List Mgmt. 2025 List Mismanagement and Trading

[Mostyn]

No, he doesn't work for free, it's no different than any other frontloading example. He agrees to a 2 year contract at a specific value, we just pay that out in the first year. It's not difficult to grasp, it's frontloading 10, just an adjustment to how much goes to the longer term more expensive players. If you're worried about whether this fringe player will put in in his final year, then you're ignoring that they all want another contract and not putting in won't earn them one.

How about you explain the pitfalls for us?

You want to run a business where you pay someone for two years work in its entirety in the first year?

That's NOT how front loading works.

Front loading is taking a four year $2m contract and paying it $750k/$750k/$250k/$250k.

Your suggestion only makes sense if you DO want to cut them. What if they have a fantastic first year and demand to be traded?

 

[Mostyn]

Not too many would agree that Murray or Himmelberg to this point have ever been classed as ruck/forwards more forwards capable of chopping out in ruck if required. With Murray since he's joined the Crows there's really no evidence in his SANFL games we're concentrating on him being our back up ruck going forward.

Sorry - I meant forwards who are the 2nd ruck.

That's always been Himmelburg's role and seems the most obvious role for Murray. Burgess has never been a good 2nd ruck option.

 

[The Shapeshifter]

You want to run a business where you pay someone for two years work in its entirety in the first year?

That's NOT how front loading works.

Front loading is taking a four year $2m contract and paying it $750k/$750k/$250k/$250k.

Your suggestion only makes sense if you DO want to cut them. What if they have a fantastic first year and demand to be traded?

What's the pitfall chief? You seem to be deliberately avoiding answering that question? Do you reckon that both Schoey and Burgess would phone in 2025 with their careers on the line if they'd been paid their contract up front? Do you think the higher end player reduces output when the $250k part of their $500k average arrives? Risk is less with the Schoeys and Burgesses. The players with value, ie Gibbs, might decide they'll cash in and move on when the cheap part arrives. No risk with our $250k guys in the soon to delist pile.

Again, what's the pitfall?

 

[GreyCrow]

What about taxable income? The player would be advised to carefully consider those implications

 

[Mostyn]

What's the pitfall chief? You seem to be deliberately avoiding answering that question? Do you reckon that both Schoey and Burgess would phone in 2025 with their careers on the line if they'd been paid their contract up front? Do you think the higher end player reduces output when the $250k part of their $500k average arrives? Risk is less with the Schoeys and Burgesses. The players with value, ie Gibbs, might decide they'll cash in and move on when the cheap part arrives. No risk with our $250k guys in the soon to delist pile.

Again, what's the pitfall?

I said an obvious one. You did notice that, right? Considering you've weirdly said I've avoided your question.

You pay them for two years in the first year, they have a great year - and demand a trade.

Which they'd be pretty likely to do, considering you're paying them specifically so you can cut them without remorse.

Their agent would be licking their lips to sell them to someone else. ANYTHING he gets would be found money.

Meanwhile, by stacking your current year salary cap with two years of salary for some players - surely that means someone is getting less than they deserve? So they want to leave as well?

What about tax? What about employment status of someone who is your "employee" but you're not giving him any salary payments for a whole year - is that even legal?

Front load a bit, sure. But your idea seems nuts.

 

[bayside_crow]

What about taxable income? The player would be advised to carefully consider those implications

Yes. Though as long as they don’t drop any year below $190k, all the money shuffled around would be in the top tax bracket anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Mostyn]

Yes. Though as long as they don’t drop any year below $190k, all the money shuffled around would be in the top tax bracket anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I think the idea proposed is to pay someone $450k one year and nothing the next

 

[spenze]

It probably happens a lot more with rucks that go late/rookie/MSD than most other roles, and maybe not gamechangers but way way above average ruckmen and many decent lead rucks like the current Tristan Xerri, Lloyd Meek, Jordan Sweet and ***Sam Draper and let's not forget Reilly O'Brien

Dean Cox #28 Rookie Draft
Aaron Sandilands #33 Rookie Draft
Jarrod Witts #67 National Draft
Rowan Marshall #10 Rookie Draft
Oscar McInerny #37 Rookie Draft
Shane Mumford #67 National Draft
Stefan Martin #3 Preseason Draft
Sam Jacobs #1 Rookie Draft
Darren Jolly #31 Rookie Draft

Witts was a NSW scholarship player like Tex, he was always being taken with Collingwoods last pick in the draft

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I think the idea proposed is to pay someone $450k one year and nothing the next

Football years are not financial year, so you could flow it across 2 financial years.

 

[The Shapeshifter]

I said an obvious one. You did notice that, right? Considering you've weirdly said I've avoided your question.

You pay them for two years in the first year, they have a great year - and demand a trade.

Which they'd be pretty likely to do, considering you're paying them specifically so you can cut them without remorse.

Their agent would be licking their lips to sell them to someone else. ANYTHING he gets would be found money.

Meanwhile, by stacking your current year salary cap with two years of salary for some players - surely that means someone is getting less than they deserve? So they want to leave as well?

What about tax? What about employment status of someone who is your "employee" but you're not giving him any salary payments for a whole year - is that even legal?

Front load a bit, sure. But your idea seems nuts.

If they demand a trade, then we hold the cards having paid them and they remaining contracted. It's pretty simple really.

 

[The Shapeshifter]

What about taxable income? The player would be advised to carefully consider those implications

Sportspeople's taxable income is averaged, being paid in advance is swings and roundabouts.

Income averaging for special professionals 2024 | Australian Taxation Office

Information about types of professional income and how to work out the tax payable with income averaging.

www.ato.gov.au

 

[The Shapeshifter]

Yes. Though as long as they don’t drop any year below $190k, all the money shuffled around would be in the top tax bracket anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

You don't understand tax.

 

[Big Dub]

You don't understand tax.

In my opinion, that's a compliment.

Tax people are weird

 

[Mostyn]

If they demand a trade, then we hold the cards having paid them and they remaining contracted. It's pretty simple really.

Yes, that happens a lot. Holding someone to a contract where you do not plan to pay them for that year.

Again - these are employees. What you're proposing would break a stack of laws. No manager in existence would agree to it.

 

[Big Dub]

Yes, that happens a lot. Holding someone to a contract where you do not plan to pay them for that year.

Again - these are employees. What you're proposing would break a stack of laws. No manager in existence would agree to it.

Actually, legally it's pretty simple to hold someone to a contract where you have paid upfront.

It might practically be a bit harder in AFL land where the player tends to end up where he wants. But you can always hold an employee to a contract you have already paid for.

 

[crow2crow]

I had signed off for the year but then I caught a glimpse of toby murray in a video... you can't put on that much size in 3 months surely?? holy moly

 

[crow2crow]

What about taxable income? The player would be advised to carefully consider those implications

their tax works differently to ours
look it up for professional sports people, it doesn't work on the tax year like the rest of us

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Football years are not financial year, so you could flow it across 2 financial years.

I thought professional athletes had special averaging rules for tax purposes.

 

[cleanhands]

I had signed off for the year but then I caught a glimpse of toby murray in a video... you can't put on that much size in 3 months surely?? holy moly

D Jarman didn’t have any trouble