Rumour GFC 2024 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt 2

[cats_09]

Ask and we'll try our best to assist - so here's 2024 Provisional AFL Draft Order

As normal, would like to acknowledge & thank Lore for creating this, keeping it up to date and making it available for all users on BF to use and keep track of the picks ahead of the upcoming draft





I'll also sticky this post to ensure it's easily accessible for discussion of our hypothetical trader

 

[Munich]

Looked like every nervous Geelong supporter!!!

That's not our game...

 

[iameviljez]

Then Neale and mullin shouldn't have played as both fairly average at the moment.

Neale and Mullin got games based on potential, and, in Neale's case, the decline of Hawkins.

That's life in elite sport - sometimes, talent gets the gig.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

No, he is still DFA. You can’t be a rookie for three years.

Ok so on that logic ollie dempsey, who was ooc in 2023 in his last year on the rookie list, became a dfa and under the fa for life rules is now always an unrestricted free agent when ooc?

 

[CatsDoItBetter]

id much prefer to keep Dekoning but if we can get a good deal for him I wouldn’t be too concerned as long as we can turn it into some quality players.
It’s probably not the best time to trade him though he’s been poor for two years. And a real weakness in him has been unearthed which is his competitiveness and contest work.
On the other hand he’s really shown his versatility with some scintillating plays in the ruck. A team us or another could really work with him from now to make him work in any area of the ground. That’s appealing to many clubs but it does strike me as strange that the dogs would be trying to get another 200cm player.

 

[D BRIDGE]

Could be blue moonism but the Doggie’s board are burning Geelong/Cotton On deal to the ground along with implicating the AFL whilst simultaneously forcing Geelong to offer more to keep them quiet and the dogs offering SDK 6 years which he’s apparently keen on….

I read through 7 or 8 pages of the Dogs board yesterday and it is some of the most unhinged stuff you can imagine.

They are all whipping themselves into an absolute frenzy... frothing at the mouth stuff.

A couple of them have a clue about what's going on, but the majority are in la-la land.

It's comedic gold and well worth a look.

And for all the WB lurkers... no you wouldn't get band one for Smith "if he was a FA" because he is coming to us for less (on the books less) because as you all know... we have been paying him under the table for 2 years via a third party lol.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

id much prefer to keep Dekoning but if we can get a good deal for him I wouldn’t be too concerned as long as we can turn it into some quality players.
It’s probably not the best time to trade him though he’s been poor for two years. And a real weakness in him has been unearthed which is his competitiveness and contest work.
On the other hand he’s really shown his versatility with some scintillating plays in the ruck. A team us or another could really work with him from now to make him work in any area of the ground. That’s appealing to many clubs but it does strike me as strange that the dogs would be trying to get another 200cm player.

I don't think we'd be able to cover his loss for the year next year. The one year of his contract remaining is worth more than any picks we'd land.

 

[Klink]

Pies and Dee's making a play for Ollie Lord according to Josh Gabelich

On SM-A526B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[iameviljez]

Ok so on that logic ollie dempsey, who was ooc in 2023 in his last year on the rookie list, became a dfa and under the fa for life rules is now always an unrestricted free agent when ooc?

Unsure.

Someone else posted the rookie rules earlier, worth looking up.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Unsure.

Someone else posted the rookie rules earlier, worth looking up.

That's basically what I am asking. Because a poster elsewhere has said the rules RE becoming a FA with a contract on offer only comes into effect if you're offering a rookie spot and of you offer a senior contract it doesn't.

 

[STPer18]

Could be blue moonism but the Doggie’s board are burning Geelong/Cotton On deal to the ground along with implicating the AFL whilst simultaneously forcing Geelong to offer more to keep them quiet and the dogs offering SDK 6 years which he’s apparently keen on….

Just when you thought the Richmond cookers were not to be outdone a new challenger emerges.

 

[Munich]

I read through 7 or 8 pages of the Dogs board yesterday and it is some of the most unhinged stuff you can imagine.

They are all whipping themselves into an absolute frenzy... frothing at the mouth stuff.

A couple of them have a clue about what's going on, but the majority are in la-la land.

It's comedic gold and well worth a look.

And for all the WB lurkers... no you wouldn't get band one for Smith "if he was a FA" because he is coming to us for less (on the books less) because as you all know... we have been paying him under the table for 2 years via a third party lol.

