Contract talks have been going on since July. If he gets on the park and performs, he gets big bucks, but so far his best year was 5th in b and f. Jordan Russell by contrast has a second in the b and f. I love big K when he is up and running. The club has stuck with him during many long injury lay offs. He owes us. He can decide whether he wants to lead us in to the future, or have his manager hawk him around to every club in the AFL, which is pretty demeaning esp when he keeps failing to satisfy medicals . All that does is push his price down.

I can't believe someone of 26 yrs old is peeved because he is only going to get $1m if he fails to play a game in the next 3 years.

I'm not sure how that's prima donna behaviour?

We offer 1 mill over 3 years.
Two other clubs offer 3.75 mill over 5 years.

This after he knocked back a similar size of coin from GWS about 5 years earlier. We largely stuff him around on the basis of wanting to know what we'd get as a free agency pick.

All things considered, I think it's relatively even in terms of who owes who what.

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?

How are we stuffing him around? There's a contract there for him to sign if he wants.

Which is deliberately undervalued, and about 2.75 million less than other offers on the table?

Are we not stuffing him around if we offer him a contract for $50 a game and a slab? It's still a contract.

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?

I know a few blokes who would jump at the latter.

which 2 clubs?

how do you know the amount?

and how did the medicals go?

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

5 years is a long time.

If he's after security for the rest of his playing days, then fair enough.

But we're about to (hopefully) recruit a whole stack of young stars who will be seeking a pay rise within 4 to 5 years, and we can't tie up that much money on a ruckman who will be lucky to make it through 3 more seasons (based on his injury history).

The reality of free agency is that you need to manage your money.
Loyalty should be rewarded with a premium, but loyalty cannot be rewarded as highly as it used to be sadly.

I'm happy for us to lose Kreuzer if the compensation's good but I'm not sure it helps your argument to say that we need to save on the salary of someone who we'll only have for three years for pay rises for a bunch of players in four to five years time who don't even exist at this stage.

Besides which we still have a cap minimum to pay.

That said, a player with Kreuzer's history should be happy to sign an heavily incentive based deal.

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

Collingwood and the Bulldogs, figures that haven't been disputed by either club when the topic has been publicly discussed on several occasions.

Medicals apparently not so great?

All largely irrelevant in the context of Kreuzer's apparent "prima donna" behaviour..

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?

but not in carlton's apparently prima donna behaviour.

and as to the truth of those figures, because no one denies a thing, ity does not make that thing a fact, just as denying a thing does not make is flase.

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

I'm not saying Carlton are being prima donnas either. It is what it is. Good luck to them trying to get the best value out of whatever deal eventuates - if that involves holding off on offering a realistic contract offer, so be it.

Nor is it so much a fact, as it is logic that Carlton will act in their own best interests, as will Matthew Kreuzer.

Somehow I don't think my argument is the one lacking factual basis on this one (unless we're going by Kreuzer should just take what's in front of him, what a cauliflower to not do so) - but hey, a fish is a fish.

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?

Re Kreuzer... this is purely business now from both parties.
He would've signed otherwise so forget the fluffy loyalty stuff.
If the medicals raise questions about his durability going forward, usher him out.

Boy I wish I shared your faith...

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

Fair point.

"Act in their own perceived best interests".....

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?

Were the medicals performed by "AFL recommended" medicos......the ones that were not used for Daisy's medicals !

Are you really claiming we've offered him 330K a year (less than the average AFL wage btw) and other teams are offering him 750K a year for 5 years? I've not seen that anywhere. 400-450K from us plus extras if he plays more, and 2.4 mill for 4 years from the Pies were what I'd seen. 750K a year is insanity and we shouldn't go near that.

No, I'm quoting what Gerry posted above. As to where he's sourced that from, I have no idea. Rebutting the idea that based on such a discrepancy in what we've offered, he's petulant and a prima donna..

Whilst I'm certain that those offers were put to him - I doubt they're still on the table post failed medicals. Irrespective - that quote is saying we put that to him in late August, PRE-failed medicals at Collingwood and the Bulldogs.

Even by the figures you're quoting, it's still quite a bit less in length and value compared to what the market have offered him. We've deliberately low balled him.

I suspect what is offered now and what is offered once it's confirmed what the FA compensation will be (and possibly other factors - who we could get as a new ruckman/for what price, what will Warnock agree to?) are completely different.

If the AFL turn around to us and say he's only worth pick 20 odd, watch the offer rise in value. I can't see them giving in on four years though.

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?

The quote above is from the Age http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/c ... jngh7.html

I know it is all guesswork and innuendo but I believe the Blues offer quoted to be close to the mark.

Given his injury history I can't believe the Pies would be offering him a 4 year $2.4m deal, we are the only club that gives chronically injured players that coin.

The fact that he has reportedly failed medical assessments and had the offer withdrawn does him more harm than good. It doesn't sound like his manager is giving him great advice.
He has only had one decent season (2009 when he was 5th in b and f). While this is mainly due to injury but we can't pay guys huge money if they are rarely on the park.

If he has some mega offer from somewhere else, then he should take it or reject it. We have offered him very good money if he plays well enough, often enough. Either commit or leave

I suspect money won't be the problem so much as haggling over the fourth year that other clubs are offering.

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?

Scoop says...

Carlton looking at delisting Jones and rookie-ing him.

Freo and Richmond frontrunners for Bennel

Lennon and 3rd rounder for Yarran