De Goey 5 year deal 800 a year.!!

[Vortex]

I did the same as P66

I abused the moderators on purpose- bad - I was very critical of Chris Pelchen, and it didn’t sit well with the forum. I suppose most supporters wanted to believe in Lyle Lanley and bought the snake oil!
P66 who was generally a club apologist and me had a few stoushes over it!!!

The 2008/2009 off seasons tore the fabric that GT had built out of the club.
The 2011-2013 off seasons completely fkd the club for near on a decade!!!!

The spreadsheet or blueprint of whatever the fk it was crippled the joint

So I went hard at the moderators so they would ban me!!!

They did and I was off SS for years… eventually came back … not sure why?

Mate your stoushes with P66 were worth the admission alone, sought of like listening to the banter in the animal enclosure back in the day. As I say the site lost it's character after the coup and the PC mods moved in hence its steady decline to to where we are today.

[saynta]

And as I say, the guy was a turd and a bully constantly wrecking threads and belittling fellow sainters.

Good riddance.

[SaintPav]

“Don't like the board getting involved in on-field matters.
Reeks a bit of "The Club" for mine”.

It’s not the 1970s. Anyway, that’s not what exactly happened. If you have seen the film or the play, the President recruited a pot head.

There are governance issues at stake both financial and reputational etc. It’s the board’s role to manage the club’s risk around these matters.

De Goey was ARRESTED in the U.S. Do people comprehend what that means?

The board is doing what it’s supposed to be doing. Under corporation law, the board has a fiduciary duty to manage the club’s risk on a range of financial, operational and strategic issues.

I’d be more worried how a confidential board agenda item was leaked to the media. Not good.

It appears that the AFL is still stuck in 1970s The Club land
when it comes to the confidentiality of sensitive board matters.

I have seen the film. The president then marched in to the coaches box and demanded that Haywood be played instead of being left on the bench.
The point was that the board should not be involved in on-field matters.

James Gallagher is the head of List Management.
Allan Williams is the Commercial Partnerships Manager.
I'd imagine, as part of their due diligence, these two would consult about the imact recruting DeGoey might have on any commercial partnerships we have. I'd suspect that it would be no imapct as it hasn't seemed to hurt Collingwood.
James might also consult with any number of other heads of departments to see if there'd be negative impacts. Again, I'd suspect not.
He'd also want to have a chat with DeGoey about what he's doing to address the off field dramas he is involved with.

Once all that due diligence has been done, only then would you go to the board with all the evidence that backs up the recruitment or otherwise of DeGoey. The Board, should have no reason to object to the decision.

The board should focus on clearing our debt and give the club the best possible chance to create success. It should never be involved in which player we draft, delist, trade, or recruit.

Well, we don’t know exactly where they are in the decision making process and what was exactly brought to the board or the exact background of the information request.

As it’s a big long term contract, I doubt though if it was an item for information. The club’s management are probably seeking input and endorsement of the recruitment strategy and approach from the executive board before moving forward which obviously involves making an offer to De Goey. This is the standard process corporations use when making large investment decisions.

At the end of the day it is the board who is responsible for monitoring these decisions and who should ultimately be held accountable if it all goes pear shaped.

Corporate governance 101!

It should not have been leaked to the media as it is a breach of governance.

Pathetic!

[Vortex]

“Don't like the board getting involved in on-field matters.
Reeks a bit of "The Club" for mine”.

It’s not the 1970s. Anyway, that’s not what exactly happened. If you have seen the film or the play, the President recruited a pot head.

There are governance issues at stake both financial and reputational etc. It’s the board’s role to manage the club’s risk around these matters.

De Goey was ARRESTED in the U.S. Do people comprehend what that means?

The board is doing what it’s supposed to be doing. Under corporation law, the board has a fiduciary duty to manage the club’s risk on a range of financial, operational and strategic issues.

I’d be more worried how a confidential board agenda item was leaked to the media. Not good.

It appears that the AFL is still stuck in 1970s The Club land
when it comes to the confidentiality of sensitive board matters.

