Richmond have made a terrible mess of their salary cap and need to dump Dion Prestia.

What could Carlton do to recruit him?

NOTHING. They can't make a move (trade out) on 2-3 mid-range players because the players have to disagree. So what they would have to do is the same thing as Collingwood have done - create some disharmony with the player(s) in question in order to get them out the door...hey presto, Prestia is in.

I don't like the idea that clubs should have the rights to trade a player 'anywhere' (it creates the whole NFL "have fun playing in Cleveland" corollary) but if Collingwood had the right to do so 'this' and all of the associated bad PR could and would have been avoided.

For me, we need to re-sign Bont soon. If doing that means we need to move on a contracted player (or 2), well, sign me up for that. But get Bont's signature on the paper and I really don't care how you do it. If you (the club) needs to release a statement that we have traded on player x and y for salary cap reasons, well, "#whatchagonnado"??? The fact remains that under the current rules, we would have to effectively "CUT TIES" with some (potentially) much loved players (or maybe just Josh Bruce - just joking Josh!) in order to do this...and we would really need to follow a similar approach to the one Collingwood have taken...

Or - give me another way to do it? Tell me how else they could have cleared cap room and maintained their relationships with their players understanding that the players MUST AGREE TO LEAVE!

[Daughter of the West]

There is zero chance of me looking at a Collingwood Fan site but WHY should there be fall-out?

I actually feel sorry for AFL clubs in this situation. If we use another club as an example - let's go with Carlton - think about this premise.

1/. They need inside midfielders.
2/. Richmond have made a terrible mess of their salary cap and need to dump Dion Prestia.

What could Carlton do to recruit him?

NOTHING. They can't make a move (trade out) on 2-3 mid-range players because the players have to disagree. So what they would have to do is the same thing as Collingwood have done - create some disharmony with the player(s) in question in order to get them out the door...hey presto, Prestia is in.

I don't like the idea that clubs should have the rights to trade a player 'anywhere' (it creates the whole NFL "have fun playing in Cleveland" corollary) but if Collingwood had the right to do so 'this' and all of the associated bad PR could and would have been avoided.

For me, we need to re-sign Bont soon. If doing that means we need to move on a contracted player (or 2), well, sign me up for that. But get Bont's signature on the paper and I really don't care how you do it. If you (the club) needs to release a statement that we have traded on player x and y for salary cap reasons, well, "#whatchagonnado"??? The fact remains that under the current rules, we would have to effectively "CUT TIES" with some (potentially) much loved players (or maybe just Josh Bruce - just joking Josh!) in order to do this...and we would really need to follow a similar approach to the one Collingwood have taken...

Or - give me another way to do it? Tell me how else they could have cleared cap room and maintained their relationships with their players understanding that the players MUST AGREE TO LEAVE!

Apologies if I’m missing the obvious here, but shouldn’t there be financial modeling in place BEFOREHAND to ensure they don’t have such a cap issue in the first place?

[jeemak]

Yeah, there's a good faith element involved here as well. If a player agrees to backdate a contract in good faith they probably shouldn't expect to be completely stitched up and have everything from their character to their partner's professional choices questioned.

Additionally, clubs that bite off more than they can chew with no regard for how it may affect key stakeholders in the future, which is clearly what Collingwood has done in this instance in chasing a flag, deserve no sympathy.

[bornadog]

There is zero chance of me looking at a Collingwood Fan site but WHY should there be fall-out?

I actually feel sorry for AFL clubs in this situation. If we use another club as an example - let's go with Carlton - think about this premise.

1/. They need inside midfielders.
2/. Richmond have made a terrible mess of their salary cap and need to dump Dion Prestia.

What could Carlton do to recruit him?

NOTHING. They can't make a move (trade out) on 2-3 mid-range players because the players have to disagree. So what they would have to do is the same thing as Collingwood have done - create some disharmony with the player(s) in question in order to get them out the door...hey presto, Prestia is in.

I don't like the idea that clubs should have the rights to trade a player 'anywhere' (it creates the whole NFL "have fun playing in Cleveland" corollary) but if Collingwood had the right to do so 'this' and all of the associated bad PR could and would have been avoided.

