Player Contracts - 2018-19

[Shahanga]

someone on the 442 forums also posted that we are pretty advanced with Josh Kennedy, but they didnt post a link or anything.

Am expecting us to sign Kennedy.  If his missus is playing basketball here next year and they have young kids i think he will sign with a Melbourne club and tards have signed Berisha and re-signed "zimmer frame" Thompson. 

[Tommykins]

Unlikely we'll hear much about Kennedy until the middle of July as that's when the Japanese transfer window opens.

[jw1739]

 

 

 

So Chapman and Brown are now confirmed on multi year deals and Engelaar is gone .

I don't see a confirmation.

(Although I do believe it is true)

 

Looks fairly clear to me: "...while Orlando Engelaar won’t be returning.

Brown and Chapman have signed multi-year deals with Heart..." 

 

A newspaper article is a piece of journalism, not an official confirmation.

 

You are correct, but I thought you were referring to the article rather than "official" confirmation from the club. If they are true to form, we won't hear from the latter until it is dragged out of them. Beggars belief as to how we won an award for "communications."

Edited May 12, 2014 by jw1739

[Deeming]

So Chapman and Brown are now confirmed on multi year deals and Engelaar is gone .

I don't see a confirmation.

(Although I do believe it is true)

Looks fairly clear to me: "...while Orlando Engelaar won’t be returning.Brown and Chapman have signed multi-year deals with Heart..."  Melbourne heart just tweeted to a goal article http://www.footballcourier.com/news/story/3171433/heart-snare-chapman-brown/full_story.html referring to the Herald Sun article confirming Brown and Chapman signing but interestingly it omits Engelaar leaving

[Tommykins]

Melbourne Heart News, not Melbourne Heart tweeted that link.

[mulhollanddrive]

While Kennedy would be good quality, I'm not a fan of watching long crosses for 6 months.

[theresonlyonebzamora]

While Kennedy would be good quality, I'm not a fan of watching long crosses for 6 months.

As opposed to the slick passing game we've repeatedly mastered over 4 seasons?

[Jimmy]

Chapman Melling and Brown all on two year deals and Melling is outside of the cap.

[perthheart]

While Kennedy would be good quality, I'm not a fan of watching long crosses for 6 months.

 

I don't think Kennedy is just the one trick pony of winning balls in the air. Our passing game, because of it's reliance on wingers often results in crosses into the box anyway. Dugandzic is really our only winger who regularly gets to the by line through passing moves with the centre forward, most of our other wingers rely on pace to get to the edge of the box and try to whip in crosses generally to no one. I think Kennedy ticks all the right boxes as someone able to play with the ball at his feet and back to goal, but also able to cause problems in the air when a more direct game is needed.

 

Whether we go for him or Bresciano as Australian marquee would probably depend on whether a better international marquee is available in AM or CF and also whether either of them even has any designs on playing in the a-league.

[Murfy1]

Pretty surprising that Melling is on 1 of the 3 senior NYL/youth contracts outside the squad of 23 and salary cap:

 

Melling will join Melbourne Heart outside of the salary cap as a full-time, base salary contract, one of three additional youth players that A-League clubs are afforded outside of its 23-player squad.

http://www.footballaustralia.com.au/melbourneheart/news-display/Melbourne-Heart-FC-Captures-New-Signings/90572

 

A good reminder of how arcane and confusing the A-League squad rules are. I was pretty sure these 3 youth players had to come through the NYL. but the original official document on these rules is a little unclear, and the club has smartly and capably signed him outside of the salary cap and 23-player squad (BTW, for those interested, the official document is here, and the 3 youth player exceptions [like Melling] are referred to on page 5 in the middle of the document under the title "Homegrown Player").

 

 

So Heart has 16 senior players in the 23-player squad (including Mooy and excluding Engelaar), including unused international marquee and Australian marquee spots (and possibly a junior marquee spot), and has Melling on 1 of the 3 youth spots outside the 23. Ross Archibald might well end up taking of 1 of those 3 senior youth spots also, as Davutovic reported that Archibald will be on a "youth-senior contract" next season (although Archibald is only 19, so if he's kept on a NYL contract I reckon that's fine as well, just as long as Heart promote and hold onto him as long as he keeps playing well and developing).

