List Mgmt. Fremantle FC Contract List/Depth Chart
- Thread starter Taylor
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Taylor
Community Leader
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #477
31 players contracted for next season and only 38 allowed would make it very difficult.
Assuming we intend to pick up three players total, you've got to choose four of these:
Matera, Mundy, Dixon, North, Schultz, Valente, Bewley, Cox, Banfield, Watson, Pina, Thomas
Bolded have been in the first choice team this season.
Watson would be unlucky there, being able to trade off Blakely might save him.
Assuming we intend to pick up three players total, you've got to choose four of these:
Matera, Mundy, Dixon, North, Schultz, Valente, Bewley, Cox, Banfield, Watson, Pina, Thomas
Bolded have been in the first choice team this season.
Watson would be unlucky there, being able to trade off Blakely might save him.
Yeah everyone is still waiting which must be difficult for all clubs planning.
I have heard a club official (sorry have forgotten club) who said they expect 38 plus 2 rookies plus 2 Cat B but genuinely no decision has been made yet.
- Apr 26, 2011
- 11,066
- 13,697
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Wimbledon AFC
The players being cut would be on very little money.
Wouldn't you just tax all the players wages 5% rather than get rid of the stragglers ?
Wouldn't you just tax all the players wages 5% rather than get rid of the stragglers ?
Taylor
Community Leader
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #480
If they are removing the rookie list then the minimum pay for players after their first two years would be $100,000 a year.
Even just one of those players at each club is $1.8 million extra to find. 4 per club is half a club's worth of salary cap across the league.
We have too many sides to be profitable.
- Jun 30, 2011
- 7,127
- 14,645
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I don't think the rumours are going to be very reliable since I expect the source of many them is the AFL itself using them as a means of pressuring the PA.
My guess is the PA's position is it will agree to whatever for next season (38 and 2, 40 and 2 42 and none, it doesn't matter) as long as the AFL agree in writing that going forward from the next CBA list numbers will be 44 (or 42, whatever. Not less than that) with no rookie list and allowance for what are now called Cat B rookies.
The AFL won't agree and it'll all get kicked on to next year.
The PA have no incentive to accept a list reduction below current numbers without some commitment from the AFL in their favour. If they do agree then we can safely assume it is because Dangerfield took a bribe.
My guess is the PA's position is it will agree to whatever for next season (38 and 2, 40 and 2 42 and none, it doesn't matter) as long as the AFL agree in writing that going forward from the next CBA list numbers will be 44 (or 42, whatever. Not less than that) with no rookie list and allowance for what are now called Cat B rookies.
The AFL won't agree and it'll all get kicked on to next year.
The PA have no incentive to accept a list reduction below current numbers without some commitment from the AFL in their favour. If they do agree then we can safely assume it is because Dangerfield took a bribe.
- Jun 30, 2011
- 7,127
- 14,645
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I know I said this months ago but i'm still waiting for someone to explain to me:
1) How a ongoing small list reduction makes a difference when the AFL have a revenue problem now of a scale many many times what it would save? (If they still have revenue problems in 2022 the league is stuffed, as it won't be able to support the debts it is incurring now to keep the game afloat. What they actually need is for the players to agree to take a large enough temporary haircut to make a difference to their ability to keep the AFL solvent next year.)
2) How it is in the PA's interest compromise at all on anything permanent?
1) How a ongoing small list reduction makes a difference when the AFL have a revenue problem now of a scale many many times what it would save? (If they still have revenue problems in 2022 the league is stuffed, as it won't be able to support the debts it is incurring now to keep the game afloat. What they actually need is for the players to agree to take a large enough temporary haircut to make a difference to their ability to keep the AFL solvent next year.)
2) How it is in the PA's interest compromise at all on anything permanent?
- Jun 30, 2011
- 7,127
- 14,645
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I think I have also said this before but I think so PA members are going to come to regret having the highest paid players as their chief reps.
- Jun 30, 2011
- 7,127
- 14,645
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Anyway the point I'm trying to make is it's just opportunistic from the AFL this list size thing. It has no material relevance to dealing with the COVID situation. And if a deal is cut it's because the PA is not properly representing the players as the reps are open to being suborned.
Last edited:
- May 3, 2007
- 39,439
- 23,044
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Man City, Valencia, Lazio, Panthers
That would suck to be honest. I would keep the rookie list.
Keep the 43 or 44 players, 38 players on the main squad, 5-6 players on the rookie list have rookie listed players on $104,000 a year or $2,000 a week
Two more years for emerging defender
Brennan Cox signs on for another two seasons!
Coxy locked away for 2 years, would have preferred 3 but good to get him locked up
Docker Gun
Bottom of the top.
If --- Mundy gets pushed out:
Then --- Somethings Wrong, very wrong.
Then --- Somethings Wrong, very wrong.
- May 3, 2007
- 39,439
- 23,044
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Man City, Valencia, Lazio, Panthers
Valente should of got a dockers game or 2 already
- May 3, 2007
- 39,439
- 23,044
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Man City, Valencia, Lazio, Panthers
Valente should of got a dockers game or 2 already
- May 26, 2003
- 24,574
- 19,152
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- SFFC, Aussie Women's Cricket, HNK
from Adelaide's "Johnny Rutten"
- Mar 29, 2019
- 14,213
- 20,317
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- San Francisco 49ers, Swan Districts.
Lmao at North should be contending
yes says a lot about their situation
Thanks Purpellian anchor that is an interesting look at the lists. Didn’t realise how young Adelaide are and still think we are a developed enough list to contend for finals next year and so do the players going by their comments lately.
