List Mgmt. 2025 List Management 📃

[DangerousD]

We will have enough to match if the deal they offer is long enough. GWS did the same with Jez Cameron despite being extremely tight on cap space at the time.

If a deal is 7 years for example, from what we know clubs can match the contract with the money spread any which way across the duration. GWS apparently just said we'll give Cameron all the money in the last 2 years and SFA in the first few where they had already had much of their big money contracts signed up to.

Forcing a trade on TDK is an absolute must if it comes to that. Losing him for a late first rounder in a highly compromised draft would be an epic disaster.

Cameron they knew wanted to go home to Victoria, very little risk in them playing this card if that’s true, Tom would be leaving for the Saints for the biggest contract ever.

 

[marcmurphy3]

ln pure dollar terms the net difference after Tax would be approx $300k per annum, it sounds in theory to get another $600k but he is not going to pocket that at all.
Still of the view he would be mad to go St kilda, absolutely would understand the attraction of going to Geelong playing with his brother & strong ongoing premiership opportunities & the benchmark club of the Afl, going to the Saints is crazy.

He would also stand to make alot less post career.

Plus, unlikely to ever fulfill his full potential as a player having to share the ruck with Marshall. There's only been one circumstance this century of the all australian ruckman playing in a dual ruck set-up.

 

[TheBlueCampaigner]

We will have enough to match if the deal they offer is long enough. GWS did the same with Jez Cameron despite being extremely tight on cap space at the time.

If a deal is 7 years for example, from what we know clubs can match the contract with the money spread any which way across the duration. GWS apparently just said we'll give Cameron all the money in the last 2 years and SFA in the first few where they had already had much of their big money contracts signed up to.

Forcing a trade on TDK is an absolute must if it comes to that. Losing him for a late first rounder in a highly compromised draft would be an epic disaster.

The risk in this scenario is that he accepts our deal and we lose other talent because we can’t afford to pay them.

 

[Coops93]

ln pure dollar terms the net difference after Tax would be approx $300k per annum, it sounds in theory to get another $600k but he is not going to pocket that at all.
Still of the view he would be mad to go St kilda, absolutely would understand the attraction of going to Geelong playing with his brother & strong ongoing premiership opportunities & the benchmark club of the Afl, going to the Saints is crazy.

It's still a significant difference, over the life of the contract it's still over $2m more after tax, which if anything is even more incentive.

 

[ESKIE]

I think the TDK re-signing will be announced after the Hawks game... my prediction

 

[macky99]

It's still a significant difference, over the life of the contract it's still over $2m more after tax, which if anything is even more incentive.

Whilst it may significant over 7 years, be highly surprised if he is not looking at broader things than purely $.

Money does not buy happiness so many examples of this.
The offer from Carlton is said to be approx $1.1m that is still massive, he is not a All Australian, not figured highly in our best and fairest except last year, St Kilda is massively overvalving his worth.

Don't even see it as a great career move with Marshall already there as TDK has had very mixed success as a 2nd ruck.

 

[Coops93]

Whilst it may significant over 7 years, be highly surprised if he is not looking at broader things than purely $.

Money does not buy happiness so many examples of this.
The offer from Carlton is said to be approx $1.1m that is still massive, he is not a All Australian, not figured highly in our best and fairest except last year, St Kilda is massively overvalving his worth.

Don't even see it as a great career move with Marshall already there as TDK has had very mixed success as a 2nd ruck.

It is significant year on year, as well as over 7 years. It's a significant difference no matter how you slice it. Tax or no tax. Even then, I'm sure these guys have plenty of creative accounting support to minimise taxable income, so it's doesn't bring it that much closer.

I'm sure he is contemplating all those things, but a 60% pay increase would turn everyone's head. It's easy for us to contemplate his career for him and say there's more important things than money. If St Kilda are overvaluing him them that's no one's problem but theirs, and is of benefit to TDK financially.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

If TDK goes for 1.7m it's not the end of the world. Ruckmen don't win premierships, certainly not at $1m+ per year. It would be frustrating if we only ended up with a first round pick because of it, as a deal of $1.7m per season demands a top #3 pick. Not sure if we can realistically mess around with 'matching' the offer and trading in a scenario where he's getting $1.7m, but hopefully the club could manufacture a scenario where we get more of a return than a pick tied to our first if he leaves.

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

Whilst it may significant over 7 years, be highly surprised if he is not looking at broader things than purely $.

Money does not buy happiness so many examples of this.
The offer from Carlton is said to be approx $1.1m that is still massive, he is not a All Australian, not figured highly in our best and fairest except last year, St Kilda is massively overvalving his worth.

Don't even see it as a great career move with Marshall already there as TDK has had very mixed success as a 2nd ruck.

When a player chases the almighty $$$, they have to accept all of the pressure that comes with it from the media, the supporter base, and even the club given they've invested so heavily into him. Not sure if TDK is the type who would want the spotlight being directed at him.