 

And now with the signing of Chapman to the 23 squad, Heart has signed the required 3 players under 20. Meaning that the remaining senior signings can all be quality. Can't wait to see what the club comes up with.

Edited May 20, 2014 by Murfy1

[wombegongal]

Worth noting that one Marco Rojas was on a youth marquee deal and was a New Zealand national. In that regard I'd suggest that this spot maybe or should be used on a man city youth player.

[NewConvert]

On the topic of Kennedy, I have a good source that told me that he is also looking at playing in one of the Arab leagues where he is being offered petro-dollars.

[hakz7]

On the topic of Kennedy, I have a good source that told me that he is also looking at playing in one of the Arab leagues where he is being offered petro-dollars.

He can get that here can't he?

[NewConvert]

 

On the topic of Kennedy, I have a good source that told me that he is also looking at playing in one of the Arab leagues where he is being offered petro-dollars.

He can get that here can't he?

 

Presumably...

[drewmelbcity]

Any further news on the possibility of some players contracts being brought out?

[Tonyboozeadams]

Please be ramsey

[bt50]

Kalmar most likely IMO

[kingofhearts]

Please be ramsey

 

Kalmar most likely IMO

Both pls

[Deviant]

terminating a players contract adds to the cap. might as well keep them! And there's nothing wrong with Kalmar. 

[Dylan]

It will be kalmar. I think JVS likes Ramsay and when duff falls over we won't have a left winger, well except for willo I suppose.

[drewmelbcity]

terminating a players contract adds to the cap. might as well keep them! And there's nothing wrong with Kalmar. 

 

100% sure about this? Then there would defiantly be no reasoning into terminating a players contract unless it is for a visa spot to allow more loans?

[Deviant]

 

terminating a players contract adds to the cap. might as well keep them! And there's nothing wrong with Kalmar. 

 

100% sure about this? Then there would defiantly be no reasoning into terminating a players contract unless it is for a visa spot to allow more loans?

 

Not 100%, but logical.

[drewmelbcity]

 

 

terminating a players contract adds to the cap. might as well keep them! And there's nothing wrong with Kalmar. 

 

100% sure about this? Then there would defiantly be no reasoning into terminating a players contract unless it is for a visa spot to allow more loans?

 

Not 100%, but logical.

 

 

I don't entirely believe that as you're buying the contract out therefor there is no outstanding salary but anyway I have never been a big fan of Kalmar so I couldn't care less, I don't mind Raimsay but yeh he is hot or cold

[cadete]

I hope its Kalmar as we wont probably need him.

 

We already have Mooy and one of the Marquee's is going to be a Central Midfielder as well... so all Kalmar is going to do is at best is get in the way of the much more talented Mauk from getting game time.

[K-aram92]

 

 

terminating a players contract adds to the cap. might as well keep them! And there's nothing wrong with Kalmar. 

 

100% sure about this? Then there would defiantly be no reasoning into terminating a players contract unless it is for a visa spot to allow more loans?

 

Not 100%, but logical.

 

I'm not 100% sure either but you're right it sounds logical. Because otherwise it would be too easy for a team to use that as a loop hole and sign far more expensive players. 

 

You could take someone like Villa for example and instead of having him on a 1 year deal on a salary that wouldn't fit under the cap, you instead sign him for 5 years and split his salary over the 5 years with the intention to terminate his contract at the end of the first year and pay him out. He would still get his money and the team would have been able to fit him under the cap. 

 

That would be a loop hole which is why I would imagine that despite paying them out, their salary would still count under the cap because otherwise it would be too easy to do something like what I just suggested. 

 

But then again, that's just how I justify it in my head and it could be completely wrong. 

[Deviant]

unless that money is then deducted from the next 4 years

 

something that the A-league would do.

[K-aram92]

unless that money is then deducted from the next 4 years

 

something that the A-league would do.