I have seen the film. The president then marched in to the coaches box and demanded that Haywood be played instead of being left on the bench.
The point was that the board should not be involved in on-field matters.

James Gallagher is the head of List Management.
Allan Williams is the Commercial Partnerships Manager.
I'd imagine, as part of their due diligence, these two would consult about the imact recruting DeGoey might have on any commercial partnerships we have. I'd suspect that it would be no imapct as it hasn't seemed to hurt Collingwood.
James might also consult with any number of other heads of departments to see if there'd be negative impacts. Again, I'd suspect not.
He'd also want to have a chat with DeGoey about what he's doing to address the off field dramas he is involved with.

Once all that due diligence has been done, only then would you go to the board with all the evidence that backs up the recruitment or otherwise of DeGoey. The Board, should have no reason to object to the decision.

The board should focus on clearing our debt and give the club the best possible chance to create success. It should never be involved in which player we draft, delist, trade, or recruit.

Well, we don’t know exactly where they are in the decision making process and what was exactly brought to the board or the exact background of the information request.

As it’s a big long term contract, I doubt though if it was an item for information. The club’s management are probably seeking input and endorsement of the recruitment strategy and approach from the executive board before moving forward which obviously involves making an offer to De Goey. This is the standard process corporations use when making large investment decisions.

At the end of the day it is the board who is responsible for monitoring these decisions and who should ultimately be held accountable if it all goes pear shaped.

Governance 101!

It should not have been leaked to the media as it is a breach of governance.

Pathetic!

If you were having a guess, what do you think the motivation was for the leaker?

I can think or two scenarios based on the intel the industry and or club have, 1), The Pies don't plan to let him go, 2), The Pies are planning to let him go.

From there it's about leverage and maximising each of the stakeholders postion, price and value.

I thinks he's staying so coming back to agenda and motivation of the leaker on the board, what could it be SP ?

[Yorkeys]

What if
No leak, Club just answered a question from the press. Surely it's not commercial in confidence.
Not everything is a conspiracy.
Although I have a theory about that as well. But can I trust you.

[Templar]

Happens daily.
Journo calls board member: Will you be voting for Pauline Hanson?
Saints Board Member: What?? That is none of your affair.
J: So its confidential?
S: Are you kidding me?
J: So your not voting for her?
S: Look. I will be weighing up policies and candidates and will vote for who I vote for when the time comes. Besides its none of your business.

Headline: Saints board weighing up voting for One Nation

[SaintPav]

“Don't like the board getting involved in on-field matters.
Reeks a bit of "The Club" for mine”.

It’s not the 1970s. Anyway, that’s not what exactly happened. If you have seen the film or the play, the President recruited a pot head.

There are governance issues at stake both financial and reputational etc. It’s the board’s role to manage the club’s risk around these matters.

De Goey was ARRESTED in the U.S. Do people comprehend what that means?

The board is doing what it’s supposed to be doing. Under corporation law, the board has a fiduciary duty to manage the club’s risk on a range of financial, operational and strategic issues.

I’d be more worried how a confidential board agenda item was leaked to the media. Not good.

It appears that the AFL is still stuck in 1970s The Club land
when it comes to the confidentiality of sensitive board matters.

I have seen the film. The president then marched in to the coaches box and demanded that Haywood be played instead of being left on the bench.
The point was that the board should not be involved in on-field matters.

James Gallagher is the head of List Management.
Allan Williams is the Commercial Partnerships Manager.
I'd imagine, as part of their due diligence, these two would consult about the imact recruting DeGoey might have on any commercial partnerships we have. I'd suspect that it would be no imapct as it hasn't seemed to hurt Collingwood.
James might also consult with any number of other heads of departments to see if there'd be negative impacts. Again, I'd suspect not.
He'd also want to have a chat with DeGoey about what he's doing to address the off field dramas he is involved with.

Once all that due diligence has been done, only then would you go to the board with all the evidence that backs up the recruitment or otherwise of DeGoey. The Board, should have no reason to object to the decision.

