Leadership Group 2018

[kruddler]

No they are completely comparable.
If a person is payed more in football it is because the club believes they offer more than others.
When the club agreed to pay Daisy what he and his management were seeking, there would have been a clear set of expectations on what he would deliver and there is no way he has come close to delivering on those.

So the club had expectations that Daisy has failed to reach. Is that
a) Daisy's fault for not putting in and doing his role to the best of his ability?
b) The clubs fault for expecting Daisy to be a player his body can no longer be?

I'd say b).

Yeap credit for trying, credit for helping mentor the young players, credit for choosing not to force the club to have him mainly play reserves last year by getting rid of his clause, allowing us to pick him on merit.

So something he has control over, he gets the credit for.

I am not saying Daisy can't be picked in the 22, but that doesn't change that his recruitment was terrible.
There was little to no chance to 'sell' as you say in the off season as there would have been little to no interest.

The recruitment may have been terrible, but that is NOT daisys fault.

If a club said we want you to come over to the enemy and leave a club you've won a flag at for a team which is struggling. We want you to mentor our players and set an example everyone can try to emulate and we want to pay you 700k a year to do so.
Are you going to say...thanks but no thanks. I'm not the player i used to be? I'll take less thanks.

Gimme a break.

You are jumping to a lot of conclusions as to why the club retained him. Bolts has set he sets a good example, but then so did Armfield. You conclude we kept him because he is the only player with a flag, but I haven't seen that either. I think they kept him because they see him as in our best 22 or best 25 players and it wasn't going to be easy to find another ready to go player better than him for nothing and he is accepting a salary closer to his worth.

I'm not jumping to conclusions. I'm stating facts.
The club kept him after his initial contract was up.
He sets a good example.
He is the only player on our list with a flag.

I have an opinion that all of those would certainly be in the 'pro' column when the club evaluated his worth.
Yes, being a potential best 22 player would be another reason.
As for Army, different kettle of fish, but it appears his body (which is older) is not allowing him to do the things he (and the club) want him to be able to do. FWIW, i wouldn't be unhappy if he was retained.

Do you think if he had made similar salary demands to last time he would be there? Of course not. I suspect he stayed because he is on the right salary for what he is capable of delivering and that is a lot less than he has been paid.

Again with the money.
Of course if he demanded 1mil, the club would tell him where to go.
If Crippa demanded 1 mil, they'd probably tell him the same.

The point about how much you pay Daisy is relevant whilst you are paying him that salary. It doesn't mean you can't play him (though for quite a while I don't think he was even playing well enough to deserve selection in most sides), but you can constantly expect more from him.

Value for money...AGAIN.  :
He is on the list. Is he giving you value for money? Probably not....but does that come into consideration when you are picking the team? It shouldn't. You pick the team that gives you the best chance to win.

You have said over and over his salary doesn't matter and I have said over and over it does. I am sure it also matters to at least come of his workmates as much as it matters to others in any industry if they think a person is overpaid for their output. That is true across all sports where players are putting in clauses to make sure they are the highest paid at the club or that their salary also goes up if another player starts to earn more etc and I don't see that it would be any different in the AFL where the players threaten industrial action every time that the CBA is up for renegotiation.

You are STILL getting the 2 confused.
Value for money, is a club issue. Club signs the contracts and pays the money. If they are unhappy with value for money they do something about it.
It goes back to the first point i made in this post....did the club expect too much from Daisy? Yes. Was it a mistake to pay him that much? Yes. Is there a lesson to be learned? Yes.
Has daisy done anything wrong in terms of effort, attitude and things in his control? No.

[flyboy77]

No Kruddler, your myopia precludes you seemingly from seeing a big picture.

To digress, be glad when the footy starts so we can talk about actual performance rather than perception!

[kruddler]

No Kruddler, your myopia precludes you seemingly from seeing a big picture.

To digress, be glad when the footy starts so we can talk about actual performance rather than perception!

What 'big picture' am i missing?

If i'm looking at this from Daisy's point of view, i have done everything humanly possible to perform. Am i capable of performing to the same level when i was in the peak of my career at Collingwood? No, but i'll give my best.

