List Mgmt. 2023 List Management

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

A few weeks ago


From last year


Cook didn’t say that at all, in either of the interviews.
 
Cook didn’t say that at all, in either of the interviews.

Sorry, Cook referring to list management issues and then stating we need to hit the draft for 2-3 years and forcing us to pick up kids has nothing to do with salary cap issues.

When Cook says, ‘can we keep him on our list considering our top heavy nature’ in relation to TDK after stating he’s a required player must mean we are too tall and not because we have stretched salary cap

When Cook is asked how we keep all our players who command top dollar deals as a list management challenge, again he must be talking about something else other than salary cap.

To then spend the rest of the interview talking about how much to pay players and payment structures and it becoming a challenge, again he mustn’t be talking about the salary cap at all.
 
Indeed, he mentions list management issues (faced by most clubs) not salary cap.

Cook says, ‘can we keep him on our list considering our top heavy nature’ when asked if TDK will stay, he’s not talking about being too tall.

When Cook says our current situation ’forces is to take kids’ he’s not taking about us being old, he says this after saying our list is top heavy.

In the second interview Cook spends the hole interview talking about pay scales and money and refers to this challenge as a list management challenge.
 
From Cook's comments it's clear that we have cap pressure. How much? Well none of us would know the specifics, particularly with the ability for clubs to frontend and backend contracts...there's a lot of flexibility for clubs. When we had a 'warchest' a few years ago, we didn't question that the news articles were correct.

I don't read it as if we have a crisis, just that we'll need to be disciplined and don't have much scope to splash out on big names for the next couple of years.

Those who can't admit this are really in the Nile.
 
Sorry, Cook referring to list management issues and then stating we need to hit the draft for 2-3 years and forcing us to pick up kids has nothing to do with salary cap issues.

When Cook says, ‘can we keep him on our list considering our top heavy nature’ in relation to TDK after stating he’s a required player must mean we are too tall and not because we have stretched salary cap

When Cook is asked how we keep all our players who command top dollar deals as a list management challenge, again he must be talking about something else other than salary cap.

To then spend the rest of the interview talking about how much to pay players and payment structures and it becoming a challenge, again he mustn’t be talking about the salary cap at all.

You’re off on tangents.

Nobody is suggesting we don’t have cap pressure.

You said “we are maxed out cap wise” and when asked to substantiate, you then proceeded to provide 2 Cook interviews in which he didn’t state that at all.

Every club has cap pressure. That’s the nature of a competition in which you have a cap floor.
 
You’re off on tangents.

Nobody is suggesting we don’t have cap pressure.

You said “we are maxed out cap wise” and when asked to substantiate, you then proceeded to provide 2 Cook interviews in which he didn’t state that at all.

Every club has cap pressure. That’s the nature of a competition in which you have a cap floor.
Yeah...I'm serious.

Not interested in what journalists have to say. They scream that they want player salaries to be made public and in the meantime they are known to constantly overstate player salaries...and yet we're supposed to believe they have intricate knowledge of club salary caps?

That doesn't sound right to me.

Where did our CEO say we have issues? I must have missed it.


Im not off on tangents at all. I quoted passages from the interviews.

Your quoted message is above, where you state that you’re not interested in what any journalists have to say and specifically asked where our CEO mentioned we have issues. I have provided you with the interview where he says we have issues.

But all good, focus on the part where he doesn’t use the words ‘maxed out’

Every club has cap pressure?

Yes, some have very little pressure and some have a lot, we have the amount where our CEO states our current position forces us to bring in kids and we will focus on the draft for 2-3 years.
 
Im not off on tangents at all. I quoted passages from the interviews.
Which say something different to what I initially queried.
Your quoted message is above, where you state that you’re not interested in what any journalists have to say and specifically asked where our CEO mentioned we have issues. I have provided you with the interview where he says we have issues.

I asked you to show me where anyone who would know, has said we have maxed out our salary cap.

Which is what you originally said.

Is there anything?

But all good, focus on the part where he doesn’t use the words ‘maxed out’

Why wouldn’t I focus on the part I queried specifically?

Every club has cap pressure?

Yes. All are forced to pay somewhat similar amounts.

The salary cap isn’t new. There is a ceiling and a floor.

Yes, some have very little pressure and some have a lot, we have the amount where our CEO states our current position forces us to bring in kids and we will focus on the draft for 2-3 years.
Didn’t he also say we focussed on the draft last year but also brought in Acres?
 