It's very amusing albeit a bit sad and clueless.

 

[D BRIDGE]

Even if Clohesy can be an UFA it might be still better for the Dogs to trade something of low value for him because once you’re
a UFA you stay one forever.

 

[Zouz Kitty]

The reality of Baz playing for Geelong is that Cotton On will get an even bigger bump of sales, as it’s from here and he will be iconic for them (as an influencer). He would rightly demand to be paid a lot more as he will have greater impact being part of the team.

So it’s sort of this win win win for Baz, Cotton On and the Cats.

The AFL would see that it is completely justified for him to get a bigger pay packet from Cotton On.

Probably one of the smoothest heists you’ll ever see…

Will his Cotton On contract + earnings be included in salary cap?

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Unsure.

Someone else posted the rookie rules earlier, worth looking up.

Following up further the flow chart the afl put out just says offering a rookie contract allows a player to delist themselves



But also if you are offered a contract "presumably" for senior list

 

[Zouz Kitty]

Could be blue moonism but the Doggie’s board are burning Geelong/Cotton On deal to the ground along with implicating the AFL whilst simultaneously forcing Geelong to offer more to keep them quiet and the dogs offering SDK 6 years which he’s apparently keen on….

Dogs want SDK?

Baffled by discussion of trading SDK + Close, also Humphries in Reid deal

 

[Catsace]

First big trade news of GF week -

Well that might give us a chance against the Suns up North as Lukocious just absolutely DOMINATES Geelong, he seems to turn into Gary Sr for a week.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Even if Clohesy can be an UFA it might be still better for the Dogs to trade something of low value for him because once you’re
a UFA you stay one forever.

Prefer not to trade him at all

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Will his Cotton On contract + earnings be included in salary cap?

If they are then they've lost the plot.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Just when you thought the Richmond cookers were not to be outdone a new challenger emerges.

There are a lot of fair and reasonable types there genuinely embarrassed by it too

 

[iameviljez]

Following up further the flow chart the afl put out just says offering a rookie contract allows a player to delist themselves

View attachment 2122069

But also if you are offered a contract "presumably" for senior list

View attachment 2122070

Regardless, I just can't see the Dogs being interested in Clohesy.

 

[Kitcat]

Regardless, I just can't see the Dogs being interested in Clohesy.

It’s a shame we didn’t get the Gold Coast Clohesy as well.

 

[Catman]

Pies and Dee's making a play for Ollie Lord according to Josh Gabelich

On SM-A526B using BigFooty.com mobile app

His price would have plummeted after being overlooked for Sav and an overcooked Dixon as KPF talls late in the year. To be fair his injury interrupted season wouldn't have helped.

 

[cats_09]

No, he is still DFA. You can’t be a rookie for three years.

Yes you can - you've always been able to re-sign rookies to the rookie list for 3 years

And they've also recently (last month) changed the rookie list rules so that a player can actually be on it for up to 5.5yrs:

Rookies – time on list

The AFL will introduce a trigger for an additional fourth year on the Rookie List where the Rookie has played less than ten career AFL matches, which will then apply in same way for access to an additional fifth year. Total aggregate years on the Rookie List will be capped at five years (5.5 years for Mid-Season Rookie Draft).

This change aims to assist clubs to invest in players who may take longer to develop.

 

[iameviljez]

Yes you can - you've always been able to re-sign rookies to the rookie list for 3 years

And they've also recently (last month) changed the rookie list rules so that a player can actually be on it for up to 5.5yrs:

Rookies – time on list

The AFL will introduce a trigger for an additional fourth year on the Rookie List where the Rookie has played less than ten career AFL matches, which will then apply in same way for access to an additional fifth year. Total aggregate years on the Rookie List will be capped at five years (5.5 years for Mid-Season Rookie Draft).

This change aims to assist clubs to invest in players who may take longer to develop.

When do they just ditch the list and incorporate it into the main list?

 

[cats_09]

Ok so on that logic ollie dempsey, who was ooc in 2023 in his last year on the rookie list, became a dfa and under the fa for life rules is now always an unrestricted free agent when ooc?

Not at all - a 2nd yr rookie will only become a FA is they are rejecting a 3rd year rookie contract

If the player accepts the rookie contract or a contract elevating them to the senior list, they aren't FAs