Taumololo's Big Payday

[betcats]

Rubbish... from what I've read... Taumalolo has no rights to force the cowboys to renegotiate his contract.

If the cap rises significantly then he will be stuck on base of 1M a season for 10 years when others in his status will be earning anything between 2-3M a season.

And the only way out of it for Taumalolo would be to rely on the good graces of your club or potentially having to commit PR suicide by publicly sulking about your contract.

Not even NBA players who have guaranteed contracts for far, far more than this amount sign 10 year deals.

Good on the kid for securing his future... but im interested to see any future deals his agents have with the Cowboys for other players... because to me it looks like Taumalolo's agents just did the Cowboys a solid at the detriment of Taumalolo.

Im not advocating he does 1 year SBW type deals... but there ARE ways for him to do multiyear contracts with options in order to circumvent any injury risk.

Nailed it. It's silly to think he can sign a 10 year deal and the just demand more money half way through it and the club will just do it.

 

[DiegoNT]

Rubbish... from what I've read... Taumalolo has no rights to force the cowboys to renegotiate his contract.

If the cap rises significantly then he will be stuck on base of 1M a season for 10 years when others in his status will be earning anything between 2-3M a season.

And the only way out of it for Taumalolo would be to rely on the good graces of your club or potentially having to commit PR suicide by publicly sulking about your contract.

Not even NBA players who have guaranteed contracts for far, far more than this amount sign 10 year deals.

Good on the kid for securing his future... but im interested to see any future deals his agents have with the Cowboys for other players... because to me it looks like Taumalolo's agents just did the Cowboys a solid at the detriment of Taumalolo.

Im not advocating he does 1 year SBW type deals... but there ARE ways for him to do multiyear contracts with options in order to circumvent any injury risk.

You're right, Taumololo has no right to re-negotiate his contract. Cowboys have every right to say no and enforce his contract as is. But if Taumololo keeps playing the way he is, or even get better, is it in Cowboys best interests to just say no in that circumstance?

 

[Captain Apollo]

Nailed it. It's silly to think he can sign a 10 year deal and the just demand more money half way through it and the club will just do it.

Yep. Unless there is a clause allowing him to void it or seek renegotiation, Taumalolo will be stuck with it. It certainly gives him security for the next 10 years, which if that was what he was after good luck to him.

 

[Captain Apollo]

You're right, Taumololo has no right to re-negotiate his contract. Cowboys have every right to say no and enforce his contract as is. But if Taumololo keeps playing the way he is, or even get better, is it in Cowboys best interests to just say no in that circumstance?

Yes actually, it would be in the Cowboys interests to say no. That way they could sign/re-sign other players of quality to assembly a premiership contending side around him.

 

[RazorRam0n]

It was rumored less than 24 hours ago, and only publicly confirmed at an 11.30am press conference.

Yet you've managed to gain an understanding of the terms of the contract in that timeframe?

reasonable point, but as i said earlier, IF a former cows board member has made a statement assuming no option in lolo's favour...he'd a better source than you

 

[betcats]

You're right, Taumololo has no right to re-negotiate his contract. Cowboys have every right to say no and enforce his contract as is. But if Taumololo keeps playing the way he is, or even get better, is it in Cowboys best interests to just say no in that circumstance?

Say this happens and the cows do say no, what do you think happens next? Sulking and dropping his form isn't likely to make the cows want to give him more money or any other team for that matter.

 

[DiegoNT]

Yes actually, it would be in the Cowboys interests to say no. That way they could sign/re-sign other players of quality to assembly a premiership contending side around him.

So if they had the games best player, under market value from a previous deal, who's providing you with huge value on the field, come forward and say he's not happy off the field, he has offers to go home or go to union is their anything they could do to help you'd think they'd just say 'we're not going to do anything' ? You'd either have to pay an extra couple of hundred thousand ( in this hypothetical definitely worth it) or you can say no and risk either losing your superstar to union or have him sulking around the place for another 5 years, unhappy with the club and just going through the motions at a million a year.
Yes the cowboys have the right to say no, doesn't mean it's in their best interest.
I have the right to go to the beach in speedos, but with my body size it's in no ones interests, especially my own, to do so

 

[DiegoNT]

Say this happens and the cows do say no, what do you think happens next?

You suddenly have a million dollar player who may no longer be productive or interested, a player that may just go through the motions if he doesn't think the club's being fair, may attempt to get himself sacked ( so you'll have to pay him out anyway) or 'retire' then sign with rugby

 

[betcats]

You suddenly have a million dollar player who may no longer be productive or interested, a player that may just go through the motions if he doesn't think the club's being fair, may attempt to get himself sacked ( so you'll have to pay him out anyway) or 'retire' then sign with rugby

They can only sack him if he breaches his contract in which case no he doesn't get paid out.

