Sooo, will YOU Booo Grundy ?

[Ronnie McKeowns boots]

What happens to the cap hit if he retires? Asking for a friend....

[pietillidie]

Because unlike Brodie, guys like Cameron and Dangerfield rate success and lifestyle over their own personal worth.

The only players in the league earning more than Grundy are: Martin, Fyfe, McGovern and Franklin.

Remind us all about Cameron’s and Dangerfield’s “success”. From where I sit, it looks rather like they’ve both choked badly, repeatedly in big finals - if that’s the sort of “success” you value, perhaps you could go and troll Geelong, instead of Collingwood.

Can’t you admit that Grundy held CFC to ransom when negotiating he’s last contract?
Don’t see Danger, Selwood,Cameron Hawkins,Stewart doing that.
And when u say choked badly I’m assuming you mean in GF’s. Pies have done much better in not choking yeh?

Professional administrators don't get held to ransom. No guns were being held to anyone's head. However, professional administrators might get overridden by presidents who have tied their fate to a coach who has tied his fate to a player. Grundy's manager did his job in a favourable market.

Blaming Grundy is a puerile envy and one the rest of us know is behind his maligning.

You would you do exactly the same if you were an AA player in massive demand in a brutally short career at the key moment you should be climbing a corporate ladder or getting a PhD.

And why is it okay for a president of a club to make millions of dollars and not an actual, talented player to do the same?

The societal wage gap is miles too great. Some of us believe in reining it in and increasing social competitiveness. But focus on the people who are distorting politics and making it so, rather than cheaply sinking the boot into an actual, talented person. Even worse, an actual, talented person who is a major asset of your own club.

[stui magpie]

And why is it okay for a president of a club to make millions and not an actual, talented player?

Presidents of AFL clubs are volunteers. They don't get paid for the time they put in, neither do the board members.

[Wonka]

What happens to the cap hit if he retires? Asking for a friend....

A player's retirement would clear all of the remaining salary in his contract from his club's salary cap, provided the player is not a restricted free agent, an example being Tom Boyd, who was traded to the Western Bulldogs, not a restricted free agent.

[pietillidie]

And why is it okay for a president of a club to make millions and not an actual, talented player?

Presidents of AFL clubs are volunteers. They don't get paid for the time they put in, neither do the board members.

I might be overseas, but even I still remember that! I meant socially. You can't expect players to be personal charities while your own president is a millionaire and you secretly hope the club is connected to those with wealth. People fawn to power, then get all equalitarian when it comes to players. I don't buy it; they're just kicking easy targets because they're too cowardly to take on the bigger problem. Even more unbecoming, most of the very same people vote to make the problem bigger.

[stui magpie]

You miss the point. Players get paid what the market dictates within a salary cap.

Presidents wealth outside of the club is irrelevant, they are volunteering their time and it would not be a small time commitment.

The salary cap is the issue, it's the same as having a budget to staff a team. You can spend heaps on one person and top up with dregs or pay less to one and get better qualified workers.

No right answer, it depends on the situation.

[pietillidie]

You miss the point. Players get paid what the market dictates within a salary cap.

Presidents wealth outside of the club is irrelevant, they are volunteering their time and it would not be a small time commitment.

The salary cap is the issue, it's the same as having a budget to staff a team. You can spend heaps on one person and top up with dregs or pay less to one and get better qualified workers.

No right answer, it depends on the situation.

We're at cross-purposes in this bit of the discussion, probably due to my communication flaws, but seem to be about on the same page broadly. It's not irrelevant to my point because I'm speaking to social psychology and underlying attitudes towards income/wealth.

I was referring to the fact that a lot of the vitriol directed at Grundy is driven by a visceral social anger over 'people having more than me'. I wasn't offering a market or cap analysis (I get who earns what, where and why, how this impacts the cap, etc.).

Even worse when someone who has more than me doesn't give me what I want, and now, because they already owe me. This is a bitterness that people harbour, but they only let it out when they can get sink a cheap boot in. You never see them actually try to do anything about the general problem of wealth and income gaps; on the contrary, they often vote for people who make those gaps worse.

