Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Culprit wrote:

swoop42 wrote:He wants $400,000 or so says the rumours.

Not worth that at present I would have thought.

We'd be offering more in the $250,000 to $300,000 you'd think.

300k is a lot to pay on Potential. In saying that we have most likely spent that on medical bills with only the best surgeons and medical staff. Ungrateful if he wants out.

Is it? How often does the best junior footballer of his age fail to become at least worth 300k.

This is not a rookie who played well for one season.....

If he is stamping his feet and playing hardball on a contract now, as an unproven kid coming off a knee with 3 games or whatever under his belt, imagine what negotiations will be like if this kid actually becomes a good player!!

He's being difficult probably for the sake of 50-100k a year at the moment....

Shouldn't he just accept whats given (provided it is fair and reasonable of course) and just STFU and play footy and worry about asking for more money / years when he actually gets a kick??!'

I pose this thinking.
We are favourite to get Treloar and he's reported wage is around the $700k mark. But until the deal is done at the trade table we haven't got him signed.
I would imagine there would be a fair chunk of that would be in off field earnings how much would be the interesting part.
Treloar wants to come to us we have to get a deal done with GWS so you would think if it's going to happen it would be early in the trade period.
Enter Scharenberg Aish into the equation for contracts.
Now taking it on face value what the coach says he wants to stay but there is obviously a difference in what he wants and what we are offering. We also are linked to Kruezer so we have some cap juggling to do.
Now we are also reportedly in negotiations with Pendles about his contract (an extension as I understand it) so how much cap space this eats up going forward is vital as well.
We also have to consider who we may lose off our list and the space that frees under the cap.
I think the stalled negotiations are all because we don't exactly know who is going and coming and the space that may be left in the cap and how much we can generate in off field earnings for players.
I would assume Pendles off field earning capacity would be much higher than Scharenberg or Aish at this point in time.
Is the club freeing up space under the cap from Pendles getting him more off field earnings before we can make firm offers to other players.
I think the situation will unfold quickly once the trade period starts.
It will evolve quickly once we know who is coming and going and how much cap space we have.
If scharenberg does leave we will get around pick 11 or 12 from Adelaide which won't hurt our pursuit of Treloar
I'm still keen on Lobbe instead of Kruezer so maybe trading with Port would be a better option for us a direct swap of players ?
Lobbe is apparently going up for trade so they can get Dixon in

I reckon we can lock in him for say 350k a season for the next 2 years, worth taking that risk with a player like him. We can tell a lot in the next 2 years. Will either be a superstar and ours or give him the flick and make more room in the salary cap in 2 years time.

Simple.

Darkstranger wrote:I reckon we can lock in him for say 350k a season for the next 2 years, worth taking that risk with a player like him. We can tell a lot in the next 2 years. Will either be a superstar and ours or give him the flick and make more room in the salary cap in 2 years time.

Simple.

This I agree with. $350K is the current average annual salary for an AFL player and with the resilience he has shown to overcoming his injuries and plus the fact he is highly rated by Leigh Matthews (no slouch when judging footballers) indicates he is worth taking a risk from a salary perspective.

For those who think we should just pay the money Scharenberg wants, think again. None of us know the amounts in dispute, but the length of the negotiations suggest it's a significant sum. If we were to pay overs for this kid, after 4 average senior games, then we risk unravelling the team culture based on a united campaign to win flags. I suggest De Goey, Moore and Grundy would feel like mugs. They'd feel cheated. It risks blowing our player budget and team cohesion out of the water. Players are more accepting of outside recruits getting paid big bucks, because they know that's the only way to buy in good talent. But to do so for a new relative unproven player, is a recipe for disaster. So don't do it Pies. Let him f@ck off back to Adelaide.

RudeBoy wrote:For those who think we should just pay the money Scharenberg wants, think again. None of us know the amounts in dispute, but the length of the negotiations suggest it's a significant sum. If we were to pay overs for this kid, after 4 average senior games, then we risk unravelling the team culture based on a united campaign to win flags. I suggest De Goey, Moore and Grundy would feel like mugs. They'd feel cheated. It risks blowing our player budget and team cohesion out of the water. Players are more accepting of outside recruits getting paid big bucks, because they know that's the only way to buy in good talent. But to do so for a new relative unproven player, is a recipe for disaster. So don't do it Pies. Let him f@ck off back to Adelaide.

Again FWIW, I agree with THIS ^^^^

Makes good, logical sense RB. The inevitable fall out from paying him overs could be devastating to the other young guns.

The Japanese signed off on the instrument of surrender quicker than Scharenberg with his contract offer.

Someone go lay a sulfur bomb in the Scharenberg household to speed things up.

I nominate Stui.

the problem with Nick's posters is that they think everything is about them and they need quick resolutions to things for their own piece of mind. when they don't get it, they take it personally. The Cloke saga was a classic case in point (another situation that was never going to result in anything but a re-signed player.

QLD summed it up best. It is likely that the pies have said, let's see where we end up we can assess at the end of the season. Manager probably holding out to get the best deal for client and pies not in a position to acede to the request.

I would be shocked if Scharenberg left. Really shocked.

E wrote:I would be shocked if Scharenberg left. Really shocked.

Well at least you will be fully prepared for the shock thanks to some Nick's posters that think everything is about them...

burnsy17 wrote:If he is stamping his feet and playing hardball on a contract now, as an unproven kid coming off a knee with 3 games or whatever under his belt, imagine what negotiations will be like if this kid actually becomes a good player!!

He's being difficult probably for the sake of 50-100k a year at the moment....

Shouldn't he just accept whats given (provided it is fair and reasonable of course) and just STFU and play footy and worry about asking for more money / years when he actually gets a kick??!'

Half the population of Australia don't make that sort of coin, it's certainly not to be sneezed at.

Is it against Nicks rules to say "I don't like Scharenberg"? Just asking.

RudeBoy wrote:Is it against Nicks rules to say "I don't like Scharenberg"? Just asking.

you don't need to.

i will back the club in to re-sign him and will be very, very surprised if he leaves.

the tea session is off.

RudeBoy wrote:For those who think we should just pay the money Scharenberg wants, think again. None of us know the amounts in dispute, but the length of the negotiations suggest it's a significant sum. If we were to pay overs for this kid, after 4 average senior games, then we risk unravelling the team culture based on a united campaign to win flags. I suggest De Goey, Moore and Grundy would feel like mugs. They'd feel cheated. It risks blowing our player budget and team cohesion out of the water. Players are more accepting of outside recruits getting paid big bucks, because they know that's the only way to buy in good talent. But to do so for a new relative unproven player, is a recipe for disaster. So don't do it Pies. Let him f@ck off back to Adelaide.

And we know what they're on and how they'd feel because.... Makes little sense to compare 1 unknown with another unknown, or use it as a predictor of potential angst.

swoop42 wrote:The Japanese signed off on the instrument of surrender quicker than Scharenberg with his contract offer.

Someone go lay a sulfur bomb in the Scharenberg household to speed things up.

I nominate Stui.

So you think we need to bomb his family? Seriously?