For me, we need to re-sign Bont soon. If doing that means we need to move on a contracted player (or 2), well, sign me up for that. But get Bont's signature on the paper and I really don't care how you do it. If you (the club) needs to release a statement that we have traded on player x and y for salary cap reasons, well, "#whatchagonnado"??? The fact remains that under the current rules, we would have to effectively "CUT TIES" with some (potentially) much loved players (or maybe just Josh Bruce - just joking Josh!) in order to do this...and we would really need to follow a similar approach to the one Collingwood have taken...

Or - give me another way to do it? Tell me how else they could have cleared cap room and maintained their relationships with their players understanding that the players MUST AGREE TO LEAVE!

Let's say your scenario is true. The fans want to hear the truth, and not a made up story that no one believes. Just tell fans, we need to pay DeGoey and Darcy Moore big dollars to keep them, which means we will need to off load a couple of players.

Collingwood have lost a lot of credibility with this from its own fan base.

[comrade]

Why would it get to the point that your cap is so screwed that re-signing key players means you have to sell off contracted stars in the first place? That’s mistake numero uno.

Then to ‘create’ player unrest so they feel so unwelcome that they ‘want’ to leave? That’s just poison for your culture.

If the same thing went down with us and we did to Macrae what Collingwood did to Treloar (the closest comparison I could think of in terms of status and performance), I’d be disgusted.

[Bulldog4life]

That's Whale Roberts you're talking about? Part of the Teasdale/Roberts/Jackson for John Pitura trade? Possibly one of the only times that the old "we'll give you 3 ordinary players for your superstar" has ever worked. Teasdale wins a Brownlow, Roberts places fifth in the Brownlow the only year he played with South and Francis Jackson plays 100+ games and became one of the prototype rebounding defenders.



He will be hoisted on his own pettard, I love a good mediaeval analogy.

Yep you're right on the Whale. It was in the 70's. Richmond weren't the same for a few years after that. Remember his moto "Have a ale with the Whale" when he was the publican at....not sure of the name...in South Melbourne. I had a couple with him. A hilarious huge man. Hands like spades.

[Happy Days]

They should be embarrassed. They’re the biggest organisation of their kind in the damn world and they exhibited financial mismanagement you wouldn’t expect from a 10 year old getting pocket money. Let alone the damage they’ve done to their product on field, they’re letting three best 15 (including one top 3) player walk for a second round pick.

Ned Guy needs to lose his job and I would lose Buckley too, who clearly lacks the emotional intelligence required for his position.

[Twodogs]

Yep you're right on the Whale. It was in the 70's. Richmond weren't the same for a few years after that. Remember his moto "Have a ale with the Whale" when he was the publican at....not sure of the name...in South Melbourne. I had a couple with him. A hilarious huge man. Hands like spades.

T'was the Cricket Club Hotel in South Melbourne. I worked in South Melbourne for years.

[azabob]

They should be embarrassed. They’re the biggest organisation of their kind in the damn world and they exhibited financial mismanagement you wouldn’t expect from a 10 year old getting pocket money. Let alone the damage they’ve done to their product on field, they’re letting three best 15 (including one top 3) player walk for a second round pick.

Ned Guy needs to lose his job and I would lose Buckley too, who clearly lacks the emotional intelligence required for his position.

Why Ned Guy? From what I can see he inherited the mess and was charged to clean it up. His biggest mistake was doing an interview straight after trade period ended.

[mjp]

Apologies if I’m missing the obvious here, but shouldn’t there be financial modeling in place BEFOREHAND to ensure they don’t have such a cap issue in the first place?



Yeah, there's a good faith element involved here as well. If a player agrees to backdate a contract in good faith they probably shouldn't expect to be completely stitched up and have everything from their character to their partner's professional choices questioned.

Additionally, clubs that bite off more than they can chew with no regard for how it may affect key stakeholders in the future, which is clearly what Collingwood has done in this instance in chasing a flag, deserve no sympathy.



Let's say your scenario is true. The fans want to hear the truth, and not a made up story that no one believes. Just tell fans, we need to pay DeGoey and Darcy Moore big dollars to keep them, which means we will need to off load a couple of players.

Collingwood have lost a lot of credibility with this from its own fan base.




Why would it get to the point that your cap is so screwed that re-signing key players means you have to sell off contracted stars in the first place? That’s mistake numero uno.

Then to ‘create’ player unrest so they feel so unwelcome that they ‘want’ to leave? That’s just poison for your culture.

If the same thing went down with us and we did to Macrae what Collingwood did to Treloar (the closest comparison I could think of in terms of status and performance), I’d be disgusted.

