Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Pa Marmo wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:When Collingwood broke off the negotiations, after Cloke rejected their offer of $800,000 pa over 4 years, and $800,000 in the 5th year, subject to performance indicators, both sides agreed not to discuss the contract with the media.

How do you know this agreement was made?

RudeBoy wrote:Collingwood has kept its side of the bargain, but now Cloke has gone public...again...after being told not to. This is the second time he has gone out of his way to self promote and discuss his contract negotiations when advised by the club not to do so. He did not seek clearance from the club to do the interview, as is the normal required practice.

you know they didn't ask for permission how? Didn't hide it very well either, looks like Bobby Rose was looking right at them

RudeBoy wrote:Furthermore, he appeared without a club uniform or top, which is contrary to club protocols. But worse still, he lied when he said that his dispute with Collingwood was not over money!! And if that's not all, he was apparently content to say that he's doing his job on the field!!!!!

FFS, this guy is either completely delusional, a h*#fwit, or else he is deliberately trying to unravel our finals campaign. I've said previously that Cloke should be dropped from the team and shown the door. I know this won't happen this close to the finals. However, I implore the club to make a bold statement - like they did with Swanny - and drop Cloke to the VFL this week. He should only come back into our side against the bombers if he is prepared to apologise to his teammates for drawing media attention to himself, at the very time we are promoting the one in all in theme to propel us to finals victory.

Sadly, I fear he has fu#ked our flag prospects, but I will not throw in the towel while we are still in the race. Poor Bucks. He looked like he was completely shocked and nonplussed by Cloke's attitude and behaviour.

Your either delusional or in the know, I know which one I think is true.
I like Travis, I believe he will stay.

the article was to promote the variety bash and he does not appear to be representing the club.

the wailing ad nauseum from the usual suspects is predictable and tiring. the club is equally as culpable as the clokes in not keeping this out of the media. i don't think i have seen a day go by when this saga has not been spoken or written about ever since they defered negotiations. that tactic has worked marvellously well, hasn't it?!

what disappoints me the most is the supporters who are turning on cloke. the invective, vitriol and vehemency of some of the commentary is staggering to say the least - on the radio, the online forums and at the games. as per usual the "side by side" motto is only a motto of convenience for club and supporter to trot out when it suits their argument or contention.

rocketronnie wrote:Rudeboy has been short on fact and long on supposition since his first post in this thread.

THE ongoing contract negs are putting massive pressure on Rudie, the poor lad doesnt know if hes arthur or martha. The sticking point seems to be a regular supply of Whizz Fizz, gob stoppers and white knights in his fifth year, we want a perfomance based tooth decay contract, but his cunning old man is whispering sweet temptations in the boys ear. So we have stalemate, and Nicks aint budging one more inch for his outrageous demands. !

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/former- ... 6456297526

But Malthouse says Magpies supporters should get off the in-demand 25-year-old's back.

Malthouse reckons we need to get behind Cloke to help him change his form?

To be honest, I tend to agree. The fans need to start getting behind him. Who knows...it may sway him to stay.

Apparently Ed had a few things to say on MMM this morning? I only heard 2nd hand what was said but apparently the Pies are adamant that they will not offer a 5th year?

If this is the case, I change my mind about Collingwood's role in these negotiations. Just offer the &^*%$# 5th year and get it done.

Seriously. What's the difference between 4 and 5 years? Plenty of players running around at the moment not deserving of their annual salary.

John Wren wrote:
what disappoints me the most is the supporters who are turning on cloke. the invective, vitriol and vehemency of some of the commentary is staggering to say the least - on the radio, the online forums and at the games. as per usual the "side by side" motto is only a motto of convenience for club and supporter to trot out when it suits their argument or contention.

That's because along with the club and his team mates they all know he's gone! so side by side doesn't apply to him anymore, especially with the old foe sniffing about

Whately has said twice in the last week that he is gone and there is no other way to read it, now he's not given to big statements and is usually pretty measured but he was emphatic

The writing is on the wall, the club and players are making pointed statements obviously directed at Cloke and several media figures in the know believe he is walking

If true he deserves to be reviled in perpetuity

Do you mean your name is per usual the side by side motto is a motto of convenience for club and supporter to trot out when it suits their argument or contention ?

ClokingDevice wrote:

John Wren wrote:
what disappoints me the most is the supporters who are turning on cloke. the invective, vitriol and vehemency of some of the commentary is staggering to say the least - on the radio, the online forums and at the games. as per usual the "side by side" motto is only a motto of convenience for club and supporter to trot out when it suits their argument or contention.

That's because along with the club and his team mates they all know he's gone! so side by side doesn't apply to him anymore, especially with the old foe sniffing about

Whately has said twice in the last week that he is gone and there is no other way to read it, now he's not given to big statements and is usually pretty measured but he was emphatic

The writing is on the wall, the club and players are making pointed statements obviously directed at Cloke and several media figures in the know believe he is walking

If true he deserves to be reviled in perpetuity

Whately s speculating same as you. Neither of you know doodly squat about what is or isn't happening internally at Colliingwood.

Next.

Deja Vu wrote:Apparently Ed had a few things to say on MMM this morning? I only heard 2nd hand what was said but apparently the Pies are adamant that they will not offer a 5th year?

If this is the case, I change my mind about Collingwood's role in these negotiations. Just offer the &^*%$# 5th year and get it done.

