What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Should schif be captain 07

Should Schif be captian in 07

  • Yes

    Votes: 26 72.2%
  • No

    Votes: 10 27.8%

  • Total voters
    36

jed

First Grade
Messages
9,280
raidersforme said:
I dont know any normal fan who is on the wages of good players 150k+.
You cannot compare workers to professional Athelete's.

The avg worker is on 60-80k they might get perks of company car or mobile

The Professional athelete gets the 150k+ plus the gets the following that joe the worker is denied to.

Personal sponshership, appearance money, will ge given the car to drive, has a profile which launch's them into media or other high paying job (consultant or coach) good luck to them getting all these things i don't begrudge.

A person of 340k per year is on $6538.46 P/W with the right financial planning they could offset there tax to peanuts and keep it all plus they get there personal sponshership and any other paid promotion or job

So more money is greed managed well both finacial and agent wise i can't see why a 340k a year player isn't earning net $300k all inclusive
To be honest, $340K is good for a player like him, I have no issues paying that.

Not sure if you realise, but the $340K is all-inclusive. If you take out superannuation, it drops straight away to a bit over $300K. Take out tax, he'll end up about $160K-$170K. Don't know what accountants and financial planners you use, but sign me up if they can push it up to $300K.


Something else to keep in mind is that he's a professional footballer. At the end of his playing career, he's got to start all over again at whatever he chooses to do. There are only so many jobs in coaching and the media for ex-players to go into - the rest have to start again from scratch at a new career. He'll drop back to below average wages, and have to work his way back up again. So the money he earns over the next 3-5 years is what he will use to set both himself and his family up for the rest of their life.
 

jed

First Grade
Messages
9,280
Bay56 said:
agree

I dont begrudge a sportsman getting what is deserving of his talent ... but one that attempts to use a "get out" clause in attempting to do same I do ... stick to your contract which the club extended itself to fulfill in the first place
And precisely how is he breaking the contract? His contract GIVES him the option to look elsewhere if the club changed coach. Management allowed the clause to be added, and if that's what it took to sign him, I'm glad they did it. IMO it's still likely that he'll stay.
 

Bay56

First Grade
Messages
5,464
Tokyo_Raider said:
My answer is the same as yours and everyone's, Bay.

Depends how much money.

Besides, he's not breaking a contract. He is abiding by its clauses in good faith.

Mate I've been working for the same firm since leaving school ... on numerous occassions I have been the subject of a head hunter but have stayed with the firm (for less money I might add).

So please dont claim to know what my reaction would be.

In terms of his contract he obviously made sure such a "get out" clause was included ... the Raiders were stupid to agree to sign such a contract but were probably left with no choice ... now at the first chance Schif decides to exercise that option ... I'd call that poor form.

My understanding, from your answer to my question, is that you would break a contract in search for more money .... I now can understand why you consider Schifs actions to be above board.
 

Bay56

First Grade
Messages
5,464
jed said:
And precisely how is he breaking the contract? His contract GIVES him the option to look elsewhere if the club changed coach. Management allowed the clause to be added, and if that's what it took to sign him, I'm glad they did it. IMO it's still likely that he'll stay.

The reason he is staying jed is that the deal fell through.

Read my post above for comments regarding the get-out clause.

Sports people have concessions regarding tax ... it acknowleges that they will not be earning similar amounts all their working life.

btw are you watching the Raiders train on Sat
 

hrundi99

First Grade
Messages
8,404
Bay56 said:
Mate I've been working for the same firm since leaving school ... on numerous occassions I have been the subject of a head hunter but have stayed with the firm (for less money I might add).

So please dont claim to know what my reaction would be.

Once again, you're entitled to your choices, and so is he.

My understanding, from your answer to my question, is that you would break a contract in search for more money .... I now can understand why you consider Schifs actions to be above board.

Ultimately, anyone should place their family's needs above those of the company. As I stated a few days ago, it is only on very rare occasions that companies consider the employee's needs.
 

raidersforme

Juniors
Messages
487
jed said:
To be honest, $340K is good for a player like him, I have no issues paying that.

Not sure if you realise, but the $340K is all-inclusive. If you take out superannuation, it drops straight away to a bit over $300K. Take out tax, he'll end up about $160K-$170K. Don't know what accountants and financial planners you use, but sign me up if they can push it up to $300K.


Something else to keep in mind is that he's a professional footballer. At the end of his playing career, he's got to start all over again at whatever he chooses to do. There are only so many jobs in coaching and the media for ex-players to go into - the rest have to start again from scratch at a new career. He'll drop back to below average wages, and have to work his way back up again. So the money he earns over the next 3-5 years is what he will use to set both himself and his family up for the rest of their life.

