Blue Vain wrote:
99prelim wrote:
Donstuie wrote:
cimm1979 wrote:
Always a little suspicious about clubs who can constantly stay near the top.
Is there ever a story about Geelong and the Hawks and salary cap pressure?
Nope, but plenty about how players are willing to take pay-cuts to stay together.
Which is exactly why Betts can GAGF!
$400000 is more than good money for him
Ask Josh Kennedy about loyalty. He committed 100% to Carlton and we couldn't wait to ship him off to get Judd. The kid wanted to stay and was told to pack his bags and piss off.
We've got supporters here calling the players weak, soft, gutless. Telling them to @#$%&! off. Wanting Malthouse to cut the guts out of the list.
And you want to tell a player to @#$%&! off because he wont take a $150,000 per annum paycut to stay.

Cause he would be the first player in the history of the AFL to knock back a bigger offer to stay at the club that plucked him from obscurity.
$450000 is a proportional piece of the pie. He obviously wants more. There are clubs willing to give him that money. Pack your bags and POQ.
I'll bet you Brian Lake wouldn't be on $400000
Loyalty works both ways BV. You're right. I was shattered when we lost JK. Said from day one that we paid overs for Judd.
In Eddie's case, the CFC gave him his opportunity when others hadn't.
For me, a successful trade period will be one where Betts goes and Thomas stays at Collingwood. At least on the surface, it will look as though we don't pander to the avarice of players