The board should focus on clearing our debt and give the club the best possible chance to create success. It should never be involved in which player we draft, delist, trade, or recruit.

Well, we don’t know exactly where they are in the decision making process and what was exactly brought to the board or the exact background of the information request.

As it’s a big long term contract, I doubt though if it was an item for information. The club’s management are probably seeking input and endorsement of the recruitment strategy and approach from the executive board before moving forward which obviously involves making an offer to De Goey. This is the standard process corporations use when making large investment decisions.

At the end of the day it is the board who is responsible for monitoring these decisions and who should ultimately be held accountable if it all goes pear shaped.

Governance 101!

It should not have been leaked to the media as it is a breach of governance.

Pathetic!

If you were having a guess, what do you think the motivation was for the leaker?

I can think or two scenarios based on the intel the industry and or club have, 1), The Pies don't plan to let him go, 2), The Pies are planning to let him go.

From there it's about leverage and maximising each of the stakeholders postion, price and value.

I thinks he's staying so coming back to agenda and motivation of the leaker on the board, what could it be SP ?

I just assumed it was leaked. If it was, it may have been done intentionally or unwittingly.

Maybe it BS and they are really interested in someone else.

Maybe the board member is disgruntled about this particular issue.

I’m just guessing.

I would have thought that this issue should remain confidential. It’s not a great look and loose lips sink ships.

[Devilhead]

Or the Media are making stuff up/throwing darts knowing we are unlikely to respond

[saynta]

Or the Media are making stuff up/throwing darts knowing we are unlikely to respond

More than likely.

[Templar]

However it came out to me its still win/win.

Whether it was an over hyped rumour confected by a "journo" or an intentional leak from the club the net result is that the perceived value of the contract is diminished. So potentially if he does come to the Saints we won't pay overs for him.

Its like voting at a property auction - you don't want to be seen to be too keen. Take it or leave it attitude should get a better price.

And if we miss out him: Good!!!

[Vortex]

...they are really interested in someone else.

So I'm tending to give the board some credibility and assuming it was done deliberately. And so if this is the game and the club is using smoke N mirrors to send a message, who is the message being sent to? is it

- The Pies,
- De Goey and his manager
- Our sponsors
- Our female supporters and players
- Our morally inflexible supporters.
- our morally flexible supporters.

For mine if the media report is accurate then what is certain is a potential recruitment hasn't been ruled out.

And what is also probably certain, who ever signs him up, and that includes the Pies, they aren't paying top dollar and they will most certainly only be offering a contract that has a tonne of protection in it.

[D.B.Cooper]

Happens daily.
Journo calls board member: Will you be voting for Pauline Hanson?
Saints Board Member: What?? That is none of your affair.
J: So its confidential?
S: Are you kidding me?
J: So your not voting for her?
S: Look. I will be weighing up policies and candidates and will vote for who I vote for when the time comes. Besides its none of your business.

Headline: Saints board weighing up voting for One Nation

Great post.

Would be hilarious, if it was not frighteningly accurate.

[D.B.Cooper]

how can anyone with morals drink Coopers ?

Or taste buds

[saynta]

Rats fine with Board's query.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/812452/ratt ... ey-pursuit

[SinCitySainter]

They are thinking about paying De Goey $800 K a year for 5 years, that is $4M.
It would be fiscally irresponsible for a company in a stretched debt position like the Saints to do that without full support of the board.

The board are responsible for the broad financial and strategic direction of the club.
They are the ones that need to review the impact of any decision with potential impacts beyond just on-field.
With De Goey's history you would need to do your due diligence before offering him a contract.

[Life Long Saint]

They are thinking about paying De Goey $800 K a year for 5 years, that is $4M.
It would be fiscally irresponsible for a company in a stretched debt position like the Saints to do that without full support of the board.

The board are responsible for the broad financial and strategic direction of the club.
They are the ones that need to review the impact of any decision with potential impacts beyond just on-field.
With De Goey's history you would need to do your due diligence before offering him a contract.

