Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Deja Vu wrote:50 goals in an average season. He is simply too important to let go. Get the deal done Collingwood and stop being petulant about this 5th year

Agreed. If we have to lose Goldsack or a Wellers, so be it.

The thought of losing him to the Scum and opening up a premiership window for them should be enough to get the deal done.

Port played hardball with Nick Stevens and look where that got them.

Give him 5.

Forgot how good he was until that performance last night.

thebaldfacts wrote:

Deja Vu wrote:50 goals in an average season. He is simply too important to let go. Get the deal done Collingwood and stop being petulant about this 5th year

Agreed. If we have to lose Goldsack or a Wellers, so be it.

The thought of losing him to the Scum and opening up a premiership window for them should be enough to get the deal done.

Port played hardball with Nick Stevens and look where that got them.

Give him 5.

Forgot how good he was until that performance last night.

Couldn't agree more with this, I would like to hang on to Goldy though. If we have to loose Wellers, Harry or the Caff, so be it. I don't want any of that trio to go, but Trav is just that important.

I'm sure it's been considered in negotiations, but this would be my compromise offer to try to settle this damn business.

Assuming the parties are willing to accept $750-800,000 pa, the stumbling issue seems to be over it being a 4 or 5 year deal.

I'd offer Cloke a one year deal for $800,000 and then assuming he's in good form give him another 4 years on the same money starting in 2014. This way, he gets his 5 yrs on the money he wants but we don't actually commit to a 5 yr deal up front. It's a win win as far as I can tell.

The stumbling block will really be whether Demir wants to do a deal with Collingwood or whether he has already committed his son to leaving for more dough.

RudeBoy wrote:I'm sure it's been considered in negotiations, but this would be my compromise offer to try to settle this damn business.

Assuming the parties are willing to accept $750-800,000 pa, the stumbling issue seems to be over it being a 4 or 5 year deal.

I'd offer Cloke a one year deal for $800,000 and then assuming he's in good form give him another 4 years on the same money starting in 2014. This way, he gets his 5 yrs on the money he wants but we don't actually commit to a 5 yr deal up front. It's a win win as far as I can tell.

The stumbling block will really be whether Demir wants to do a deal with Collingwood or whether he has already committed his son to leaving for more dough.

Ummm the stumbling block is that a five year deal is on the table from Travis and his management. Why would Travis and his management even consider a one year deal with only a vague promise of more attached to it?I doubt either party would even consider the option. Collingwood needs to stop mucking about and sign off on the five year deal and just get it over and done if they want him.

rocketronnie wrote:

Beast wrote:

rocketronnie wrote:Some beautiful humble pie being eaten in this thread now

The amount of humble pie you've devoured over the years makes me wonder if you order a crane to leave the house

For two months Cloke played without any enthusiasm and wasn't getting much love from the rest of the boys. It's not the five goals he's kicked its the passion and the work rate that was absolutely wonderful to see.
Something has clearly changed, maybe he's signed or maybe he got our blessing to leave and feels like the weight is finally of his shoulders....

nomnomnom

Humble pie is a professional hazard McFeast, are you prepared to eat your share?

Sure, if you point out anything I said about Cloke that was actually incorrect.

Your time to shine ronnie or are you going to squib out of this as usual?

rocketronnie wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:I'm sure it's been considered in negotiations, but this would be my compromise offer to try to settle this damn business.

Assuming the parties are willing to accept $750-800,000 pa, the stumbling issue seems to be over it being a 4 or 5 year deal.

I'd offer Cloke a one year deal for $800,000 and then assuming he's in good form give him another 4 years on the same money starting in 2014. This way, he gets his 5 yrs on the money he wants but we don't actually commit to a 5 yr deal up front. It's a win win as far as I can tell.

The stumbling block will really be whether Demir wants to do a deal with Collingwood or whether he has already committed his son to leaving for more dough.

Ummm the stumbling block is that a five year deal is on the table from Travis and his management. Why would Travis and his management even consider a one year deal with only a vague promise of more attached to it?I doubt either party would even consider the option. Collingwood needs to stop mucking about and sign off on the five year deal and just get it over and done if they want him.

And then Pendles, Daisy, Beams and Reid will want 5 yr deals too. Not a smart move imo. I genuinely think giving in to Cloke's demands for a 5 yr deal would provide a short term fix with long term pain. The whole management of our TPPs going forward could start to unravel.

RudeBoy wrote:

rocketronnie wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:I'm sure it's been considered in negotiations, but this would be my compromise offer to try to settle this damn business.

Assuming the parties are willing to accept $750-800,000 pa, the stumbling issue seems to be over it being a 4 or 5 year deal.

I'd offer Cloke a one year deal for $800,000 and then assuming he's in good form give him another 4 years on the same money starting in 2014. This way, he gets his 5 yrs on the money he wants but we don't actually commit to a 5 yr deal up front. It's a win win as far as I can tell.

The stumbling block will really be whether Demir wants to do a deal with Collingwood or whether he has already committed his son to leaving for more dough.

Ummm the stumbling block is that a five year deal is on the table from Travis and his management. Why would Travis and his management even consider a one year deal with only a vague promise of more attached to it?I doubt either party would even consider the option. Collingwood needs to stop mucking about and sign off on the five year deal and just get it over and done if they want him.

And then Pendles, Daisy, Beams and Reid will want 5 yr deals too. Not a smart move imo. I genuinely think giving in to Cloke's demands for a 5 yr deal would provide a short term fix with long term pain. The whole management of our TPPs going forward could start to unravel.

Welcome to free agency. Clubs can no longer dictate to players as they used to.

I still fail to see how 1 extra year is such a disaster that will screw us over for well that 1 whole year...