That aside, the immediate problem, as you and I have both been emphasising, is that it is not going to be easy to do a deal that replaces Grundy with someone better. And my further point has been that it's not only unsavoury to get stuck into a player like that, but also imbecilic to burn bridges and relations with a bloke that we may in the end be significantly better off keeping.

It's just another marshmallow test people fail. Can't shut their pie holes for five minutes while any sort of complexity is worked through.

[RudeBoy]

I like our players to get as much as they can, but not if an individual's high salary clearly impinges the ability of our club to build and maintain a Premiership winning squad, due to salary cap problems.

I'm not up to date with what elite players earn, but I would guess that our very top players like JDG, Moore and Grundy, should be able to earn around $750-800,000 pa at Collingwood. Any more than that, does seem 'excessive' in light of the AFL's salary cap.

[pietillidie]

Okay, let's approach this with greater transparency so people can stop harbouring vague and unaccountable grievances:

(1) Who were the CFC representatives who negotiated and signed off on the contract with Grundy and his representatives, and what was the chain of authority?

(2) In what way should the club representatives who made the error be penalised for their role in signing an over-weight contract?

(3) How much should Grundy hand back due to the error made by those club representatives?

[RudeBoy]

Point 3 is silly.

I'm sure the AFL and AFL-PA would interfere to stop a player's contract being retrospectively diminished. To allow that would open the flood gates and mean contracts were meaningless. In short, it ain't going to happen.

I do note that both our previous President, Eddie McGuire, head of footy, Geoff Walsh, and our player management officer, Ned Guy, are no longer with us.

[pietillidie]

^Exactly. Rest assured, those questions are not aimed at you; rather, they're intended to bring accountability to the usual suspects who shoot their internet mouths off, creating bad blood, media fodder and more difficulties for the club. As ever, while avoiding accountability for doing so.

So, we've got:

1. McGuire, Walsh and Guy
2. All three moved on, which is perhaps a partial/indirect accountability as part of regime change
3. Illegal/impossible/against player interests

I'd say the answers speak volumes, not to mention the usual suspects are also setting Wrighty and the new club admin up for a fall should they not be able to pull off a very difficult trade with just one club of Grundy's choice.

To make matters even less savoury, Grundy is a bloke who lives in his own head and doesn't do PR very well. He's not blokey and a good laugh by nature. It's just not in his personality; you can see it a mile off. And that makes him an even easier target for the internet bullies in our midst who sink the boot into him under the cover of his earnings.

[MJ23]

After watching Silvani beat Cox in the ruck and at least halve the contest with Cameron - I can’t believe trading Grundy is even still an option.

We need a dominant ruck more than an extra few mids right now and we are about to see how much not having one costs us as we head into finals.

[Mr Miyagi]

After watching Silvani beat Cox in the ruck and at least halve the contest with Cameron - I can’t believe trading Grundy is even still an option.

We need a dominant ruck more than an extra few mids right now and we are about to see how much not having one costs us as we head into finals.

I was embarrassed by Silvani winning ruck contests.

[piffdog]

Point 3 is silly.

I'm sure the AFL and AFL-PA would interfere to stop a player's contract being retrospectively diminished. To allow that would open the flood gates and mean contracts were meaningless. In short, it ain't going to happen.

I do note that both our previous President, Eddie McGuire, head of footy, Geoff Walsh, and our player management officer, Ned Guy, are no longer with us.

It legally cannot happen. Fullstop. The only way "out" of this contract, is with the express permission of both parties. Hence if Grundy wants to stay, he stays on the current terms. End of Story. The only way anything can be done about this is if both parties (ie him and the club) agree to waive the existing agreement.

[Mr Miyagi]

Rudeboy, remember when our recruitment of Cameron was met with jeers and disbelief? He proved the doubters wrong. But he had barely played any AFL games at Sydney and sat in the twos. We’ve all had a good look at McStay. He’s going to cop it when he comes to the club. But I hope he gets to prove us wrong like Cameron did.