Seriously. What's the difference between 4 and 5 years? Plenty of players running around at the moment not deserving of their annual salary.

Five years is a long time in football. What will your comment be if he breaks down during his 4th year and he does not event take the field in his 5th contracted year.

What will you say if we cannot retain future potential stars such as Witts and others that have not even been recruited yet due to the fact that we do not have enough room in our salary cap due to too much going to one player.

Team management is a fine balance along with a gamble. The longer the contracts - the bigger the gamble. If the club get it wrong the result will ultimately be lack of player depth and poor performance on the field. If that happens I am sure that the response from many on here will be "Sack Eddie" and "Sack Bucks" etc. Hiss and Spain will have a field day.

I support the clubs actions on this. Players come and go. I would like to see Cloke retained but not at the expense of our long term success.

At the end of the day this will all be sorted out out after the final siren for the year. In the meantime we should do everything possible so as to achieve success in 2012. This includes supporting ALL of our players.

I believe Travis will stay!

Member 7167 wrote:

Deja Vu wrote:Apparently Ed had a few things to say on MMM this morning? I only heard 2nd hand what was said but apparently the Pies are adamant that they will not offer a 5th year?

If this is the case, I change my mind about Collingwood's role in these negotiations. Just offer the &^*%$# 5th year and get it done.

Seriously. What's the difference between 4 and 5 years? Plenty of players running around at the moment not deserving of their annual salary.

Five years is a long time in football. What will your comment be if he breaks down during his 4th year and he does not event take the field in his 5th contracted year.

What will you say if we cannot retain future potential stars such as Witts and others that have not even been recruited yet due to the fact that we do not have enough room in our salary cap due to too much going to one player.

Team management is a fine balance along with a gamble. The longer the contracts - the bigger the gamble. If the club get it wrong the result will ultimately be lack of player depth and poor performance on the field. If that happens I am sure that the response from many on here will be "Sack Eddie" and "Sack Bucks" etc. Hiss and Spain will have a field day.

I support the clubs actions on this. Players come and go. I would like to see Cloke retained but not at the expense of our long term success.

At the end of the day this will all be sorted out out after the final siren for the year. In the meantime we should do everything possible so as to achieve success in 2012. This includes supporting ALL of our players.

Ed said that 5th year was a point of contention, NOT that they wouldn't consider it.

He did not begrudge Travis going for the best possible deal for Travis, but the club had the bigger picture to consider. List management over the period had to be taken into account ie. any decision on a long term contract for a player has implications for all players on the list.

WHAT the hell would a prune like Gerard Whately know anyway. ??

Member 7167 wrote:

Deja Vu wrote:Apparently Ed had a few things to say on MMM this morning? I only heard 2nd hand what was said but apparently the Pies are adamant that they will not offer a 5th year?

If this is the case, I change my mind about Collingwood's role in these negotiations. Just offer the &^*%$# 5th year and get it done.

Seriously. What's the difference between 4 and 5 years? Plenty of players running around at the moment not deserving of their annual salary.

Five years is a long time in football. What will your comment be if he breaks down during his 4th year and he does not event take the field in his 5th contracted year.

What will you say if we cannot retain future potential stars such as Witts and others that have not even been recruited yet due to the fact that we do not have enough room in our salary cap due to too much going to one player.

Team management is a fine balance along with a gamble. The longer the contracts - the bigger the gamble. If the club get it wrong the result will ultimately be lack of player depth and poor performance on the field. If that happens I am sure that the response from many on here will be "Sack Eddie" and "Sack Bucks" etc. Hiss and Spain will have a field day.

I support the clubs actions on this. Players come and go. I would like to see Cloke retained but not at the expense of our long term success.

At the end of the day this will all be sorted out out after the final siren for the year. In the meantime we should do everything possible so as to achieve success in 2012. This includes supporting ALL of our players.

It's common practice among all AFL clubs to backend contracts for star players to manage the salary cap squeeze. It's been reported that Riewoldt and Jonno Brown have been on close to $1M a year for the last couple of years. No one thinks that they are playing to that level at this stage of their careers, but everyone accepts that this is payment for those peak years in which they were paid well under their market value.

Do I expect Cloke to be playing as a $800K CHF when he is 30 years old? No I don't. But I will accept that it is money being paid in lieu of the service he has given throughout his career.

The other things that needs to be taken into consideration is where will we be in 5 years time as a team? Threatening for a premiership? Rebuilding? On the downward spiral?

Our chance for premiership success is in the next 2 to 3 years (probably less than that really). Cloke staying does not guarantee us a flag next year or the year after, but I'm pretty certain we won't win a flag without him.

Whately's speculation is far superior to mine, as it should be, he's a paid professional plugged into the industry and it's his job to talk to the relevant parties and guage the situation

Even common sense will tell you what's going on.. but don't ask me, just listen to what any Collingwood player that signs up has to say.. you can mumble 'next' all you like but it won't change reality, he's gone, get used to it and start looking for someone to blow half a mill on

^^ TIPPETT ???

Piesnchess wrote:^^ TIPPETT ???

He'd be perfect for sure.. he'd take the pinch hit ruck role away from Dawes who is just gettiong monstered by it, but it would be a tough sell with him looking forward to going back to family in QLD.. we would have to hope the offer of around 700K and premierships would be enough to counter that