Our Salary Cap

[tigerman]

Why is our Salary cap so tight?

We've had Astbury and Houli retire, and Rance who's contract was up at the end of this year accepted a reduce payout.

Are Dusty and Lynch's contracts back-ended?

Jack Riewoldt has signed on for one more year, for less you'd think than his last contract.

It's hard to work out why we don't have much room in our salary cap.

"The settlement, which sees Rance paid for just two months of his deal, frees up $1.4 million in the Tigers’ salary cap for 2020 and 2021."

Revealed: Richmond Tigers’ big salary cap boost after Alex Rance sacrifices $1.4m in shock retirement settlement

Revealed: Tigers’ big salary cap boost as Rance sacrifices $1.4m

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[TigerMasochist]

Couple of fat n juicy back ended contracts, plus there'll be up n coming players re-signing on fatter deals and things start getting tight. Difficulty is always that clubs must pay a minimum of 95% of the cap regardless of talent or maturity so it never leaves much wriggle room on shekels unless you try to go the fancy footwork n end up like Colonwood last year.

Bloody ridiculous that a triple premiership side is paying out the same salary each year as sides constantly vying for the spoon.

 

[TigerFurious]

Houli re-signed for one more year in 2020, likely at base rate given his age. Astbury was maybe on $300k pa. at absolute best. The Rance money saved to date has likely gone to Lynch and Martin to help reduce their back-ended deals. Riewoldt money saved (if any, he still kicked 50 goals) would have been factored in to Lynch and Martin deals from the outset. Covid induced reductions in TPP are also a significant factor.

There is no mismanagement, or any other issues here. Just the cost of success.

 

[tigerman]

Couple of fat n juicy back ended contracts, plus there'll be up n coming players re-signing on fatter deals and things start getting tight. Difficulty is always that clubs must pay a minimum of 95% of the cap regardless of talent or maturity so it never leaves much wriggle room on shekels unless you try to go the fancy footwork n end up like Colonwood last year.

Bloody ridiculous that a triple premiership side is paying out the same salary each year as sides constantly vying for the spoon.

All the clubs had to accept a reduced salary cap due to Covid, I suspect this impacts clubs like us who have a couple of players in Dusty and Lynch on big, lengthy contracts.

 

[tigerman]

Houli re-signed for one more year in 2020, likely at base rate given his age. Astbury was maybe on $300k pa. at absolute best. The Rance money saved to date has likely gone to Lynch and Martin to help reduce their back-ended deals. Riewoldt money saved (if any, he still kicked 50 goals) would have been factored in to Lynch and Martin deals from the outset. Covid induced reductions in TPP are also a significant factor.

There is no mismanagement, or any other issues here. Just the cost of success.

Do you think Astbury would have only been at best on 300K? I have no idea, but as a 3 time premiership player it seems way unders to me.

 

[deedee]

Not surprised the cap is fraying at the seams, happens when you are successful.

 

[Spirit of Jack]

I realise we are coming off a period of success (and hopefully will quickly bounce back into it)...but for a team that has many role players, that supposedly take unders to stay at the club, and veterans that whilst should still be playing e.g. Jack and Cotch - should no longer commanding top dollar - I'm a little surprised we seemingly don't have more room. I say seemingly because everyone is guessing based on losing our two bigs.

Losing Chol to a bigger contract is understandable, its a bit like Ellis & Oleg - they can make more at a crap club - let them go. Losing CCJ however is a massive hit, we have no other tall forwards waiting in the wings. Jack is likely one year from retirement and Lynch is either brilliant or ordinary based on the health of his knees. I'm shocked that we didn't manage our cap well enough to keep a KPF that we have developed for 4 years and is just hitting his stride. That doesn't strike me as good management. If we have decided he is not good enough and we are saving the money for another target, fair enough. Again we can only speculate.

 

[zippadeee]

Do you think Astbury would have only been at best on 300K? I have no idea, but as a 3 time premiership player it seems way unders to me.

No chance
He was offered 400k by Brisbane in 2016.
He would've been on at the end 550-600.
Houli the same.
I reckon we are just not willing to throw money around.
Cerra, we pulled almost straight away as soon as we heard what he wanted.
Hopper takes all year to resign for GWS, was our offer just too low?
I think we have matured and won't splash out cash for 50-50 footballers.
I personally believe the way they handle money is A1. But our drafting is a disgrace

 

[Carter]

Are we basing this assumption on what Balmey said?