Hell he could be still performing and the club would have had to pay him 800k anyway, this way they know for sure what they have to pay in 5 years time instead of having to keep 300k spare in case he actually is still that damn good

RudeBoy wrote:

rocketronnie wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:I'm sure it's been considered in negotiations, but this would be my compromise offer to try to settle this damn business.

Assuming the parties are willing to accept $750-800,000 pa, the stumbling issue seems to be over it being a 4 or 5 year deal.

I'd offer Cloke a one year deal for $800,000 and then assuming he's in good form give him another 4 years on the same money starting in 2014. This way, he gets his 5 yrs on the money he wants but we don't actually commit to a 5 yr deal up front. It's a win win as far as I can tell.

The stumbling block will really be whether Demir wants to do a deal with Collingwood or whether he has already committed his son to leaving for more dough.

Ummm the stumbling block is that a five year deal is on the table from Travis and his management. Why would Travis and his management even consider a one year deal with only a vague promise of more attached to it?I doubt either party would even consider the option. Collingwood needs to stop mucking about and sign off on the five year deal and just get it over and done if they want him.

And then Pendles, Daisy, Beams and Reid will want 5 yr deals too. Not a smart move imo. I genuinely think giving in to Cloke's demands for a 5 yr deal would provide a short term fix with long term pain. The whole management of our TPPs going forward could start to unravel.

I don't know. Not everyone wants 5 year deals. Beams signed for 3, not even 4. Pendles only signed for 1 in his last deal, or maybe 2. I don't think they'll all of a sudden demand 5 years. Maybe Cloke's just more loyal?

When a player has rival offers of 5 years and they'd really like that security, it's difficult for them to see why the club would hold back. This is what free agency does, it lengthens and inflates contracts. It's then up to the club to decide how much they want each player.

I don't think it's a bad thing either. There's no doubt that the power balance was too greatly in favour of clubs previously.

SIGN him, primarily to spite Caaaaarlton. !

FWIW the boys on morning glory said that he wants to sign and that it is only Demir who is holding off.

Saying that whispers are that he may sign this week, but it is SEN.

how about a four year deal with a 5th year being a team option with a buy out of say $300k or something.

what this means is that if Pies dont want him in year 5 they would have to give him a $300k parting gift. That way, he will have gotten his extra $300k, and then is free to get what he can in the fifth year.

Usually, this kind of structure results in a fifth year, unless the guy is a total spud. In the latter case, he still gets the higher salary recognition for the four years he did play. I expect the $300k would count towards the fifth year for salary cap purposes, but sommeone else can confirm that.

This is a very US style solution to the problem of more years less cash vs less cash for more years (in a tight salary cap environment). This way, we decide in Year 5 whether its a 4 year or 5 year contract, and if We decide its a four years contract, then we pay him the extra cash to recognize that.

AN_Inkling wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:

rocketronnie wrote: Ummm the stumbling block is that a five year deal is on the table from Travis and his management. Why would Travis and his management even consider a one year deal with only a vague promise of more attached to it?I doubt either party would even consider the option. Collingwood needs to stop mucking about and sign off on the five year deal and just get it over and done if they want him.

And then Pendles, Daisy, Beams and Reid will want 5 yr deals too. Not a smart move imo. I genuinely think giving in to Cloke's demands for a 5 yr deal would provide a short term fix with long term pain. The whole management of our TPPs going forward could start to unravel.

I don't know. Not everyone wants 5 year deals. Beams signed for 3, not even 4. Pendles only signed for 1 in his last deal, or maybe 2. I don't think they'll all of a sudden demand 5 years. Maybe Cloke's just more loyal?

When a player has rival offers of 5 years and they'd really like that security, it's difficult for them to see why the club would hold back. This is what free agency does, it lengthens and inflates contracts. It's then up to the club to decide how much they want each player.

I don't think it's a bad thing either. There's no doubt that the power balance was too greatly in favour of clubs previously.

isn't daisy due to become a restricted free agent at the end of next year?

we know pendles held off until the cba was signed. even then he did not commit lng term and he too soon becomes a restricted free agent.

additionally, it's the other clubs who set the precedent with offering five year deals so you can't blame cloke to ask for the same at his club.

AN_Inkling wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:

rocketronnie wrote: Ummm the stumbling block is that a five year deal is on the table from Travis and his management. Why would Travis and his management even consider a one year deal with only a vague promise of more attached to it?I doubt either party would even consider the option. Collingwood needs to stop mucking about and sign off on the five year deal and just get it over and done if they want him.

And then Pendles, Daisy, Beams and Reid will want 5 yr deals too. Not a smart move imo. I genuinely think giving in to Cloke's demands for a 5 yr deal would provide a short term fix with long term pain. The whole management of our TPPs going forward could start to unravel.

I don't know. Not everyone wants 5 year deals. Beams signed for 3, not even 4. Pendles only signed for 1 in his last deal, or maybe 2. I don't think they'll all of a sudden demand 5 years. Maybe Cloke's just more loyal?

When a player has rival offers of 5 years and they'd really like that security, it's difficult for them to see why the club would hold back. This is what free agency does, it lengthens and inflates contracts. It's then up to the club to decide how much they want each player.

I don't think it's a bad thing either. There's no doubt that the power balance was too greatly in favour of clubs previously.

Pendles extended his current deal by 4 years - this year
Thats four more after this year

Pendles signed a 4 year deal earlier this year.

Daisy has only ever signed contracts 2 years at a time, so it will be interesting to see what happens with him next year.

The advent of free agency will mean clubs will need to be more flexible in offering 5 year deals. Selwood, Deledio, Hurley have all recently signed on for 5 years