Ummm - I'm not trying to say that they haven't stuffed up or made a terrible error and we shouldn't all think bad things about them. What I AM saying is that:

1/. If you want to get contracted players OUT, you are almost OBLIGATED to create a situation where they WANT to leave...or at least feel they have no option but to leave. As you will recall during this saga, the initial response from Treloar was "I want to stay"...well, in this situation, that obviously wasn't going to fly (for whatever reason).

2/. Screwing up your cap is of course not too smart. Signing Grundy for 29 years wasn't smart and many said that at the time. Re-signing Beams was clearly not too smart...and pushing $ in other players contracts 'back' in order to fund (as per the rumours) the Beams deal (which fell in their lap - kind of the way the Treloar deal fell in our laps come to think of it!) was really, really, really, really silly. But at some point, you have to acknowledge those mistakes and FIX IT. My take was that this was Collingwood attempting to FIX IT.

3/. Yes - of course, you need to be open with your members (I could care less about supporters but those who stump up their $ deserve an explanation of sorts)...but, refer back to point 1. You say "We have cap issues and players need to go - so expect some changes". Then suddenly guys are on the trading block and they basically say "Hey - I understand you have cap issues but I'm not going - I'M HAPPY...figure something else out...". That cannot be in this current situation where players MUST AGREE TO LEAVE.

I get we all want to poke fun at the 'Pies and all of that, but if you look at the things that have left them in this situation:

1/. The recruitment of WELLS went they were 'so close' to a flag. Substitute Wells for "Travis Cloke" and that could be US!!!
2/. The extension of GRUNDY. Substitute Grundy for Bont and that's soon to be us.
3/. The 'unexpected' availability of high-priced 'difference making' mid Beams. Substitute Beams for Treloar and that could be US!!!

These are always 'there but for the grace of GOD go I' moments I think...if Collingwood had won the flag in 2018 well this would all be worth it. They - the only team to beat Richmond in a knock-out final in this era - lost by a goal to what could easily be described as a VERY dubious non-free kick followed by a great goal kicked by Sheed (I taught him that btw)...the Tiges must be walking a fine line, the Saints are 100% walking a fine line...

[Sedat]

Had they won that 2018 flag, the ends would have justified the means. Losing by a kick probably incentivised them to top up with Beams as they were legitimately so close to a premiership, and on paper, only needed to add some talent and polish to their midfield.

Contracts are as important, even more so, than trades. The fact that we are paying Treloar 600k a season mitigates that risk significantly for mine (provided his medical stacked up). He is 27yo and will be at the absolute peak of his powers for almost all of his contract. His skill set is unique to our midfield (Bailey Smith is comparable but not there yet) and will only compliment our existing pieces. He has been used in a dual inside/outside capacity at Collingwood, which he won't need to do as much with us, and his electric outside run and carry will be an extremely potent addition to a midfield that has lacked that Danger-esque explosiveness.

[Twodogs]

Ummm - I'm not trying to say that they haven't stuffed up or made a terrible error and we shouldn't all think bad things about them. What I AM saying is that:

1/. If you want to get contracted players OUT, you are almost OBLIGATED to create a situation where they WANT to leave...or at least feel they have no option but to leave. As you will recall during this saga, the initial response from Treloar was "I want to stay"...well, in this situation, that obviously wasn't going to fly (for whatever reason).

2/. Screwing up your cap is of course not too smart. Signing Grundy for 29 years wasn't smart and many said that at the time. Re-signing Beams was clearly not too smart...and pushing $ in other players contracts 'back' in order to fund (as per the rumours) the Beams deal (which fell in their lap - kind of the way the Treloar deal fell in our laps come to think of it!) was really, really, really, really silly. But at some point, you have to acknowledge those mistakes and FIX IT. My take was that this was Collingwood attempting to FIX IT.

3/. Yes - of course, you need to be open with your members (I could care less about supporters but those who stump up their $ deserve an explanation of sorts)...but, refer back to point 1. You say "We have cap issues and players need to go - so expect some changes". Then suddenly guys are on the trading block and they basically say "Hey - I understand you have cap issues but I'm not going - I'M HAPPY...figure something else out...". That cannot be in this current situation where players MUST AGREE TO LEAVE.