I took it to mean we have cap committed to finding a free agent or two, therefore no room to budge on Chol/Coleman-Jones

 

[TigerPort]

Couple of fat n juicy back ended contracts, plus there'll be up n coming players re-signing on fatter deals and things start getting tight. Difficulty is always that clubs must pay a minimum of 95% of the cap regardless of talent or maturity so it never leaves much wriggle room on shekels unless you try to go the fancy footwork n end up like Colonwood last year.

Bloody ridiculous that a triple premiership side is paying out the same salary each year as sides constantly vying for the spoon.

The only one on a big back ended contract is Lynch. With Rance leaving the club had the opportunity to bring some of that forward.

Martin's contract was heavily front end loaded. For the first year of his mega contract the overall salary cap had a big increase which helped us pay more in the first year and significant dollars in that first year.

Then as Martin's contract $ decreases Lynch's increases

 

[mrposhman]

The only one on a big back ended contract is Lynch. With Rance leaving the club had the opportunity to bring some of that forward.

Martin's contract was heavily front end loaded. For the first year of his mega contract the overall salary cap had a big increase which helped us pay more in the first year and significant dollars in that first year.

Then as Martin's contract $ decreases Lynch's increases

Yeah I reckon we've used the Rance money to free up a lot of the cap from 2022 onwards. Probably means that the cap is tight in 2022 though. I suspect even if we offered something similar to what CJ has been offered the profile would be different. I'd guess with where Norths list is at, CCJ will be very well compensated in 2022 as I reckon they heavily front ended his deal.

 

[Giardiasis]

The Lynch deal could not be altered once signed, it is a rule with free agency. We could only move Martin's contract foward.

 

[DavidSSS]

We have a couple of very highly paid players, plus we would also have a fair number in the middle who would be getting very good pay. All of this would have been planned, upcoming retirements etc taken into account, then . . . COVID hits and the salary cap drops. Oh crap, we were the successful team at the time the salary cap dropped when we would have been assuming a rise.

Is it any surprise the cap space at Richmond would be tight?

DS

 

[Sintiger]

The other thing is you can bank savings in salary cap now as I understand it so crap teams who may have been paying 95% can front end new contracts ( see CCJ) and use banked savings from previous years.
This is all the price of success. If you had offered me 3 flags with a salary cap squeeze later 5 years ago I would have taken it in a heart beat.
As others have said the reduction in list size and salary cap has made it even worse.

 

[TigerPort]

The Lynch deal could not be altered once signed, it is a rule with free agency. We could only move Martin's contract foward.

All contracts can be changed on the agreement of both parties. The free agency rule is to do with total $ not reducing

 

[Giardiasis]

All contracts can be changed on the agreement of both parties. The free agency rule is to do with total $ not reducing

Rookies win from rule change, how Giants make Kelly mega-bucks fit

Callum Twomey, Mitch Cleary and Riley Beveridge bring you all the latest trade news

www.afl.com.au

"Under the AFL's free agency mandate, if a player takes up a rival's offer and moves clubs the player must be paid under the same year-by-year terms as agreed upon in the initial deal. "

 

[French Tiger]

It's a strange one as with players leaving & like Jack on most likely reduced contracts you would think there would be a bit spare.

But maybe Vlaustin Broad Baker etc all getting pay increases on their last contract signings is where it has gone.

 

[leon]

The other thing is you can bank savings in salary cap now as I understand it so crap teams who may have been paying 95% can front end new contracts ( see CCJ) and use banked savings from previous years.
This is all the price of success. If you had offered me 3 flags with a salary cap squeeze later 5 years ago I would have taken it in a heart beat.
As others have said the reduction in list size and salary cap has made it even worse.

Not to mention about $145k in 2020 Covid Bubble misdemeanor fines as well.

 

[leon]

It's a strange one as with players leaving & like Jack on most likely reduced contracts you would think there would be a bit spare.

But maybe Vlaustin Broad Baker etc all getting pay increases on their last contract signings is where it has gone.

That is probably where it's gone.

 

[achillesjones]

Still think we should have an individual salary cap of $500,000 for all players in the comp. If the stars wont play for that, I would be dumbfounded. Where else are they going to earn that type of money?
Club loyalty would return as the incentive to shop yourself at the end of each contract would be diminished.