Richmond front-ending several contracts now for salary cap room later (H-Sun)

[RedanTiger]

Really like the idea of front-loading contracts, particularly in a "transformational" period.

The thing about front-loading is that it is common for players to really put their heads down and work hard in the last year to get a new contract. Nice if that is the year when they are getting paid the the lowest yearly rate rather than the highest.

Another thing is that I think there is more room to maneouver the amounts around if you've accepted the initial concept of front-loading. If the club has a crisis in gaining a player in trade then players can be approached about altering the amounts in each year.

[RedanTiger]

Personally, I understand making room for the future...but I dont like "front" loading contracts...just as I dont like "back" loading them...

What if you pay player X $300,000 this year, $250,00 next and $200,000 in yr 3 - but the coaching staff tell you after yr1 - player X wont make it and we want to trade him?  It means you paid him too much and the books look decidedly bad in yr 1.

At least with back loaded contracts, the club gets the player's skill and expertise when it is at its highest (supposedly) then makes up for it by paying for it in the player's declining years...eg. Kouta was rumoured to be on a large backloaded contract....when at his prime he was being paid under market...

Con , IMO the exact opposite of your scenario has occurred at Richmond with McMahon. Now he is on $350,000 in his third year and no other club would take him at that price for this year so you can't trade him. 

[jackstar is back again]

Given 1st & 2nd year players are on fixed contracts, you can't just pay some draftee $100-200k extra per year now. They have to have been at the club for a while, which means you should have some idea about their value in the future.

May be why McGuane is getting paid a large amount according to Jackstar

As they didnt want to lose him to Gold Coast

[MADTIGER2010]

Smokey...i still dont like the pay more now and get services later argument...

what if a player gets paid above the odds in yr 1 and then does a knee and never comes back right again...or has one or two good seasons..is then put on one of these contracts....take cogs, thursty or raines as an example...

or if a player is paid above the odds in yrs 1 and 2...with the idea it will be made up for in yrs 3 and 4...and the player says "Why should I take a pay "cut" and get less than what I am worth this year, I think I will leave now and go on the open market and get what I am worth..." eg. take Ottens as an example...

IMHO, and luckily I dont have to balance the RFC player payment books...pay what someone is worth at the time...

Is this Earthtech Con? 

[Infamy]

Given 1st & 2nd year players are on fixed contracts, you can't just pay some draftee $100-200k extra per year now. They have to have been at the club for a while, which means you should have some idea about their value in the future.

May be why McGuane is getting paid a large amount according to Jackstar

As they didnt want to lose him to Gold Coast

Yes you've repeated this before. I'm saying its possible we may also be paying more now so we can resign him at the end of this contract for less given we would have some credits in the bank in relation to that player.

[Penelope]

Do you mean overpay him on one contract so you can pay him less on the next contract?