I get we all want to poke fun at the 'Pies and all of that, but if you look at the things that have left them in this situation:

1/. The recruitment of WELLS went they were 'so close' to a flag. Substitute Wells for "Travis Cloke" and that could be US!!!
2/. The extension of GRUNDY. Substitute Grundy for Bont and that's soon to be us.
3/. The 'unexpected' availability of high-priced 'difference making' mid Beams. Substitute Beams for Treloar and that could be US!!!

These are always 'there but for the grace of GOD go I' moments I think...if Collingwood had won the flag in 2018 well this would all be worth it. They - the only team to beat Richmond in a knock-out final in this era - lost by a goal to what could easily be described as a VERY dubious non-free kick followed by a great goal kicked by Sheed (I taught him that btw)...the Tiges must be walking a fine line, the Saints are 100% walking a fine line...

I can believe that. Did I teach you how to do it?

[ledge]

That's Whale Roberts you're talking about? Part of the Teasdale/Roberts/Jackson for John Pitura trade? Possibly one of the only times that the old "we'll give you 3 ordinary players for your superstar" has ever worked. Teasdale wins a Brownlow, Roberts places fifth in the Brownlow the only year he played with South and Francis Jackson plays 100+ games and became one of the prototype rebounding defenders.



He will be hoisted on his own pettard, I love a good mediaeval analogy.

That’s the one.

[ledge]

T'was the Cricket Club Hotel in South Melbourne. I worked in South Melbourne for years.

I won a premiership at Flem/Ken one year and off we went to the cricketers arms . Free beer and Whale serving us, he could put his hand around a jug and you couldn’t see it !

[Happy Days]

Why Ned Guy? From what I can see he inherited the mess and was charged to clean it up. His biggest mistake was doing an interview straight after trade period ended.

Even so, their overall strategy of negging their players all the way out the door and ensuring they got as little as possible in return was staggering. It would be like playing poker with your cards facing outwards.

[Twodogs]

I won a premiership at Flem/Ken one year and off we went to the cricketers arms . Free beer and Whale serving us, he could put his hand around a jug and you couldn’t see it !

Yep when I worked in South Melbourne we spent the odd (every) Friday afternoon long lunch down at the Cricket Club.

[Ghost Dog]

Had they won that 2018 flag, the ends would have justified the means. Losing by a kick probably incentivised them to top up with Beams as they were legitimately so close to a premiership, and on paper, only needed to add some talent and polish to their midfield.

Contracts are as important, even more so, than trades. The fact that we are paying Treloar 600k a season mitigates that risk significantly for mine (provided his medical stacked up). He is 27yo and will be at the absolute peak of his powers for almost all of his contract. His skill set is unique to our midfield (Bailey Smith is comparable but not there yet) and will only compliment our existing pieces. He has been used in a dual inside/outside capacity at Collingwood, which he won't need to do as much with us, and his electric outside run and carry will be an extremely potent addition to a midfield that has lacked that Danger-esque explosiveness.

A blue-chip midfielder, with marquee profile, from the biggest sporting club in Australia joins us.

[Doc26]

These are always 'there but for the grace of GOD go I' moments I think...if Collingwood had won the flag in 2018 well this would all be worth it. They - the only team to beat Richmond in a knock-out final in this era - lost by a goal to what could easily be described as a VERY dubious non-free kick followed by a great goal kicked by Sheed (I taught him that btw)...the Tiges must be walking a fine line, the Saints are 100% walking a fine line...

I’d be surprised if we weren’t pushing at the limits ourselves now, particularly following healthy deals to JJ, Bruce and Treloar, to name just a few. And I would imagine Hunter’s 5 year deal would’ve netted him a good increase.

How we can maintain our position with Bont’s big one looming this year, addressing Dunkley’s want, and then provisioning for Smith, Naughton and English will be quite the list mgmt challenge.

[bornadog]

I’d be surprised if we weren’t pushing at the limits ourselves now, particularly following healthy deals to JJ, Bruce and Treloar, to name just a few. And I would imagine Hunter’s 5 year deal would’ve netted him a good increase.

How we can maintain our position with Bont’s big one looming this year, addressing Dunkley’s want, and then provisioning for Smith, Naughton and English will be quite the list mgmt challenge.

I would say Bont is already close to a million.

[Happy Days]

I would say Bont is already close to a million.

Can't remember where I read it but Bont is already one of the top five or so paid players in the game. Doubt we'd have to stump up too much more or that anyone can offer a better package than we can. No reason for concern at the minute.

Edit - here it is; https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/the-11-biggest-earners-in-the-afl-revealed-c-1195442. He's 8th which is pretty not bad.

