Rumour 2024 Rumours and Speculation Part 3

[1990crow]

Maybe he's had a serious falling out with them and wants Geelong to get fined

Doubt it. Geelong people are always Geelong people.

 

[Vader]

This is the same organisation that currently has a person who was the Geelong COO overseeing the investigation into their financial dealings.
He's literally overseeing a review into his own decisions.

This corrupt organisation will allow and do anything they want, as long as they get the outcome they want.

Yes... but I'm still to see any reason why the AFL would "want" to send NWM to Port, particularly if it means breaking their own rules to do so.

All I'm reading here is "the AFL is corrupt so they'll let it happen". Just because A is true (which it undoubtedly is), doesn't mean that B is also true.

 

[DJ75]

Maybe he's had a serious falling out with them and wants Geelong to get fined

Even then he would be sanctioning his own decisions. Hardly great for your career.

 

[DJ75]

Yes... but I'm still to see any reason why the AFL would "want" to send NWM to Port, particularly if it means breaking their own rules to do so.

All I'm reading here is "the AFL is corrupt so they'll let it happen". Just because A is true (which it undoubtedly is), doesn't mean that B is also true.

Agreed, except it feels like the AFL have been trying desperately to give Port a hand up in SA. They also do not want a dominant Crows team.

 

[Betts are off]

Regarding NWM, I won't pretend like I watch a lot of St Kilda games (Spoiler, I watch 1 per year) so Sunday I watched him quite closely.

My question is regarding his laconic style. Does he spend most of his time at that pace or does he usually use his dash a bit more in games? He did 1 fancy feet move on the weekend which was impressive, and got up to top speed once from memory (when he tweaked his hammy), but mostly seemed to be cruising around the backline in 2nd gear.

$1.2M/year for a QB style defender is a steep price, not saying he's not worth it, but I would hope a player with that price-tag breaks the lines with his run and carry a bit more then I saw in round 1.

 

[jimvic]

Maybe he's had a serious falling out with them and wants Geelong to get fined

if that is so Geelong would be out right now questioning his independence - crickets

 

[Bearded Clam]

Regarding NWM, I won't pretend like I watch a lot of St Kilda games (Spoiler, I watch 1 per year) so Sunday I watched him quite closely.

My question is regarding his laconic style. Does he spend most of his time at that pace or does he usually use his dash a bit more in games? He did 1 fancy feet move on the weekend which was impressive, and got up to top speed once from memory (when he tweaked his hammy), but mostly seemed to be cruising around the backline in 2nd gear.

$1.2M/year for a QB style defender is a steep price, not saying he's not worth it, but I would hope a player with that price-tag breaks the lines with his run and carry a bit more then I saw in round 1.

Mate..

He was playing in a side that was being very soundly beaten.. and in my opinion was one of the best players on the ground for either team in that game against the crows on the sunday..

Sure.. He made a couple of skill errors but geez.. you’d have to expect that when the rest of your team mates are MIA and you are carrying the entire fxkn load of your sides pressure!

If he was playing for the crows on sunday he wouldve gotten 3 brownlow votes.

Massively underrated player.

Throw the kitchen sink at him.

 

[Betts are off]

Mate..

He was playing in a side that was being very soundly beaten.. and in my opinion was one of the best players on the ground for either team in that game against the crows on the sunday..

Sure.. He made a couple of skill errors but geez.. you’d have to expect that when the rest of your team mates are MIA and you are carrying the entire fxkn load of your sides pressure!

If he was playing for the crows on sunday he wouldve gotten 3 brownlow votes.

Massively underrated player.

Throw the kitchen sink at him.

I understand your position and totally on board for bringing home elitely skilled players (I was into NWM in his draft year for this very reason), but you kinda danced around my question without answering it.

Call it buyers due diligence if you wish, but I just want to know what type of HBFer 'the kitchen sink' gets these days.

 

[Mostyn]

Yes... but I'm still to see any reason why the AFL would "want" to send NWM to Port, particularly if it means breaking their own rules to do so.

All I'm reading here is "the AFL is corrupt so they'll let it happen". Just because A is true (which it undoubtedly is), doesn't mean that B is also true.

You can't see a reason why the AFL would be pro player movement?

The power of the Player's Union? The influence of player managers? The millions of dollars they earn keeping their product in the media throughout trade season?