Is my best good enough for the $'s i'm getting paid? Probably not, but i'm not going to hand them back just in the same way i doubt Kurt Tippett would be handing back the millions he stole from Sydney.

If i'm looking at it from the clubs point of view, i f**ked up. I overpaid for him. I appreciate the effort he puts in and gets the most out of his body, but am disappointed that he cannot give more given how much we are paying him. I will think twice before i offer up that much money to an injury plagued player in the future. However, I do remember that we had a similar potential issue when we offered Chris Judd large quantities of cash despite being under a huge injury cloud at the time. You win some, you lose some.

If i'm looking at it from a teammate of daisys, i am a little pissed off that he earns a lot more than me, but that thought doesn't enter my head on match day and i'm thankful he is out there busting his gut. I wish all my teammates busted a gut like he does.

If i'm looking at it from Boltons point of view, i don't care how much each player is being paid during the season, that comes into effect in the off-season. During the season all i'm worried about is getting my boys to play the way i want them to play. I reward players who do as i say and i need to balance experience with youth on match day. I pick the best team of players from the entire list to help me achieve my goals.

4 points of view on the same issue depending on who is looking at it.

What part of the bigger picture am i missing exactly? Your point of view? Daisy is evil??

[PaulP]

...............................................
I will think twice before i offer up that much money to an injury plagued player in the future. However, I do remember that we had a similar potential issue when we offered Chris Judd large quantities of cash despite being under a huge injury cloud at the time.
......................

Yes, a groin injury which mucked up his 07 season. Had surgery at the end of 07, and then he was right to go. I'd be curious to know what our medico said about recruiting Judd. As has been mentioned numerous times, our medico was against getting Daisy.

.................................................

If i'm looking at it from Boltons point of view, i don't care how much each player is being paid during the season, that comes into effect in the off-season. During the season all i'm worried about is getting my boys to play the way i want them to play. I reward players who do as i say and i need to balance experience with youth on match day. I pick the best team of players from the entire list to help me achieve my goals.
......................

Agree.

[LP]

That is what i've been saying. Spelled it out quite clearly.

Still, everyone continues to bring in $'s into the conversation.

I don't mind them complaining about him being overpaid, but there is no point claiming he's one of the worst on the list when that is clearly not the case.

In my opinion, those posters would be better off focussing on players who are performing worse than the busted up Daisy!

I'm grateful we had him in recent years, a lot of damage could have been done to our young list(from a sports psychology perspective) if we didn't have older wiser premiership player to keep them focused on the long game.

[flyboy77]

The simple fact is the bloke shouldn't be on our list.

Not before, not now.

Sure, experienced blah blah but I'd pick Garlett, Pickett, Shaw, Macreadie, O'Brien, Kerridge or O'Shea (as sorta fringe players presently) ahead of Daisy every day of the week.

What's his best position in our 22 in 2018? Is his body up to the rigours and demands of AFL senior footy (arguably not imo)

He simply doesn't cover the ground the way he once did....

[kruddler]

The simple fact is the bloke shouldn't be on our list.

Not before, not now.

Sure, experienced blah blah but I'd pick Garlett, Pickett, Shaw, Macreadie, O'Brien, Kerridge or O'Shea (as sorta fringe players presently) ahead of Daisy every day of the week.

What's his best position in our 22 in 2018? Is his body up to the rigours and demands of AFL senior footy (arguably not imo)

He simply doesn't cover the ground the way he once did....

Simple fact is, you are extremely biased.

He is not the player he once was, nobody doubts that.
He doesn't cover the ground the way he once did sure, but he covers more ground than a lot on the list....and a lot more defensively than most.

How many times has Daisy got a goal in or around the goal square on a fast break? Why do you think that is?

[flyboy77]

No bias, facts.

8 goals in 2017, less the previous years. Not many (goals out the back) at all, I'd say.....  :o

[kruddler]

No bias, facts.

8 goals in 2017, less the previous years. Not many (goals out the back) at all, I'd say.....  :o

If thats how you respond to what i've said, then i'm not going to bother explaining it to you.

[flyboy77]

Sticks and stones.....  O:-)