[bulldogtragic]

Can't remember where I read it but Bont is already one of the top five or so paid players in the game. Doubt we'd have to stump up too much more or that anyone can offer a better package than we can. No reason for concern at the minute.

Edit - here it is; https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/the-11-biggest-earners-in-the-afl-revealed-c-1195442. He's 8th which is pretty not bad.

Great point. He will get topped up and get as many years as he wants. I also assume he gets a good share of ASA money from the club (outside cap marketing dollars). Hopefully he signs soon and ends the predictable media noise.

[jeemak]

They key for us is to get ourselves top four without further delay and put in a good showing in finals.

[FrediKanoute]

Why would it get to the point that your cap is so screwed that re-signing key players means you have to sell off contracted stars in the first place? That’s mistake numero uno.

Then to ‘create’ player unrest so they feel so unwelcome that they ‘want’ to leave? That’s just poison for your culture.

If the same thing went down with us and we did to Macrae what Collingwood did to Treloar (the closest comparison I could think of in terms of status and performance), I’d be disgusted.

What if you projected we could sign Dunks in 2023 at $750k per season. Now that the Dons have come in that projection is out of the water as he will probably on sign now for somewhere north of that and attract interest from rival teams who will watch eagerly the amount of middle time he gets. If the cap doesn't increase and we want to keep Dunks then someone has to go. This is what we face in 2023.

[bulldogtragic]

What if you projected we could sign Dunks in 2023 at $750k per season. Now that the Dons have come in that projection is out of the water as he will probably on sign now for somewhere north of that and attract interest from rival teams who will watch eagerly the amount of middle time he gets. If the cap doesn't increase and we want to keep Dunks then someone has to go. This is what we face in 2023.

Also, JT, Suckling, Duryea, Martin, Lloyd & Wood are retired. Others coming off long contracts like JJ could be lesser extensions. So that frees up some. So there’s going to be some open up. Plus by 2023 Bruce has done 3 of his 4 years. We can back end a few contracts so in the Dunks scenario you raise we can be very competitive. If we are winning finals, blokes may take a little less also.

[The Adelaide Connection]

What if you projected we could sign Dunks in 2023 at $750k per season. Now that the Dons have come in that projection is out of the water as he will probably on sign now for somewhere north of that and attract interest from rival teams who will watch eagerly the amount of middle time he gets. If the cap doesn't increase and we want to keep Dunks then someone has to go. This is what we face in 2023.

I know it went a bit sour at the end of this year, but you have to give credit to GWS for how they have turned their list over for the last 10 or so years.

They were able to keep turning over more senior players who would be commanding bigger money (some legitimate guns) for low picks who would be on base money (and some who were ready to step straight into the senior team). I know their situation was unique given that they were founded on a plethora of first round, high-end talent; but the way they recycled them for picks allowed them to avoid Collingwood's cap bust situation, whilst theoretically keeping their list balanced age-wise to avoid a Hawthorn-like over the hill situation.

A lot can happen in a year, but maybe Essendon come back to the well for a (still contracted) Dunkley next year and this time they do pony up two first-rounders. I say we take it. Instant cap relief, a couple of young guns on no money (maybe even in the Smith mould and ready to go).

[1eyedog]

Can't remember where I read it but Bont is already one of the top five or so paid players in the game. Doubt we'd have to stump up too much more or that anyone can offer a better package than we can. No reason for concern at the minute.

Edit - here it is; https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/the-11-biggest-earners-in-the-afl-revealed-c-1195442. He's 8th which is pretty not bad.

Jack Martin! :eek:

[Mofra]

Can't remember where I read it but Bont is already one of the top five or so paid players in the game. Doubt we'd have to stump up too much more or that anyone can offer a better package than we can. No reason for concern at the minute.

Edit - here it is; https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/the-11-biggest-earners-in-the-afl-revealed-c-1195442. He's 8th which is pretty not bad.
Given his BMW deal and the promo work he does, a healthy chunk of his payment would come from the club's $500k Marketing allowance which is outside the cap. I'd be very surprised if Bont doesn't get at least 20% of that allowance on his own.

[Mofra]

Jack Martin! :eek:
Front-loaded for one year so no other club could match Carlton in the PSD. Picked a shocker of a year to front load it! Loses at least 30% of that as per the AFLPA deal for 2020.