Jed i agree with what you say whole heartedly except the tax part,

I do realise it's all inclusive most pay's over 55k they include it to make it look better the employer that is.

I have explained already the tax offset senario, but another example is he is the only earner in his family, he takes out life insurance on all parties in his family, it is paid by his super contributions which is legal, the net effect is the say $4000.00 for the insurance is only that, not the after tax ratio which would be approx $7300.00 saving him $3300.00 in one instance, then there's thousands of other ways to reduce tax, i do it to reduce my tax bracket two steps, by investing what johhny would have taken anyway giving me asset's and the cost of then is only 51.5% and johhny pays the rest, if you want my accountant i will give number.

On him after RL and him thinking about it, have no problem there except why didn't he think of this before putting ink to paper, this is my only grief if this was a contract negotiation i would not care but he signed he plays.

Let me put it this way how would you all feel if the Raiders decided to rip up someones contract without telling them, they had there pr team spill this to the press you would not be happy, well i feel the same way i don't support canberra Schif's i support the canberra raiders

In saying that i still think he is a great player asked me last week i would have sayed he was a legend
 

Bay56

First Grade
Messages
5,464
hrundi99 said:
Once again, you're entitled to your choices, and so is he.

Ultimately, anyone should place their family's needs above those of the company. As I stated a few days ago, it is only on very rare occasions that companies consider the employee's needs.

mate you ahave taken my answer out of context ... my statement was a reaction to T_R's assumption that I would break a contract in search for more money.

Imo you have obviously worked for the wrong firms if you think that the company only takes care of it's workers on rare occassions.
 

Tokyo_Raider

Juniors
Messages
1,229
Bay56 said:
Mate I've been working for the same firm since leaving school ... on numerous occassions I have been the subject of a head hunter but have stayed with the firm (for less money I might add).

So please dont claim to know what my reaction would be.

In terms of his contract he obviously made sure such a "get out" clause was included ... the Raiders were stupid to agree to sign such a contract but were probably left with no choice ... now at the first chance Schif decides to exercise that option ... I'd call that poor form.

My understanding, from your answer to my question, is that you would break a contract in search for more money .... I now can understand why you consider Schifs actions to be above board.

Pathetic attempt a a jibe there at the end.

The only question for you and everyone else is `how much`.

I have over 150 employees and I expect and deliver a level of loyalty. If someone offered to double their salary or whatever then I would expect them to leave.

You are excessively smug and self-satisfied in this thread, Bay, and, I am sorry to say, very, very naive.
 

Mainstream

Juniors
Messages
16
jed said:
Something else to keep in mind is that he's a professional footballer. At the end of his playing career, he's got to start all over again at whatever he chooses to do. There are only so many jobs in coaching and the media for ex-players to go into - the rest have to start again from scratch at a new career. He'll drop back to below average wages, and have to work his way back up again. So the money he earns over the next 3-5 years is what he will use to set both himself and his family up for the rest of their life.

A few years back there was a full page article about Schifcofske in the Canberra Times. It talked about his family and his background. Significantly Choc was quoted as saying that he is in fortunate position in that he is a qualified fitter and turner and that he would most likely go back to that at the end of his footy career. He expressed that he was very happy to have something to fall back on unlike a lot of his team mates...

I'm not saying he should accept that if he can earn more in some other capacity, but it was a bit misleading to go on about it and imply that money wasn't everything to him when, well, it seems to be...
 

hrundi99

First Grade
Messages
8,404
Mainstream said:
I'm not saying he should accept that if he can earn more in some other capacity, but it was a bit misleading to go on about it and imply that money wasn't everything to him when, well, it seems to be...

Once again you've oversimplified things.

Money wasn't everything. Signing with the Reds was about money AND a new challenge AND moving his family home to Queensland.
 

hrundi99

First Grade
Messages
8,404
Mainstream said:
What? When I have oversimplified things previously?

Cut out the personal attacks please.

Ummm...If you think that was a personal attack then you're sorely mistaken.

All I'm saying is you're focusing too exclusively on the money.
 

Boing Boing

Juniors
Messages
1,672
Mainstream said:
What? When I have oversimplified things previously?

Cut out the personal attacks please.

How on earth was that a personal attack? You're rather Hyper-sensitive aren't you!
 

thickos

First Grade
Messages
7,086
I agree with 2k2.... Tokyo, stack your workforce with Raiders fans! :cool:

Back on topic, I think so many of you are being so harsh on the man... what more has Schif had to have done to earn your respect? Wiki did not have all this grief directed towards him during 2004.

Remember, too, that he is still a Raider and actually hasn't gone anywhere...
 

reptar

Juniors
Messages
911
Tokyo_Raider said:
One person in the company spending all day on LeagueUnlimited is enough, thank you!

Yeah, but at least your proxy server would be well utilised!
 

Latest posts

Top