 

[Mostyn]

Agreed, except it feels like the AFL have been trying desperately to give Port a hand up in SA. They also do not want a dominant Crows team.

They couldn't give two ****s about either of those things.

 

[Vader]

You can't see a reason why the AFL would be pro player movement?

There's being pro player movement, and there's blatantly allowing clubs to break AFL rules in order to make it happen.

The power of the Player's Union? The influence of player managers? The millions of dollars they earn keeping their product in the media throughout trade season?

Yeah, that's all irrelevant.

The AFL won't stand in the way of Port trading for NWM. However, they won't allow Port to break the rules to do so. This means that Port will still need to make a 1st round selection in the 2025 ND, in addition to whatever moves they make in trading for NWM.

Trading for NWM will not count towards Port's 2x 1st round ND selections in 4 years. JHF did, as he was a 1st round pick who had only been in the system for 1 year. This is NWM's 4th year in the AFL, so his original draft date won't even fall within the 4-year window anyway!

 

[Mostyn]

There's being pro player movement, and there's blatantly allowing clubs to break AFL rules in order to make it happen.

Yeah, that's all irrelevant.

The AFL won't stand in the way of Port trading for NWM. However, they won't allow Port to break the rules to do so. This means that Port will still need to make a 1st round selection in the 2025 ND, in addition to whatever moves they make in trading for NWM.

Trading for NWM will not count towards Port's 2x 1st round ND selections in 4 years. JHF did, as he was a 1st round pick who had only been in the system for 1 year. This is NWM's 4th year in the AFL, so his original draft date won't even fall within the 4-year window anyway!

They are THEIR rules! What are they going to do - tell themselves off? Give themselves a fine?

They couldn't give a shit. There's a million ways they could bend it. They have NO reason to think that Port trading their pick for a 22 year old player would be anything other than good for them.

This ISN'T them trading three firsts for Dayne Zorko, which is the kind of thing they're trying to prevent. It's turning the gamble of a pick into the guarantee of NWM.

In any event - it won't matter. Port will have a bunch of players leaving, so finding picks should be the least of their problems. Farrell, Bergman, Butters, and who knows else.

 

[WeeBlake]

They are THEIR rules! What are they going to do - tell themselves off? Give themselves a fine?

They couldn't give a shit. There's a million ways they could bend it. They have NO reason to think that Port trading their pick for a 22 year old player would be anything other than good for them.

This ISN'T them trading three firsts for Dayne Zorko, which is the kind of thing they're trying to prevent. It's turning the gamble of a pick into the guarantee of NWM.

In any event - it won't matter. Port will have a bunch of players leaving, so finding picks should be the least of their problems. Farrell, Bergman, Butters, and who knows else.

They could even just change their rules. There’s an article on their website today saying they changed a rule about academy players, which was introduced in 2017, from this year. Sydney will benefit this year, maybe GC too.

Supporting the game in NSW and QLD is one of many things the AFL puts above fairness and consistency.

 

[Vader]

They are THEIR rules! What are they going to do - tell themselves off? Give themselves a fine?

They couldn't give a shit. There's a million ways they could bend it. They have NO reason to think that Port trading their pick for a 22 year old player would be anything other than good for them.

Clubs require "special permission" to break the 2x 1st round picks in 4 years rule.

The decision to grant "special permission" is based on the age & experience of the player, and the draft picks which the club has used in recent history. It's not based on whether or not the player being traded is a guaranteed star.

Port & NWM would fail on both criteria. NWM is 22 and has been in the system for 4 years, which makes him ineligible for consideration anyway. Then there's the fact that Port have consistently traded out of the draft for multiple years, so they can't argue "we didn't take a 1st round pick, but we did take 5x 2nd round picks last year".

This ISN'T them trading three firsts for Dayne Zorko, which is the kind of thing they're trying to prevent. It's turning the gamble of a pick into the guarantee of NWM.

Irrelevant.

To all intents and purposes there is no difference (in the eyes of the AFL) between them trading for NWM or Taylor Walker - both are far too old for the AFL to consider giving them "special permission".

In any event - it won't matter. Port will have a bunch of players leaving, so finding picks should be the least of their problems. Farrell, Bergman, Butters, and who knows else.

Finally, you write something which is actually relevant!

I agree that they will be trading out players, and they will need to use the draft assets received from these trades in order to satisfy StK's trading requirements for NWM.

All that matters is that Port will be required to use a 1st round pick in the 2025 ND, regardless of whether or not they trade for NWM.