[hujsh]

Front-loaded for one year so no other club could match Carlton in the PSD. Picked a shocker of a year to front load it! Loses at least 30% of that as per the AFLPA deal for 2020.

Wonder if he regrets that now?

[Twodogs]

Front-loaded for one year so no other club could match Carlton in the PSD. Picked a shocker of a year to front load it! Loses at least 30% of that as per the AFLPA deal for 2020.


Wonder if he regrets that now?

I'm betting that Carlton will find an imaginative way around the problem.

[azabob]

Jermey Cameron also got stooged on a back ended deal in 2020.

Coupled with the Collingwood issue I’d imagine players would be extremely careful in back ending, front loading contracts.

Clubs and the AFL should also be concerned, but I don’t think they care too much.

[Raw Toast]

Returning to Collingwood's trade week, I think the incandescent rage of many of their barrackers is warranted.

While I know that issues of loyalty are more than double-edged, if the club asks someone to amend their contract numerous times to help the club out, and then chases that player from the club when the big $ finally comes due, it's a horrible look. And to manage it so disingenuously and with such incompetence when Buckley has tried to build his coaching legacy around notions of honesty and integrity, it's a terrible look to treat any player like that (and I know the industry is brutal, but Treloar in particular, was a much loved player as well).

Collingwood were clearly in a dire position, and it seems they felt like the best way of managing it was to try and bluff their way through it. But what a perfect cluster of mis-management.

For me the question is not so much how they got into such a position (as others have noted, you could defend or critique various individual moves, and they did get wonderfully, agonizingly, close to a flag). But they've provided a classic illustration of how not to manage a salary-cap crisis.

Obviously there are lots of people to apportion responsibility to. But for me Buckley is the largest and most interesting. He's very highly invested in a vision of himself as someone who behaves ethically, and with integrity. And this year had already shown his inability to take responsibility and own the horrendous treatment of Lumumba - Buckley's reputation and legacy were already taking a hammering, and he's been pretty pre-occupied with that in 2020 from what I've heard.

The treatment of JS and particularly Treloar just adds to Buckley's failure to live up to the image of himself that he sells. At least Clarkson was able to be brutally honest when it came to pushing out Mitchell and Lewis (and Hodge?). I didn't like what Clarkson did (it was too brutal and a betrayal of trust and the sacrifice of those players for mine), but the logic was clear, and Clarkson was courageous enough to own it as his decision.

MJP, I don't think Buckley had to tell Treloar stories about the playing group being uncomfortable, or to raise the incredibly dubious stuff around his partner moving to Qld. As I see it, Buckley just had to tell him that he thought it was best for the Pies if Treloar went to another club. The coach still has that power, I think, to make it clear that he doesn't want the player around anymore.

But I don't think Buckley could bear the thought of being seen as so brutal - as essentially betraying Treloar who helped the club out with his contract numerous times, on the understanding - and trust! - that they would look after him because of that. And so we get the flood of disinformation and bs stories about the various reasons they felt worried that Treloar. (While there might be grains of truth in the disinformation, because there usually is, the barrackers can clearly see it for the bs that it is.)

So the person who desperately wants to be a role-model of a leader, has once again failed a very clear, public test of leadership. And instead still chooses to hide behind notions of misunderstandings and the various innuendos about players that Collingwood have been so adept at spreading about their own players when those players become a problem to the great leaders Buckley (and McGuire).

[jeemak]

Good post RT.

[Rocket Science]

Utterly unsurprising boof-headed recalcitrance (https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-2020-trade-period-collingwood-trades-eddie-mcguire-nathan-buckley-adam-treloar-jaidyn-stephenson-eddie-mcguire-defends-collingwood/news-story/6c2a8decdf3f1f426b351504b6788f03) from the bloated, rotting head of the fish. The poor ol' Pies are simply being victimised.

“It’s a ‘big story’ because the other stories have been done to death for 10 days and Collingwood didn’t do a whole lot on trade radio and things like that. The media always like to come after people who aren’t racing to be on those types of things.”

Shocked to be sitting here this is the same club ham-fistedly rebuffing racism allegations.

[ledge]

Returning to Collingwood's trade week, I think the incandescent rage of many of their barrackers is warranted.

While I know that issues of loyalty are more than double-edged, if the club asks someone to amend their contract numerous times to help the club out, and then chases that player from the club when the big $ finally comes due, it's a horrible look. And to manage it so disingenuously and with such incompetence when Buckley has tried to build his coaching legacy around notions of honesty and integrity, it's a terrible look to treat any player like that (and I know the industry is brutal, but Treloar in particular, was a much loved player as well).

