Author Topic: Jay Schulz [merged]  (Read 26813 times)

Passionfruit

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #150 on: October 13, 2007, 06:15:31 AM »
Why keep players when they cant get a game and play most of the season at Coburg :banghead

1965

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #151 on: October 13, 2007, 06:34:39 AM »
Why keep players when they cant get a game and play most of the season at Coburg :banghead

Is CHB an option?

Passionfruit

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #152 on: October 13, 2007, 06:39:36 AM »
Why keep players when they cant get a game and play most of the season at Coburg :banghead

Is CHB an option?

Your up early 1965.?
CHB at Coburg you suggest?

1965

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #153 on: October 13, 2007, 06:44:44 AM »
Why keep players when they cant get a game and play most of the season at Coburg :banghead

Is CHB an option?

Your up early 1965.?
CHB at Coburg you suggest?

5:30 every morning (it makes holidays a bitch but what can you do?)

He is quick and big surely he could learn how to punch the ball?


Offline {X}

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
Re: Schulz
« Reply #154 on: October 13, 2007, 06:48:41 AM »
when terry 1st came to punt rd , he earmarked jay to be a chb, maybe he should just stick to that and get him to play down back and chase the ball, give him a task rather than try and make the play in the fwd line

may just be what he needs

1965

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #155 on: October 13, 2007, 06:50:32 AM »
when terry 1st came to punt rd , he earmarked jay to be a chb, maybe he should just stick to that and get him to play down back and chase the ball, give him a task rather than try and make the play in the fwd line

may just be what he needs

certainly worth trying.

We have a couple of potential fowards in Jack and Cleve.

Passionfruit

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #156 on: October 13, 2007, 06:53:52 AM »
He doesnt read the game too well and when played down in D 50, got lead too the ball too often ;)

Ramps

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #157 on: October 13, 2007, 08:52:48 AM »
i would of taken p28 for schulz and given that to Footscray for McMahon instead- in effect keeping 3 top 20 picks.

Bull

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #158 on: October 13, 2007, 09:24:59 AM »
The age is reporting Shultz will be paid $275k next year at Richmond.

http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/brisbane-lion-a-man-in-demand/2007/10/12/1191696179377.html?page=2

"While the acquisitions of Jordan McMahon and Mitch Morton and retention of Jay Schulz on a contract for next year that is said to guarantee the former South Australian $275,000 led rival clubs to question whether the Tigers could afford Brennan, Richmond director of football Greg Miller insisted that they had the room to accommodate him."


We are Fu&ked if this is true, how could somone who has played one decent game in 5 years get that kind of money.

We are a rabble and Miller should be sacked immediately.

Tigermonk

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #159 on: October 13, 2007, 09:32:47 AM »
l think your unrating McMahon here
Shultzs got what he deserved  :clapping

Tigermonk

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #160 on: October 13, 2007, 09:39:23 AM »
The age is reporting Shultz will be paid $275k next year at Richmond.

http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/brisbane-lion-a-man-in-demand/2007/10/12/1191696179377.html?page=2

"While the acquisitions of Jordan McMahon and Mitch Morton and retention of Jay Schulz on a contract for next year that is said to guarantee the former South Australian $275,000 led rival clubs to question whether the Tigers could afford Brennan, Richmond director of football Greg Miller insisted that they had the room to accommodate him."


We are Fu&ked if this is true, how could somone who has played one decent game in 5 years get that kind of money.

We are a rabble and Miller should be sacked immediately.

dont beleive everything you read in the papers
the deal for Brennan was not done from Brisbane side
Miller done his job nicely & he aint finished yet

Passionfruit

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #161 on: October 13, 2007, 10:11:07 AM »
l think your unrating McMahon here
Shultzs got what he deserved  :clapping


Schultz shouldnt be on an AFL list and gets $275,000 and McMahon is worth $170-$220. ::)
Lets see how McMahon goes with less talented support around him

Tigermonk

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #162 on: October 13, 2007, 11:08:26 AM »
True Jackstar we have to wait how McMahon goes same as Carlton with Judd its all risk in buisness
& who can confirm Shultz is getting 275K in a final year of contract does anyone have a copy of a document thats states it
Performance based clause would come into effect on that & he aint been performing  ;D  :rollin
after his good behaviour his contract would have alot of clauses after he lost the club a sponsor
l doubt very much he be getting paid $275k playing at VFL level

Passionfruit

  • Guest
Re: Schulz
« Reply #163 on: October 13, 2007, 11:22:53 AM »
True Jackstar we have to wait how McMahon goes same as Carlton with Judd its all risk in buisness
& who can confirm Shultz is getting 275K in a final year of contract does anyone have a copy of a document thats states it
Performance based clause would come into effect on that & he aint been performing  ;D  :rollin
after his good behaviour his contract would have alot of clauses after he lost the club a sponsor
l doubt very much he be getting paid $275k playing at VFL level

Alot of players have lop sided contracts. 

Offline rogerd3

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
Re: Schulz
« Reply #164 on: October 13, 2007, 01:02:44 PM »
l think your unrating McMahon here
Shultzs got what he deserved  :clapping


Schultz shouldnt be on an AFL list and gets $275,000 and McMahon is worth $170-$220. ::)
Lets see how McMahon goes with less talented support around him


$275,000, now where did you pull that figure from?