What we pay the players has nothing to do with the debt.
The AFL requires all teams to pay the salary cap to its players. You may "bank" some of that for a certain amount of time, but you must spend at least 95% of the cap every year.

Wasting money on an "elite" training facility at Seaford wouldn't have helped our debt. Then building another one back at Moorrabbin didn't help.
Spending 800k per year on a player and still being under the salary cap is not an issue.

[CURLY]

Would love to get DeGoey I think he would have us in the top 4 next season.

Issue is if he as much as farts the AFL will make sure he is booted out. The AFL and the media would make sure he isnt playing.

[older saint]

They are thinking about paying De Goey $800 K a year for 5 years, that is $4M.
It would be fiscally irresponsible for a company in a stretched debt position like the Saints to do that without full support of the board.

The board are responsible for the broad financial and strategic direction of the club.
They are the ones that need to review the impact of any decision with potential impacts beyond just on-field.
With De Goey's history you would need to do your due diligence before offering him a contract.

What we pay the players has nothing to do with the debt.
The AFL requires all teams to pay the salary cap to its players. You may "bank" some of that for a certain amount of time, but you must spend at least 95% of the cap every year.

Wasting money on an "elite" training facility at Seaford wouldn't have helped our debt. Then building another one back at Moorrabbin didn't help.
Spending 800k per year on a player and still being under the salary cap is not an issue.

Agree re debt. Board must be involved as if paying him $800k per year costs the club millions in membership and sponsorship as well as payout if he undertakes similar off field actions that he has in the past.

[saynta]

From the hun.

‘We investigate everybody’: Ratten says Saints haven’t cooled on De Goey

Nell Geraets

St Kilda coach Brett Ratten says the club has not “cooled” on Collingwood’s free agent star Jordan De Goey after The Age reported that the board asked the Saints’ football department to further examine the drama-prone player.
Saints coach Brett Ratten says the club has not cooled on Collingwood’s Jordan De Goey.

Saints coach Brett Ratten says the club has not cooled on Collingwood’s Jordan De Goey.Credit:Getty Images

In a board meeting last Thursday night, the board asked the club executive to gather additional information about De Goey to help determine whether the Saints should continue to pursue the controversial 26-year-old.

Ratten said the board’s request was part of a normal process undertaken whenever a new player is under consideration, and that it did not indicate any loss of interest in a possible “long-term contract for a player of his quality”.

“It’s like all free agents, I think. We investigate everybody, especially when you’re bringing a high-profile player in,” Ratten told reporters on Wednesday morning.

“I think all boards ask for information. That’s not different to our footy club or other footy clubs.

“It doesn’t matter if we’re employing new staff members or players, we have to run things past the board, and they have the right to challenge and ask questions and see where we’re at with it.”

De Goey has come under scrutiny this year after a video was released showing the player purportedly trying to remove the bikini top of a female friend at a Bali nightclub during Collingwood’s bye week. He was also arrested in New York last November, where he pled guilty to harassment in the second degree after an altercation at a nightclub.
Related Article
Collingwood star Jordan De Goey has attracted the interest of St Kilda.
AFL 2022
No go ahead for De Goey from Saints board ... yet

Ratten refused to indicate what type of questions were asked about De Goey at the meeting, but noted the player’s undeniable talent while reiterating that no decision had yet been made.

St Kilda enjoyed a 12-point win against Hawthorn in round 20 and will face first-placed Geelong at the GMHBA on Saturday night. With the return of vice-captain Dougal Howard this week, and midfielder Dan Hannebery last week, Ratten believes the Saints can hang on to their position in the final eight as the end of the regular season looms.

[Life Long Saint]

Agree re debt. Board must be involved as if paying him $800k per year costs the club millions in membership and sponsorship as well as payout if he undertakes similar off field actions that he has in the past.

De Goey won't be the best or worst person we've had on our list.

Jack Steven took drugs and drank on a training camp. Suspended for weeks. Ended up winning 4 B&F's
Alan Murray was done for over .05
Milne was convicted of indecent assault. Still played with the club.
The rap sheet for our club goes on.

