Recruiting EFC Trade/Draft Talk III - 1 McClug, 1 Billings (AND ROSS) for 4th rounder get it done dodoro

Who should we take with pick 1?

  • Hugh McCluggage

    Votes: 202 59.6%
  • Will Brodie

    Votes: 50 14.7%
  • SPS

    Votes: 13 3.8%
  • Rhys Mathieson

    Votes: 30 8.8%
  • Jack Billings

    Votes: 22 6.5%
  • Ben Ainsworth

    Votes: 9 2.7%
  • A well pickled ham

    Votes: 7 2.1%
  • A bag of mouldy spuds

    Votes: 5 1.5%
  • A rancid orange

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • A floury apple

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • An over mushy pear

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • A rock hard mandarin

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • A braised brussel sprout

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    339

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Psd or next years first their choice
No pick 19 **** them if he chooses us no need to do them any favours i still think next year we will get a top 8 pick to much for a player that Hasn't played for 2 years. Yeah we will have to offer big money but atleast we aren't trading away our future .

What is everyone's thoughts imo no more than a 3 year deal.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Lets be honest, if he hasn't nominated your mob before the end of the bye its down to us and north.

Hawks pick 15 > 19 and dempsey

For the 1 millionth time in this thread Dempsey is an UFA he can't be traded.
 
Fair enough.
Didn't think it was that bad, just thought it was a bunch of homesick princesses that couldnt live away from mummy while getting paid big $$$
It was pretty bad. You don't get that many players bailing out at once unless something is seriously amiss. Of course a couple of past and present players called them princesses (might've been Rockliff and Brown) and there was no coming back from there.

They'll be fine, they've improved out of sight and once their facilities get a revamp (I doubt the AFL will let things stand as they are for too much longer) they'll probably start being a destination club. The footy department stuff isn't likely to be a problem for much longer with the AFL reviewing all that
 
Lets be honest, if he hasn't nominated your mob before the end of the bye its down to us and north.

Hawks pick 15 > 19 and dempsey
The thing of it is though, that if he nominates us and Gold Coast refuse to deal with us (and I'd probably just prefer to walk him to the PSD), O'Meara has the right to block any other trades or he just straight up walks out on them which will become more and more likely if they want to keep trashing him.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

What is everyone's thoughts imo no more than a 3 year deal.

1 year deal with trigger clauses for another 2 or 3 if he plays enough games, or an extra 1 or 2 on less $$ if he doesn't play at all.

Makes GC demands for a bunch of picks look unreasonable but gives JOM some assurance that he won't be cast off at the first sign of injury while protecting us somewhat against having a $700k list clogger eating up cap space for 3 years if it all turns to shit
 
1 year deal with trigger clauses for another 2 or 3 if he plays enough games, or an extra 1 or 2 on less $$ if he doesn't play at all.

Makes GC demands for a bunch of picks look unreasonable but gives JOM some assurance that he won't be cast off at the first sign of injury while protecting us somewhat against having a $700k list clogger eating up cap space for 3 years if it all turns to shit
Agree definitely have to have trigger clauses in the contract to protect the club if we can't get his body right (though I think we will, would've thought we'd have one of the best medical/physio departments in the competition).
 
1 year deal with trigger clauses for another 2 or 3 if he plays enough games, or an extra 1 or 2 on less $$ if he doesn't play at all.

Makes GC demands for a bunch of picks look unreasonable but gives JOM some assurance that he won't be cast off at the first sign of injury while protecting us somewhat against having a $700k list clogger eating up cap space for 3 years if it all turns to shit
Don't know that that will cut the mustard with JOM. Would surely be looking for a bit more security than that.
 
Don't know that that will cut the mustard with JOM. Would surely be looking for a bit more security than that.
I know he is in relatively high demand but players with chronic injuries don't often get much security
 
Nope. but what I'm saying is if it isn't before the finals its a finals team mostly likely which then turns to hawks or roos
ok but he hasn't nominated you.. Or us or north. Or any other team in Vic. So I'd say it's open to who ever offers JOM the best deal then the clubs will be invited to the party
 
So I did a bit of googling (Dr Google!) and ruptured patellar tendons can cause bits of bone to break off and cause further trouble (a bit of bone is what sheared off Cooney's cartilage)... and google also says that his knee required secondary surgery earlier this year for a 'minor clean up' (whaever-tf that means). But then it also says his knee injury was caused by patellar tendinitis (jumper's knee) which is an overuse injury (different type of rupture to the ones that usually cause bits of bone to break off).

So basically, they broke him, then they didn't fix him properly?

I'm mostly working off limited secondary source information (including wikipedia - so reliable!) and then extrapolating though, so grains of salt are recommended.

Adding to this GC sent JOM to Europe and he had his patella tendon shaved to ease the tendinitis he'd been experiencing. Goes through the recovery, gets back and first or second match back he snaps that tendon.

I think there's a fair case to suggest that shaving the tendon made it weaker contributing to the likelihood of it snapping which it did obviously.

Will need a thorough medical of everything that has gone on there.
 
Last edited:
1 year deal with trigger clauses for another 2 or 3 if he plays enough games, or an extra 1 or 2 on less $$ if he doesn't play at all.

Makes GC demands for a bunch of picks look unreasonable but gives JOM some assurance that he won't be cast off at the first sign of injury while protecting us somewhat against having a $700k list clogger eating up cap space for 3 years if it all turns to shit

Jom would be after much more than that.
 
Don't know that that will cut the mustard with JOM. Would surely be looking for a bit more security than that.
He probably is but we can't offer deals based on his form 2 years ago and some assumption that he can return to that. We should leave his previous form aside and focus on what he offers us now which is a high risk, high reward proposition; and the deal we offer him and the deal we offer the Suns should reflect that.

A lot of people seem to be under the assumption that he's a preseason and a bit of physio away from returning to his best but he's not. He's no guarantee to play again, if he does he might never regain his physical attributes that made him so damaging in his early years. Also, he's missed 2 years of his development so who knows what his skills will be like.

If we offer him a big deal a) the Suns will use that to demand a significant compensation that does not account for the risks we are taking on, and b) as I said earlier we risk getting stuck with the most expensive list clogger in AFL history
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top