Collingwood were clearly in a dire position, and it seems they felt like the best way of managing it was to try and bluff their way through it. But what a perfect cluster of mis-management.

For me the question is not so much how they got into such a position (as others have noted, you could defend or critique various individual moves, and they did get wonderfully, agonizingly, close to a flag). But they've provided a classic illustration of how not to manage a salary-cap crisis.

Obviously there are lots of people to apportion responsibility to. But for me Buckley is the largest and most interesting. He's very highly invested in a vision of himself as someone who behaves ethically, and with integrity. And this year had already shown his inability to take responsibility and own the horrendous treatment of Lumumba - Buckley's reputation and legacy were already taking a hammering, and he's been pretty pre-occupied with that in 2020 from what I've heard.

The treatment of JS and particularly Treloar just adds to Buckley's failure to live up to the image of himself that he sells. At least Clarkson was able to be brutally honest when it came to pushing out Mitchell and Lewis (and Hodge?). I didn't like what Clarkson did (it was too brutal and a betrayal of trust and the sacrifice of those players for mine), but the logic was clear, and Clarkson was courageous enough to own it as his decision.

MJP, I don't think Buckley had to tell Treloar stories about the playing group being uncomfortable, or to raise the incredibly dubious stuff around his partner moving to Qld. As I see it, Buckley just had to tell him that he thought it was best for the Pies if Treloar went to another club. The coach still has that power, I think, to make it clear that he doesn't want the player around anymore.

But I don't think Buckley could bear the thought of being seen as so brutal - as essentially betraying Treloar who helped the club out with his contract numerous times, on the understanding - and trust! - that they would look after him because of that. And so we get the flood of disinformation and bs stories about the various reasons they felt worried that Treloar. (While there might be grains of truth in the disinformation, because there usually is, the barrackers can clearly see it for the bs that it is.)

So the person who desperately wants to be a role-model of a leader, has once again failed a very clear, public test of leadership. And instead still chooses to hide behind notions of misunderstandings and the various innuendos about players that Collingwood have been so adept at spreading about their own players when those players become a problem to the great leaders Buckley (and McGuire).

Buckley might be all those things but he isn’t the list manager or the bloke who works the wages and years in a contract.
To me it’s the boards doing and Buckley has no option but tow the line.
The club tells him what to tell the media, the problem is the leakage from the leaving players isn’t fitting the clubs story.
Buckley/club should just have been honest with the players and said we are stuffed with the salary cap we can’t hold on to you.
Someone will be scape goated but it won’t be Buckley.
Interesting season for the pies next year ...will see if they come out to play or they rebel.
That’s when Buckley’s job is on the line.

[Bulldog Joe]

Buckley might be all those things but he isn’t the list manager or the bloke who works the wages and years in a contract.
To me it’s the boards doing and Buckley has no option but tow the line.
The club tells him what to tell the media, the problem is the leakage from the leaving players isn’t fitting the clubs story.
Buckley/club should just have been honest with the players and said we are stuffed with the salary cap we can’t hold on to you.
Someone will be scape goated but it won’t be Buckley.
Interesting season for the pies next year ...will see if they come out to play or they rebel.
That’s when Buckley’s job is on the line.

Where is Eddie's responsibility in all this.

Eddie pushed Malthouse out because North were offering Buckley the coaching job. He set a precedent to get what he wanted and Buckley has now effectively followed that example.

Collingwood are likely damaged goods until both McGuire and Buckley move on.

[azabob]

Where is Eddie's responsibility in all this.

Eddie pushed Malthouse out because North were offering Buckley the coaching job. He set a precedent to get what he wanted and Buckley has now effectively followed that example.

Collingwood are likely damaged goods until both McGuire and Buckley move on.

Punchline is McGuire was elected unopposed back in Feb for three years.

[Bulldog Joe]

Punchline is McGuire was elected unopposed back in Feb for three years.

Vladimir Putin gets similar support.

[Twodogs]

Vladimir Putin gets similar support.

Vlad will likely be gone before Eddie.

[Bulldog Joe]

Vlad will likely be gone before Eddie.

True.

Putin is only right until about 2035.

[Twodogs]

True.

Putin is only right until about 2035.

Word is Vlad has Parkinson's disease.