Personally, I think he'll sign on after a bit of fine tuning between his manager and the club....in fact, I'm even more confident now than when he was out of contract a couple of years back and the Cats were sniffing around.

And you're absolutely correct, money doesn't buy happiness. You hear so many stories of players knocking back massive offers from other clubs and going on to have success at their current club - and they have zero regrets in their decision.

Weiters told SOS to shove his offer up his blurter last year....reckon TDK will be the next.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

It is significant year on year, as well as over 7 years. It's a significant difference no matter how you slice it. Tax or no tax. Even then, I'm sure these guys have plenty of creative accounting support to minimise taxable income, so it's doesn't bring it that much closer.

I'm sure he is contemplating all those things, but a 60% pay increase would turn everyone's head. It's easy for us to contemplate his career for him and say there's more important things than money. If St Kilda are overvaluing him them that's no one's problem but theirs, and is of benefit to TDK financially.

People forget that to ever make that money they’ll be taxed, also ignoring a dollar now is worth a lot more then a dollar in the future. Post football, who knows; Every club has wealthy supporters and enough networks that unless there is something very specific it probably doesn’t make a difference.

I have little doubt he will take unders to stay with us, how much he is willing to give up is up to him. I’ll be gutted but wouldn’t begrudge him for leaving, it’s no different to someone like Williams coming to us.

 

[macky99]

It is significant year on year, as well as over 7 years. It's a significant difference no matter how you slice it. Tax or no tax. Even then, I'm sure these guys have plenty of creative accounting support to minimise taxable income, so it's doesn't bring it that much closer.

I'm sure he is contemplating all those things, but a 60% pay increase would turn everyone's head. It's easy for us to contemplate his career for him and say there's more important things than money. If St Kilda are overvaluing him them that's no one's problem but theirs, and is of benefit to TDK financially.

Sole reason for choosing Saints would be purely for $ no other reason, that would put huge pressure on him.
Again not a good career move for him they already have a very good ruckman,Saints would be better spending the $ on another quality midfielder.

Saints are going for anyone of quality no takers over the last 3 years, still don't expect him to move to St Kilda.

 

[Blue__Balls]

I dont understand this.

Why would TDK be leaving if we match the deal? To force a trade you need to match the deal offered, which by reports is huge.

If Tom was to leave, it would only be because the difference in deals is too big to pass up.

There’s no trade in this scenario

Depends how it plays out. There are two higher profile precedents that have been established (oddly enough, both to Geelong...).

Dangerfield's free agency paperwork was never actually lodged. Adelaide made it clear they would match, Geelong accepted that reality and negotiated a trade.

Jeremy Cameron is in fact the first and only time a Restricted Free Agent has had their bid formally matched. At the end of the Free Agency window he was technically still a GWS player after they actually matched the Geelong bid, though both parties knew full well that he'd be moving. It was just a case of GWS ensuring they held the whip hand in negotiations so they could extract maximum value in the trade.

If TDK accepts terms from St Kilda, we could indicate we're going to match the bid, resulting in a trade being negotiated. Or the FA match paperwork could be filed and then the result could still be that Tom is traded. Only way he'd stay after we match the bid is if we're happy with that outcome and we believe Tom will honour it by giving his all for the jumper moving forward, or if St Kilda pull up stumps and refuse to trade.

 

[Blue__Balls]

The risk in this scenario is that he accepts our deal and we lose other talent because we can’t afford to pay them.

We wouldn't hold him on a contract that was that prohibitively expensive. We'd either match and then trade with St Kilda, or at worst we'd get one more year out of him and tell him he's welcome to get his manager to find another club who are prepared to take on his contract provided they can offer X, Y and Z in a trade.

 

[Stamos]

Depends how it plays out. There are two higher profile precedents that have been established (oddly enough, both to Geelong...).

Dangerfield's free agency paperwork was never actually lodged. Adelaide made it clear they would match, Geelong accepted that reality and negotiated a trade.

Jeremy Cameron is in fact the first and only time a Restricted Free Agent has had their bid formally matched. At the end of the Free Agency window he was technically still a GWS player after they actually matched the Geelong bid, though both parties knew full well that he'd be moving. It was just a case of GWS ensuring they held the whip hand in negotiations so they could extract maximum value in the trade.

If TDK accepts terms from St Kilda, we could indicate we're going to match the bid, resulting in a trade being negotiated. Or the FA match paperwork could be filed and then the result could still be that Tom is traded. Only way he'd stay after we match the bid is if we're happy with that outcome and we believe Tom will honour it by giving his all for the jumper moving forward, or if St Kilda pull up stumps and refuse to trade.

The thing is neither Cameron or Dangerfield went to Geelong for more money than their clubs offered. Very different scenarios to what would happen if TDK wanted to take up St Kilda's offer.