Every football club has players that cause angst.
DeGoey's worse muck up was in the US.
In isolation, what happened in Bali was not a story. In fact, if it wasn't De Goey, we'd have heard nothing about it.

As long as we do our due diligence, then the board should have no cause to disagree with the football department's recommendation.

[Life Long Saint]

De Goey has come under scrutiny this year after a video was released showing the player purportedly trying to remove the bikini top of a female friend at a Bali nightclub during Collingwood’s bye week. He was also arrested in New York last

That's a stretch!
Not condoning that action at all. But he didn't try and remove the top.

[saynta]

De Goey has come under scrutiny this year after a video was released showing the player purportedly trying to remove the bikini top of a female friend at a Bali nightclub during Collingwood’s bye week. He was also arrested in New York last

That's a stretch!
Not condoning that action at all. But he didn't try and remove the top.

That's the herald sun reporter saying that , not me mate.

[older saint]

Agree re debt. Board must be involved as if paying him $800k per year costs the club millions in membership and sponsorship as well as payout if he undertakes similar off field actions that he has in the past.

De Goey won't be the best or worst person we've had on our list.

Jack Steven took drugs and drank on a training camp. Suspended for weeks. Ended up winning 4 B&F's
Alan Murray was done for over .05
Milne was convicted of indecent assault. Still played with the club.
The rap sheet for our club goes on.

Every football club has players that cause angst.
DeGoey's worse muck up was in the US.
In isolation, what happened in Bali was not a story. In fact, if it wasn't De Goey, we'd have heard nothing about it.

As long as we do our due diligence, then the board should have no cause to disagree with the football department's recommendation.

Apart from Milne none of them damaged someone else and were also in a different era where things were viewed different.
Disagree about what happened in Bali and if nothing else shows he just doesn't get it.

I think the key as you say is due diligence. Will he mature as Dusty did and become a top line AFL footballer or will he go down the Jake Stringer path, never properly fit, committed, and show glimpses of what could have been.

[happy feet]

I did the same as P66

I abused the moderators on purpose- bad - I was very critical of Chris Pelchen, and it didn’t sit well with the forum. I suppose most supporters wanted to believe in Lyle Lanley and bought the snake oil!
P66 who was generally a club apologist and me had a few stoushes over it!!!

The 2008/2009 off seasons tore the fabric that GT had built out of the club.
The 2011-2013 off seasons completely fkd the club for near on a decade!!!!

The spreadsheet or blueprint of whatever the fk it was crippled the joint

So I went hard at the moderators so they would ban me!!!

They did and I was off SS for years… eventually came back … not sure why?

Mate your stoushes with P66 were worth the admission alone, sought of like listening to the banter in the animal enclosure back in the day. As I say the site lost it's character after the coup and the PC mods moved in hence its steady decline to to where we are today.

I had a few blues with P66 too. Somehow we figured out we went to the same High School, although he was in the year above. I was in the same year as his sister. I remembered him quite well, he is a good bloke away from here and in school boy footy days was a very handy player. Had a bit to do with the club.

[Wayne42]

They are thinking about paying De Goey $800 K a year for 5 years, that is $4M.
It would be fiscally irresponsible for a company in a stretched debt position like the Saints to do that without full support of the board.

The board are responsible for the broad financial and strategic direction of the club.
They are the ones that need to review the impact of any decision with potential impacts beyond just on-field.
With De Goey's history you would need to do your due diligence before offering him a contract.

What we pay the players has nothing to do with the debt.
The AFL requires all teams to pay the salary cap to its players. You may "bank" some of that for a certain amount of time, but you must spend at least 95% of the cap every year.

Wasting money on an "elite" training facility at Seaford wouldn't have helped our debt. Then building another one back at Moorrabbin didn't help.
Spending 800k per year on a player and still being under the salary cap is not an issue.

I don't think Seaford was a waste of money at that time.
Seaford was state of the art compared to the dump that was Moorabbin.

Not sure how much money the Saints contributed to Seaford but i don't believe it was big dollars.
Anyone know the facts on that ?