The list management issues that are front of mind for Cook and Austin:
  1. That we carry half a dozen players who have been long contracted to the club that can't get on the park. This damages the club's depth. It takes a couple of other injuries and the list falls apart
  2. That we drafted poorly for several years or traded out of the pointy end of the draft altogether so that we have precious few players younger than Sam Walsh (drafted in 2018) who are any real quality. This prohibits a self sustaining AFL list

It's all well and good to keep trading in and signing 25+ year Olds to help a flag push for the next few years but after that the club will find itself back to where it was at the end of the 90s early 2000s where almost everyone retires at once

The club will answer the second problem this year and next year to bring in fresh talent to add to Hollands, Motlop and Durdin (the only 3 that are virtual locks to be consistent best 22 players for the next 10-15 years,we all have our favorites from the rest of our youthful list and can be hopeful for the likes of Cowan, etc.).

The club can simultaneously add a veteran or two to support our winning in the present and near future. These are the types who will replace the injury riddled players.

These are our list management issues.

It'll be more than 6 but say you bring in 4 kids like we did last year and 2 veterans who are able to contribute but more importantly be available for selection most weeks and the list will transform tremendously.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The list management issues that are front of mind for Cook and Austin:
  1. That we carry half a dozen players who have been long contracted to the club that can't get on the park. This damages the club's depth. It takes a couple of other injuries and the list falls apart
  2. That we drafted poorly for several years or traded out of the pointy end of the draft altogether so that we have precious few players younger than Sam Walsh (drafted in 2018) who are any real quality. This prohibits a self sustaining AFL list

It's all well and good to keep trading in and signing 25+ year Olds to help a flag push for the next few years but after that the club will find itself back to where it was at the end of the 90s early 2000s where almost everyone retires at once

The club will answer the second problem this year and next year to bring in fresh talent to add to Hollands, Motlop and Durdin (the only 3 that are virtual locks to be consistent best 22 players for the next 10-15 years).

The club can simultaneously add a veteran or two to support our winning in the present and near future. These are the types who will replace the injury riddled players.

These are our list management issues.
I'd say Walsh is still young enough (22) to be around long term.
 
I'd say Walsh is still young enough (22) to be around long term.

Absolutely he is. Hopefully another decade.

My point is that the list of quality thins out tremendously after that (that is younger). We have 3 virtual locks for best 22 status younger than him and some players we have a lot of hope in

Contrast that to other clubs and it's a readily identifiable area of need

Screenshot_20230518-153444.png
 
Yeah...I'm serious.

Not interested in what journalists have to say. They scream that they want player salaries to be made public and in the meantime they are known to constantly overstate player salaries...and yet we're supposed to believe they have intricate knowledge of club salary caps?

That doesn't sound right to me.

Where did our CEO say we have issues? I must have missed it.
I have take a stab at what I think the players might be on, based on reports in the media, the AFL salary cap is 14mil, so based on these figures I am 3mil over and I thought i was being conservative..

Jsos
400​
Dow
450​
Jesse
300​
LOB
300​
Cerra
700​
Zac W
700​
Kennedy
500​
Foagarty
350​
Cripps
900​
Harry
850​
Mitch McGovern
800​
TDK
250​
Acres
500​
Holland
150​
Docherty
500​
Carrol
150​
Kemp
250​
Walsh
800​
Durdin
250​
Plowman
350​
Martin
700​
Marchbank
350​
Weitering
800​
Newman
300​
Fisher
300​
Cowan
150​
Pittonet
300​
Cunningham
250​
Hewett
400​
Charlie
900​
Lemmey
150​
Binns
150​
Young
300​
Philp
150​
Ed
250​
Honey
150​
Boyd
150​
Durdin
200​
Cincotta
150​
Okeffe
150​
Akuei
150​
Saad
600​
Owies
250​
Mirkov
100​
Cotterel
200​
17000​
 
Last edited:
I have take a stab at what I think the players might be on, based on reports in the media, the AFL salary cap is 14mil, so based on these figures I am 3mil over and I thought i was being conservative based on all the media reports..

