NVM Contract

[CQ SAINT]

So is Keeler. Wasn't your strategy, 2 years or their gone? Nas was better then half the team last year on draftee coin, this year they will be deciding if the 7th figure is a 1 or a 2.

3 for $1m or 5 for $2m. Not a decision to rush for either party. I have a feeling if we want Nas, we will need to go 5 years.

The 2 year strategy makes a lot of sense, especially for speculative long shot picks like Sharman. If a player like Sharman doesn't establish himself this year he should be cut and find a replacement. Better to have a higher turnover rate with those types of players than to keep for 3 to 5 years.

A 5 year contract for anyone but an elite gun of the game is stupid especially a kid that hasn't reached 100 games, plain madness.

That's up to him and a South Australian club though isn't it. He is top 10 draft pick, he debuted in year 1, he will line up round 1, first 22 in his 2nd year.
It's not just because the rest are s***, the kid can play, what more do you want?

He's shown he might be star of the game, a long way to go yet, let's see how his second year goes first. Too many kids before him have started well and faded quickly.

100 games is the sweet spot if a 5 year deal is suitable. I'd be surprised and disturbed if Walsh offers 5 years

Walsh crippled Collingwood with his incompetent list management and wreckless long terms contracts

So why all the angst?

[6621104]

"wreckless" - absolute genius!

[loris]

"wreckless" - absolute genius!

[Vortex]

So is Keeler. Wasn't your strategy, 2 years or their gone? Nas was better then half the team last year on draftee coin, this year they will be deciding if the 7th figure is a 1 or a 2.

3 for $1m or 5 for $2m. Not a decision to rush for either party. I have a feeling if we want Nas, we will need to go 5 years.

The 2 year strategy makes a lot of sense, especially for speculative long shot picks like Sharman. If a player like Sharman doesn't establish himself this year he should be cut and find a replacement. Better to have a higher turnover rate with those types of players than to keep for 3 to 5 years.

A 5 year contract for anyone but an elite gun of the game is stupid especially a kid that hasn't reached 100 games, plain madness.

That's up to him and a South Australian club though isn't it. He is top 10 draft pick, he debuted in year 1, he will line up round 1, first 22 in his 2nd year.
It's not just because the rest are s***, the kid can play, what more do you want?

He's shown he might be star of the game, a long way to go yet, let's see how his second year goes first. Too many kids before him have started well and faded quickly.

100 games is the sweet spot if a 5 year deal is suitable. I'd be surprised and disturbed if Walsh offers 5 years

Walsh crippled Collingwood with his incompetent list management and wreckless long terms contracts

So why all the angst?

I can assure you there isn't any angst..

[ctqs]

Someone at the club told me in August that NWM's manager is well known for getting his rookie clients to hold out till the second year to get the best possible deal.

[skeptic]

Someone at the club told me in August that NWM's manager is well known for getting his rookie clients to hold out till the second year to get the best possible deal.

In fairness…
If he’s going to improve markedly and all indicators are that he is, it’s an excellent strategy

[Banger9798]

NWM will be a beauty, hopefully signs for 3 years

[guitars4]

NWM will be a gun player , we just need to keep him . How we do that is difficult but I'm hoping the blokes in charge can make it happen sooner than later .

[Yorkeys]

Make finals.

No-one enjoys playing in or supporting a club that struggles like we did for the second half of 22.

No joy in being part of that capitulation.

[Vortex]

"wreckless" - absolute genius!

Thanks, so just incompetence in a non wreckless way?