 

[ed-grimley]

What's it like living in Townsville all year round?

 

[DiegoNT]

They can only sack him if he breaches his contract in which case no he doesn't get paid out.

They still lose him

 

[shiznit]

It was rumored less than 24 hours ago, and only publicly confirmed at an 11.30am press conference.

Yet you've managed to gain an understanding of the terms of the contract in that timeframe?

Yes... and as I stated previously... we would need to see the contract.

But assuming what's been reported is correct... then those are valid questions to ask...

 

[betcats]

They still lose him

And his value likely drops because he's just acted a dickhead and breached a contract.

 

[DiegoNT]

And his value likely drops because he's just acted a dickhead and breached a contract.

Like I said in this hypothetical he's already got other big offers.

He could just as likely plateu and only be worth $1m a year anyway

He could also lose form and have injuries and still get a $1m a year.

Any way it goes down, Lolo will be in a good position.

 

[Captain Apollo]

So if they had the games best player, under market value from a previous deal, who's providing you with huge value on the field, come forward and say he's not happy off the field, he has offers to go home or go to union is their anything they could do to help you'd think they'd just say 'we're not going to do anything' ? You'd either have to pay an extra couple of hundred thousand ( in this hypothetical definitely worth it) or you can say no and risk either losing your superstar to union or have him sulking around the place for another 5 years, unhappy with the club and just going through the motions at a million a year.
Yes the cowboys have the right to say no, doesn't mean it's in their best interest.
I have the right to go to the beach in speedos, but with my body size it's in no ones interests, especially my own, to do so

If you want an example of a player in another sports who signed along term contract that wound up becoming undervalued because that sport's salary cap went up, I give you Michael Jordan. In 1989 Jordan signed an 8 year, $25 million contract, which at time of signing put him amongst the highest paid players at $3-$4 million a season. Problem was about 12-18 months later, the NBA got a massive increase in revenue due to a new tv deal and the salary cap went up immensely, so Jordan was on his $3-$4 million whilst other players were sign contracts worth $10-$15 million per season. Jordan had no leverage so he stuck with that contract, even after he came back from baseball. It wasn't until he re-signed with Chicago for the 1996-97 season he got a huge pay day from the Bulls.

As to running off to Union, he could try, but the Cowboys would be able to get a restraining order placed on him if he attempted to play professional rugby union without the Cowboys consent whilst under contract. Before you say "but it is unenforceable overseas", if that is the case, then why did SBW wind up buying out his contract with the Bulldogs after he'd walked out to go to French RU?

 

[tumbidragon]

10 yr contracts are f**king geniused imo. But on the plus side Lolo's an animal who has a big engine and a durable body. IF he stays fit and motivated, 1Mill a season in 6-10 yrs time is peanuts for a player of his calibre.
Just glad that the code has retained him, Best of luck to him and the cows.

 

[shiznit]

You're right, Taumololo has no right to re-negotiate his contract. Cowboys have every right to say no and enforce his contract as is. But if Taumololo keeps playing the way he is, or even get better, is it in Cowboys best interests to just say no in that circumstance?

But that's the point though... it has to be in the Cowboys best interest for a renegotiation to happen.

What's in the Cowboys best interest may not necessarily be in Taumalolo's best interest.

But with a deal like this you leave terms almost completely in the clubs favour.

To be fair to the club... if something horrid happens to Taumalolo and he doesn't live up to his 1M a season price tag... the ball would be his court... But you would think a decent agent wouldn't be thinking along those lines.

 

[DiegoNT]

But that's the point though... it has to be in the Cowboys best interest for a renegotiation to happen.

What's in the Cowboys best interest may not necessarily be in Taumalolo's best interest.

But with a deal like this you leave terms almost completely in the clubs favour.

To be fair to the club... if something horrid happens to Taumalolo and he doesn't live up to his 1M a season price tag... the ball would be his court... But you would think a decent agent wouldn't be thinking along those lines.

And like I said, in the event that Lolo goes to another level and sold himself short initially, then keeping Lolo happy would definitely be in their interests.

 

[axl rose]

What's it like living in Townsville all year round?

Anywhere thats not Sydney these days seems nice.

 

[shiznit]

And like I said, in the event that Lolo goes to another level and sold himself short initially, then keeping Lolo happy would definitely be in their interests.

Is it ever that clear cut though??

It's easy to say that now...

Here's a hypothetical scenario...

fast forward 3-5 years and the Cowboys have developed another young kid who's now the best in the game and as such is demanding 2M a season or he will sign elsewhere...

I don't care how good Taumalolo is playing... if the club has a chance to keep both players by forcing him to stick to his contract then they would do it without a second thought... and so they should... if Taumalolo was dumb enough to sign that contract then that's not the club's fault.

The agent on the other hand...