 

[skam85]

In any event - it won't matter. Port will have a bunch of players leaving, so finding picks should be the least of their problems. Farrell, Bergman, Butters, and who knows else.

I'm impressed how you double down and keep making things considering your track record

Agreed - if we give up pick 25 without something significant also coming back our way, then we will all be massively disappointed. That's a terrible deal for us.

He's an aging role player.

He's just not worth a pick as early as 25 in a super draft.

Overpaid for ANB? F*** me.

It's a dick move to make promises to Barrass and get him to come out publicly with a commitment, and then actively bail on him.

He's a contracted footballer.

West Coast don't have to do anything other than let him know when pre season training begins.

Disgraceful by Hawthorn to make promises to him, a contracted footballer, and then leave him embarrassed by their unwillingness to actually close the deal.

If Hawthorn weren't interested in actually getting Barrass to their club, they never should have made promises.

Port haven't list to Sydney since 2016, and beat them by 20 goals last time they played.

They're in the grand final. It's a flip of the coin from there.

 

[Peter Doherty]

All that matters is that Port will be required to use a 1st round pick in the 2025 ND, regardless of whether or not they trade for NWM.

They currently do not have a 2025 first.

So if the rats don't leave the ship and they don't bring in a first rounder this year, then what?

 

[spenze]

I'm impressed how you double down and keep making things considering your track record












View attachment 2255599
View attachment 2255601

Jeez, his greatest misses Vol 3


And that is just this year

 

[George Kramer]

Why is it Moystn Vader shitfights ruin every thread

 

[rabidcrow]

Clubs require "special permission" to break the 2x 1st round picks in 4 years rule.

The decision to grant "special permission" is based on the age & experience of the player, and the draft picks which the club has used in recent history. It's not based on whether or not the player being traded is a guaranteed star.

Port & NWM would fail on both criteria. NWM is 22 and has been in the system for 4 years, which makes him ineligible for consideration anyway. Then there's the fact that Port have consistently traded out of the draft for multiple years, so they can't argue "we didn't take a 1st round pick, but we did take 5x 2nd round picks last year".

Irrelevant.

To all intents and purposes there is no difference (in the eyes of the AFL) between them trading for NWM or Taylor Walker - both are far too old for the AFL to consider giving them "special permission".

Finally, you write something which is actually relevant!

I agree that they will be trading out players, and they will need to use the draft assets received from these trades in order to satisfy StK's trading requirements for NWM.

All that matters is that Port will be required to use a 1st round pick in the 2025 ND, regardless of whether or not they trade for NWM.

Will they? JHF in 2022, no one 2023, Berry 2024. Why would they need to use a 2025 to meet the 2 in 4?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Vader]

Will they? JHF in 2022, no one 2023, Berry 2024. Why would they need to use a 2025 to meet the 2 in 4?

Does JHF count as 2022, when they traded for him? Or, does he count as 2021, when he was first drafted?

 

[Mostyn]

Clubs require "special permission" to break the 2x 1st round picks in 4 years rule.

The decision to grant "special permission" is based on the age & experience of the player, and the draft picks which the club has used in recent history. It's not based on whether or not the player being traded is a guaranteed star.

Port & NWM would fail on both criteria. NWM is 22 and has been in the system for 4 years, which makes him ineligible for consideration anyway. Then there's the fact that Port have consistently traded out of the draft for multiple years, so they can't argue "we didn't take a 1st round pick, but we did take 5x 2nd round picks last year".

Irrelevant.

To all intents and purposes there is no difference (in the eyes of the AFL) between them trading for NWM or Taylor Walker - both are far too old for the AFL to consider giving them "special permission".

Finally, you write something which is actually relevant!

I agree that they will be trading out players, and they will need to use the draft assets received from these trades in order to satisfy StK's trading requirements for NWM.

All that matters is that Port will be required to use a 1st round pick in the 2025 ND, regardless of whether or not they trade for NWM.

This is so amazingly naive.

They give special permission when they want to. They have never clearly defined the criteria, because they want to shape them to whatever they feel gets the best outcome.

They will always give themselves room to shape compensation and permission to whatever they think gets the best result. Fairness is irrelevant. They set their own definitions and will change them whenever they need.

They want the best commercial outcome for the clubs and league. That remains the only essential criteria.

The criteria are never transparent and won't be.