Well yeah that would be the same outcome. Either way, it would prevent teams from simply being able to terminate contracts at will. I can't see City (trying to get used to calling us that) doing that unless as mentioned above, it is to free up a visa spot, which would be the only benefit I would imagine. If it does happen, it surely must mean that we intend to replace the departing player with a loaned player from City's youth team or NYCFC, as that would mean that their salary could be covered mostly by Man City or NYCFC. 

 

And on that note, I'm very interested to hear more regarding that comment in one of the articles suggesting that the FFA are looking into modifying the loan rules. My impression of that was that they would make them more strict in order to prevent Man City from simply loaning us 5 top quality visa players that otherwise wouldn't have fit under the cap. 

[drewmelbcity]

 

unless that money is then deducted from the next 4 years

 

something that the A-league would do.

Well yeah that would be the same outcome. Either way, it would prevent teams from simply being able to terminate contracts at will. I can't see City (trying to get used to calling us that) doing that unless as mentioned above, it is to free up a visa spot, which would be the only benefit I would imagine. If it does happen, it surely must mean that we intend to replace the departing player with a loaned player from City's youth team or NYCFC, as that would mean that their salary could be covered mostly by Man City or NYCFC. 

 

And on that note, I'm very interested to hear more regarding that comment in one of the articles suggesting that the FFA are looking into modifying the loan rules. My impression of that was that they would make them more strict in order to prevent Man City from simply loaning us 5 top quality visa players that otherwise wouldn't have fit under the cap. 

 

 

And this is what would tick me off, the FFA coming in a blocking possible loans that would other wise entice a rather large amount of people wanting to come view some of the worlds best (even majority players are in twilight years). The way I view it is the responsibility should fall back on other clubs to meet the standards we could possibly set.

[Deviant]

it'd be viable if they bank on the next marque to pull in the amount of money they spent on the first person and then recoup the money they spend on the send person. 

 

Very hard to do... unless it's a Gareth Bale type signing. Either way, it's good at the moment to have a salary cap. It's better for investors as they can calculate the overheads better and make the right business decisions. I.E. Villa for 10 games, paid minimal from melb city, big impact on and off the field, plus making room for (Ronaldinho, i wish) a marque. all without breaking the budget.

Smart decisions like getting duff, a well renowned winger who has quality crosses, to feed the rumored Kennedy who is tall and strong in the air to receive headers because that how they want the team to play, utilisation of the wingers.

[K-aram92]

 

 

unless that money is then deducted from the next 4 years

 

something that the A-league would do.

Well yeah that would be the same outcome. Either way, it would prevent teams from simply being able to terminate contracts at will. I can't see City (trying to get used to calling us that) doing that unless as mentioned above, it is to free up a visa spot, which would be the only benefit I would imagine. If it does happen, it surely must mean that we intend to replace the departing player with a loaned player from City's youth team or NYCFC, as that would mean that their salary could be covered mostly by Man City or NYCFC. 

 

And on that note, I'm very interested to hear more regarding that comment in one of the articles suggesting that the FFA are looking into modifying the loan rules. My impression of that was that they would make them more strict in order to prevent Man City from simply loaning us 5 top quality visa players that otherwise wouldn't have fit under the cap. 

 

 

And this is what would tick me off, the FFA coming in a blocking possible loans that would other wise entice a rather large amount of people wanting to come view some of the worlds best (even majority players are in twilight years). The way I view it is the responsibility should fall back on other clubs to meet the standards we could possibly set.

 

Yeah exactly. In some ways, I can see why they would want to do it, because having a bunch of players loaned makes the salary cap seem pointless to some extent. But like you said, instead of preventing us from utilising loan players, why not allow us to do it and continue to allow us to do it until other clubs realise that they have to take the same approach. Sure it may not be as easy for them because they aren't linked to the CFG, but still it would mean that the competition can grow immensely, with some highly talented overseas players being loaned to the A League, drawing in crowds and increasing the standard of the competition. 