 

[SurreyBlue]

The thing is neither Cameron or Dangerfield went to Geelong for more money than their clubs offered. Very different scenarios to what would happen if TDK wanted to take up St Kilda's offer.

That's what they tell us or is on the books.

 

[Arr0w]

How many A graders chase coin without having won a flag?

 

[Blue__Balls]

The thing is neither Cameron or Dangerfield went to Geelong for more money than their clubs offered. Very different scenarios to what would happen if TDK wanted to take up St Kilda's offer.

Not sure that's relevant, TBH. In fact - it suggests that even when the club could afford to pay the player what they want, and the player reeeally wanted out, they still just utilised the bid matching process to enforce a trade.

If TDK accepts the Saints offer and we match the bid, they'll pay big-time at the trade table. To do otherwise would make a mockery of their inability to lure a big fish, after they've already been rejected by so many.

 

[Stamos]

Not sure that's relevant, TBH. In fact - it suggests that even when the club could afford to pay the player what they want, and the player reeeally wanted out, they still just utilised the bid matching process to enforce a trade.

If TDK accepts the Saints offer and we match the bid, they'll pay big-time at the trade table. To do otherwise would make a mockery of their inability to lure a big fish, after they've already been rejected by so many.

I think you're misreading the situation.
Adelaide and Giants 'matched' because they could financially, and were able to force better trades than compo. And both times, Geelong could afford to trade because they weren't paying overs in terms of salary.

They are very different situations to that of TDK & St Kilda, where it is all about the money. It would be a true FA salary that we would not be able to afford, and the Saints would not be willing to trade for a player that they've made an FA offer for.

 

[Arr0w]

I think you're misreading the situation.
Adelaide and Giants 'matched' because they could financially, and were able to force better trades than compo. And both times, Geelong could afford to trade because they weren't paying overs in terms of salary.

They are very different situations to that of TDK & St Kilda, where it is all about the money. It would be a true FA salary that we would not be able to afford, and the Saints would not be willing to trade for a player that they've made an FA offer for.

How many A grade players take higher offers over potential success

North went through a period where they offered huge coin to attract quality players

Saints have already been knocked back by a number of players

While not the best offer in the market, ours is still a sizable investment, one that should be enough for TDK to remain

 

[Blue__Balls]

I think you're misreading the situation.
Adelaide and Giants 'matched' because they could financially, and were able to force better trades than compo. And both times, Geelong could afford to trade because they weren't paying overs in terms of salary.

They are very different situations to that of TDK & St Kilda, where it is all about the money. It would be a true FA salary that we would not be able to afford, and the Saints would not be willing to trade for a player that they've made an FA offer for.

I'm not sure TDK would want to walk back into the club on day 1 of preseason having forced our hand and taken a massive payday that saw him earning as much as our next two top paid players combined...especially when those players had themselves forgone big money to help position the club for a run at sustained success.

So if we match a bid for TDK, it won't result in him going "sweet, that's the figure I wanted, I'll stick around now thanks" - he'll still have committed to St Kilda, they'll still be keen, and they'll pay up knowing that it will be their best chance to land a genuine match-winning player who could help drive them back into relevance.

 

[Stamos]

How many A grade players take higher offers over potential success

I can't think of a single well paid, well respected gun player who has left purely for money.

There was Ablett Junior, but he had been on unders at Geelong, got expansion money and moved interstate. Different situation.

 

[Stamos]

I'm not sure TDK would want to walk back into the club on day 1 of preseason having forced our hand and taken a massive payday that saw him earning as much as our next two top paid players combined...especially when those players had themselves forgone big money to help position the club for a run at sustained success.

So if we match a bid for TDK, it won't result in him going "sweet, that's the figure I wanted, I'll stick around now thanks" - he'll still have committed to St Kilda, they'll still be keen, and they'll pay up knowing that it will be their best chance to land a genuine match-winning player who could help drive them back into relevance.

We wouldn't be able to match St Kilda's offer, if he decides to take it.

 

[Blue__Balls]

We wouldn't be able to match St Kilda's offer, if he decides to take it.

Who knows if that's true - a long enough offer gives us plenty of years in which we can claim to be able to move other contracts around. We only have 9 players contracted past the end of next year - if the Saints are offering a 7 year deal, then we've got a lot of years there where there's not a whole lot of salary locked in.

 

[Arr0w]

I can't think of a single well paid, well respected gun player who has left purely for money.

There was Ablett Junior, but he had been on unders at Geelong, got expansion money and moved interstate. Different situation.

He also tasted success prior to leaving

I doubt TDK will entertain the Saints offer

 

[Stamos]

Who knows if that's true - a long enough offer gives us plenty of years in which we can claim to be able to move other contracts around. We only have 9 players contracted past the end of next year - if the Saints are offering a 7 year deal, then we've got a lot of years there where there's not a whole lot of salary locked in.

You can't 'match' by back-ending all the money.