I beleive thst if Welsh isn't picked up in the national draft, he will become a rookie draft pick and we will go into ther season with 37 on the main list and 5 rookies (plus 1 cat b).
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
List Mgmt. 2024 List Mismanagement and Trading Part 2
- Thread starter 1990crow
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Achilles not easy to get over
- Aug 30, 2021
- 18,632
- 36,618
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Aren’t we full on the rookie list though?
Chezzel
Rookie
- Oct 15, 2023
- 32
- 60
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
I don’t think this happens because we’ve committed to picking both of them up in the rookie draft, so if no one bids on welsh we’ll take him with our last pick in the national. Both burgess and Schoenberg will be rookied so we physically can’t take welsh in the rookie draft.
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
dogs105
Sweet Kennels Proprietor
We're full on the minimum rookie list, which assumes we're maxing the main list. Which we wouldn't be if we took only pick 4 and had 1 rookie promotion.
But this would not give us the mandated 3 main list additions - it seems that we are expecting to draft 2 players
dogs105
Sweet Kennels Proprietor
And need to take 3 in the ND.
Could promote 2 rookies and have pick 4, but that leaves no vacancy to match Welsh if required in ND.
- Aug 30, 2021
- 18,632
- 36,618
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
So clear we will promote Keane and pick Welsh.
Imagine promoting Borlase and not leaving yourself a spot to draft Welsh if someone nominates him, just won’t happen
I think you need to have 3 main list vacancies, but you don't have to use them.
That doesn't mean we won’t take him in the mai draft, just that we don't have to.
No, we can't. We still need to make 3 selections in the ND (including rookie upgrades). The only way the list mathematics works is if we make 2 selections in the ND, upgrade 1 rookie, and re-draft Berg and Burgo in the RD.
37+5 is not an option unless we delist & re-draft another senior contracted player, as per today's announcement. This is not happening.
On SM-A5360 using BigFooty.com mobile app
No, you need to make 3 selections in the ND. Rookie Upgrades count towards the total.
We are now committed to taking Welsh with our last live pick in the ND, if nobody bids on him before then.
Afcprophet
All Australian
- Jul 8, 2021
- 973
- 1,369
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Usually takes 2 years to get back to full fitness after a rupture. Still think Schoenberg has a chance to be a good player.
- Oct 10, 2016
- 858
- 832
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Can someone please explain to me the deal with delisting Schoenberg and Burgess and re drafting them as rookies? Does that mean we have list spots now to pick up Jack Hayes?
I literally have no idea when it comes to list spots/rookie spots etc.
Edit: sorry if this has already been spoken about, just jumped on and don’t have time to read through the thread.
I literally have no idea when it comes to list spots/rookie spots etc.
Edit: sorry if this has already been spoken about, just jumped on and don’t have time to read through the thread.
No. Doing the senior <-> rookie list shuffle does not change the total number of vacancies on our list, which remains at 2. There are no additional vacancies created as a result of this move.
This move is the first part of a process whereby we shuffle the 2nd vacancy from the rookie list to the senior list. The second part involves upgrading a rookie (most likely Keane) to the senior list.
This is all about having enough list vacancies to satisfy the AFL's mandatory 3 ND selections (including rookie upgrades).
Delisting these 2 players from the senior list means that we now have 3 senior list vacancies, as required by the AFL. We will upgrade 1 rookie, and make 2 selections in the ND - pick #4 and Welsh. We will then re-draft Berg and Burgo in the RD, leaving us with 38 players on our senior list and 4 on the rookie list.
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Moderator
- May 24, 2006
- 79,736
- 161,771
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Redbacks, Sturt, Liverpool, Arizona
- Moderator
- #3,691
Does the rookie list need to be re-named?
Probably...
Impact list is what we call it at the AFC.
- Oct 10, 2016
- 858
- 832
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Legend. Thanks for your time to put this together. A lot more understanding now
- Sep 25, 2014
- 5,193
- 3,701
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Sturt, Adelaide United & Leeds United
No, the rules need to be changed. should be for under 23s and for those that have not been on an AFL list before. not used to rort the system etc.
We should call it the 'half-way house', because it means you are half way out the door.
SugarShane
C12 H22 O11
Yes, if only to stop all the nuffies in the comments going "Rookie!? He's 32!!!"
Vader ... just wanted to clarify this one (very unreasonable and improbable) pathway.
So pre-empting with "yes this is PlayStation level stuff":
If we have talked to Burgess (secret squirrel style) and agreed for him NOT to be picked up in the Rookie draft, ie he's gone.
Then we have one extra spot for the draft - but that spot is currently a rookie spot.
Can we change our list structure to accommodate an extra ND draftee, or would it mean that Welsh could only be added as a rookie?
Of course we would have to overpay with a future first to get back in to even the back end of the first round, but maybe we make that call if a player is available that we love.
So pre-empting with "yes this is PlayStation level stuff":
If we have talked to Burgess (secret squirrel style) and agreed for him NOT to be picked up in the Rookie draft, ie he's gone.
Then we have one extra spot for the draft - but that spot is currently a rookie spot.
Can we change our list structure to accommodate an extra ND draftee, or would it mean that Welsh could only be added as a rookie?
Of course we would have to overpay with a future first to get back in to even the back end of the first round, but maybe we make that call if a player is available that we love.
The first problem here is that we've committed to re-drafting him, which is a contractual arrangement. We can't do a "secret squirrel" agreement not to re-draft him.
Secondly, why would they even bother with this "secret squirrel" stuff? They might as well just say that he's been delisted, and his 2025 contract has been paid out. What you're suggesting makes no sense.
Putting aside the "secret squirrel" crap, and proceeding with a hypothetical based on him being delisted outright...
That being the case, the answer becomes "it depends". What it depends upon is when the rookie upgrade paperwork has/had to be lodged with AFL House:
- If the paperwork has already been lodged, then the 3rd senior list vacancy has already been filled, and the vacancy created by not re-drafting Burgess would be on the rookie list, giving us a pick in the RD.
- If the paperwork hasn't been lodged yet, then there is no longer any requirement to upgrade a rookie, so the vacancy created is on the senior list, giving us a 3rd live pick in the ND.
The only List Lodgement date listed in the booklet before the ND, was on 31st October. However, we also know that there's a DFA window which is currently open, which closes on 8th November - presumably there is another LL after this, finalising team lists before the ND. Make of that what you will...
As I tried to make very clear - this is just hypothetical in theory stuff. I know that it's not going to happen, I was just wondering about the mechanics with the list.
Thanks for the answer.
BTW - The only reason you'd secret squirrel anything is to hide your intention. Not necessarily a stupid thing when you are competing with 17 other organisations for the same resources.
Similar threads
- Poll