 

What the FFA is likely to do is inhibit us from growing in order to keep the competition even, but the best way for it to grow and become a league that is respected more highly in Australia is to let us utilise this opportunity and encourage other teams to follow suit. Besides, it's not the same as removing the salary cap (which I do think needs to stay), because there's still the VISA limit which forces us to ensure we keep an emphasis on developing local talent. It's a lose-lose for Melbourne, the A League and the Socceroos if they choose to prevent us from utilising the current loan rules by changing them. 

[jw1739]

I think we can always get around this by transferring players within the CFG rather than loaning them. Whatever salary the player doesn't get while he's here with us is made up to him either before he comes or after he returns to Manchester or New York. I doubt that FFA can intrude into the details of what players are being paid in another jurisdiction or why.

 

Over time I can see a whole series of these issues coming up as CFG flexes its muscles in the A-League.

[mulhollanddrive]

MLS having the same debate, after a parent club loaned out 4-5 players outside the cap.

 

Either way, we only have 1 international spot available after the marquee, and if anything it's probably for a youth player who would be on similar money as a regular A-League player.

[silva10]

Does anyone know if we have reached our cap level?

 

Can Miller play as an injury replacement for Koren, and would the money he was paid fall outside the cap?

[silva10]

I have been given the salary cap some thought and was wondering if the Visa player and Aussie Marquee spots should all fall outside of the cap.

 

In fact maybe the 3 Visa spots should be renamed Marquee spots so that you can sign more Aussie players outside of the cap if you so wish.

 

The benefit of this I believe would be that there would be more money inside the cap to pay a little more to the better players who are not Marquees. You wouldn't be rasing the cap as such and each team can decide if they wanted to use the Marquee spots.

[sheepdog]

Aus marquee is outside the cap im pretty sure.

[silva10]

Aus marquee is outside the cap im pretty sure.

 

Yes I believe that and the International Marquee spot are out of the cap. Why not have the other two visa players outside of the cap, so that teams can bring better players in from abroad as well as being able to pay Aussie players a little more inside the cap.

Edited November 19, 2014 by silva10

[Torn Asunder]

that makes far too much sense ...

[n i k o]

If the visa players fall outside the cap that means a team like us could bring in lampard, iniesta etc. as visa players which would imbalance the league. God forbid that happens.

[jw1739]

The two marquee player places are inside the squad number cap, and outside the squad salary cap.

 

All marquee players have to be approved by FFA, that is they have to be deemed by FFA to be "special" enough to warrant paying them outside the cap.

 

The corollary to the above is that no-one paid inside the cap should be termed a "marquee." Unfortunately, the media frequently misuse the word.

[Murfy1]

Does anyone know if we have reached our cap level?

 

Can Miller play as an injury replacement for Koren, and would the money he was paid fall outside the cap?

 

I've heard one journalist say that Melbourne City does not have enough money to sign a final player under the salary cap. The minimum salary for a player is about $55,000, and the salary cap this season is $2.55 million, for effectively 21 players (minus the 2 marquees). So the rough average per player per season is about $100,000, which is chickenfeed in the global market for football players (with, as many state, very inflated prices for footballers). Especially when the likes of Mooy is signed for about $300,000 per season, it quickly means that there's very little salary cap for other players (which the club probably had to do with Mooy, as he was offered Aus marquee deals from other clubs, and was reportedly signed pre-takeover, hence Mooy thought he was joining Heart).

 

But at the same time it hasn't been confirmed that the club can't sign at least 1 more player under the cap. I'd guess though if the club could sign another player, that that player would probably be on minimum wages ($55k) and then the question needs to be asked if a player prepared to accept such low wages can add anything meaningful to the team.

 

That's why I believe the club is looking at the likes of Liam Miller for an injury replacement deal. Why not strengthen the team as much as possible? And you never know, Miller could show value and stick around to play for next season or beyond (Wielaert and Germano will definitely be moved on by season's end, so we'll have free Visa spots).

 

With the lack of confirmation around the salary cap being full, I'm somewhat hoping a decent player (like, say, in LB) will be signed in the January transfer window on $55k for the remaining half season, 14 games. But I'm not holding my breath, and appreciate that apart from Mooy, Koren, Kennedy joining the squad that the only other new players to join the team will be injury replacement players, perhaps like Miller.