Jsos
400​
Dow
450​
Jesse
300​
LOB
300​
Cerra
700​
Zac W
700​
Kennedy
500​
Foagarty
350​
Cripps
900​
Harry
850​
Mitch McGovern
800​
TDK
250​
Acres
500​
Holland
150​
Docherty
500​
Carrol
150​
Kemp
250​
Walsh
800​
Durdin
250​
Plowman
350​
Martin
700​
Marchbank
350​
Weitering
800​
Newman
300​
Fisher
300​
Cowan
150​
Pittonet
300​
Cunningham
250​
Hewett
400​
Charlie
900​
Lemmey
150​
Binns
150​
Young
300​
Philp
150​
Ed
250​
Honey
150​
Boyd
150​
Durdin
200​
Cincotta
150​
Okeffe
150​
Akuei
150​
Saad
600​
Owies
250​
Mirkov
100​
Cotterel
200​
17000​
If we can frontend/backend contracts it's possible to stll get the official number to $14mil. Remember we can go under and over by 5% in some circumstances too.

Less important - veteran allowances might apply to guys like Cripps so their full salary isn't included against the cap.
 
I have take a stab at what I think the players might be on, based on reports in the media, the AFL salary cap is 14mil, so based on these figures I am 3mil over and I thought i was being conservative based on all the media reports..

Jsos
400​
Dow
450​
Jesse
300​
LOB
300​
Cerra
700​
Zac W
700​
Kennedy
500​
Foagarty
350​
Cripps
900​
Harry
850​
Mitch McGovern
800​
TDK
250​
Acres
500​
Holland
150​
Docherty
500​
Carrol
150​
Kemp
250​
Walsh
800​
Durdin
250​
Plowman
350​
Martin
700​
Marchbank
350​
Weitering
800​
Newman
300​
Fisher
300​
Cowan
150​
Pittonet
300​
Cunningham
250​
Hewett
400​
Charlie
900​
Lemmey
150​
Binns
150​
Young
300​
Philp
150​
Ed
250​
Honey
150​
Boyd
150​
Durdin
200​
Cincotta
150​
Okeffe
150​
Akuei
150​
Saad
600​
Owies
250​
Mirkov
100​
Cotterel
200​
17000​

Geez, we’re screwed
 
Absolutely he is. Hopefully another decade.

My point is that the list of quality thins out tremendously after that (that is younger). We have 3 virtual locks for best 22 status younger than him and some players we have a lot of hope in

Contrast that to other clubs and it's a readily identifiable area of need

View attachment 1690318
It’s the sort of list you would see at one of the top sides so it’s abit of a worry in our situation.
 
Absolutely he is. Hopefully another decade.

My point is that the list of quality thins out tremendously after that (that is younger). We have 3 virtual locks for best 22 status younger than him and some players we have a lot of hope in

Contrast that to other clubs and it's a readily identifiable area of need

View attachment 1690318
Agree after cerra and Walsh the rest of the youth are role players at best .. unless lemmey really comes on as a key position
 
Based on my figures which I am sure are a long way off reality, but with Dow 450, Lob 300, Fog, 350, Marchbank 350, Cunners 250, Ed 250 all who are likely to be gone at seasons end, if they are replaced with a grad on $150k we get back $900k.
 
Martin, made sense at the time, although he had never shown consistent good footy at GC and he has been exactly the same player at Carlton due to injury and form, its more frustrating because what we hoped Martin would become is exactly the type of player we so desperately need.

Martin had had 3 top 3 finishes in F & Bs at GC.

But he's been bitterly disappointing at CFC.

Staggered the Club can't get on top of his repeated soft tissue injuries.
It's worth pointing out that, similar to Williams, we signed him up to play a role that he didn't play a whole lot at his previous club. We signed him up as a small to medium forward whereas for the Suns he was more of a utility that played different roles most weeks. He was used as an impact forward in bursts/quarters but was never played there consistently as a main position.

I'd suggest that when he has looked his best for is us is when he's had short bursts on the ball and has some burst impact there. Aside from the odd qtr or 15 minute periods in games he doesn't look good up forward at all.
 
It's worth pointing out that, similar to Williams, we signed him up to play a role that he didn't play a whole lot at his previous club. We signed him up as a small to medium forward whereas for the Suns he was more of a utility that played different roles most weeks. He was used as an impact forward in bursts/quarters but was never played there consistently as a main position.

I'd suggest that when he has looked his best for is us is when he's had short bursts on the ball and has some burst impact there. Aside from the odd qtr or 15 minute periods in games he doesn't look good up forward at all.
HFF is hard to play. There might be something to this - but atm he just has to STAY FIT!
 
Nick Watson much like Hollands>LoB this year would be a more impactful pick up than Gresham. Perhaps they'd break even in his first year or maybe Gresham would be slightly ahead, but within 2-3 years Watson will be a better player and cost us far less in cap space.
Agree! More kids with heart and desire over players looking for a pay day that aren't overly good anyways. Hit the draft hard again
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top