If we lost Hurley to GC17

Remove this Banner Ad

it would definately challenge losing the 99 pre-lim and 90 GF as the worst moment i can remember in footy!!
 
I was too young for the 90 one.
But I remember the Carlton by 1 point and Sydney by 1 point finals. They sucked and hurt something bad.
The rest of my family are North Melbourne supporters, the amount of times in the 90's that we almost played North in a Grand Final brought real tension to the house lol.
 
I was too young for the 90 one.
But I remember the Carlton by 1 point and Sydney by 1 point finals. They sucked and hurt something bad.
The rest of my family are North Melbourne supporters, the amount of times in the 90's that we almost played North in a Grand Final brought real tension to the house lol.

i was 8 in 1990 i still blame peter sumich for missing that goal giving us 2weeks off, ruining our momentum!! the rules always get changed after we get screwed! now there is no draws in finals! and the priority pick rule got changed the year before we finish 2nd last and wed have gumby and luenberger instead of gumby and jetta...
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I would have to pull down the huge Hurley shrine I built for the next Jesus. :mad:

Maybe I can recoup some money by selling the marble.
 
i was 8 in 1990 i still blame peter sumich for missing that goal giving us 2weeks off, ruining our momentum!! the rules always get changed after we get screwed! now there is no draws in finals! and the priority pick rule got changed the year before we finish 2nd last and wed have gumby and luenberger instead of gumby and jetta...

We'd have Gumby and Selwood actually.
 
I don't think it's fair for the GC to target young developing sides. Go after players from teams in the top 4, not teams who are struggling to make finals. I'd be upset if we lost Hurley, even more so if we got nothing for him! Players under the age of 20 or 21 should be off limits.


You can also argue for top 4 sides that it is unfair for them because they are having their windows prematurely shut from the raid on talent.

I think the fact that some clubs will not lose any players is the unbalanced element, if one club loses a decent player then every club should be forced to give up a similar player or something of that ilk so at least everyone suffers thus balancing things out.

GC said they are confident on signing 8-10 un-contracted names that means 6-8 clubs do not lose any talent, this is my major gripe.
 
The AFL has devised a compensation system which takes into account a players age, B and F history, position drafted etc. The exact formula is a secret so that clubs cant fiddle their B and F results.

My understanding of the situation is that Hurley may attract a compensatory pick in the 20's or 30's.

Note that this compensatory pick cant be used in 2010, but can be used in any of the following four drafts.
 
We'd have Gumby and Selwood actually.

If we had drafted Selwood, his so called degenerative hips (or whatever was supposedly suspect on him) would have become a relaity no doubt. Such has been our luck.

Though nice to see Gumby is the only player on our injury list ATM. Thats different for us. A complete list to choose from.
 
Have to take a bit of confidence that

- Hurley is a local, Rosanna boy. Has family here.
- Good mates with Zaharakis and Still
- Reports are he is happy at the club
- We have a lot of cap space to match any offer the GC throws at him

If we match what the GC throw at him, which will be over the odds, then you would have to be pretty confident that he would stay. The club knows how important he is to our future.

Anyone know when contract negotiations would take place?
Will we have to wait until the end of the season?
 
GC said they are confident on signing 8-10 un-contracted names that means 6-8 clubs do not lose any talent, this is my major gripe.

Agreed, this is my concern also. Forgetting whether one is for or against some form of free agency for a minute, if it did exist then losing a good player wouldn't hurt clubs as much as they could try and attract another good player to fill the hole left.

But in a system that is set up to distribute talent and limit coaxing of other clubs' talent (draft, salary cap, trading system), the fact that new startup teams have advantages in all of those areas means that they will attract some players and this leaves those players old clubs at a disadvantage to other clubs that managed to retain all their players.

The AFL has devised a compensation system which takes into account a players age, B and F history, position drafted etc.

Not having a go at you, but you say that as if there is some sort of solace to be had in it. The problem here being that the AFL has a history of calculating things poorly, and seeing things through their own bias or to their own advantage.

The exact formula is a secret so that clubs cant fiddle their B and F results.

It's understandable that they would keep it a secret, but it's probably more to do with how much animosity they would receive if clubs and fans knew how poorly they will be compensated ahead of time.

My understanding of the situation is that Hurley may attract a compensatory pick in the 20's or 30's.

This would be my problem. Hurley is young and was taken a pick #5, this is a huge investment for any club and a club should get at least equal return on their investment (especially given the system the AFL uses as mentioned above) if it is as young as Hurley.

Having said that Hurley is one of the most talented KPP I've seen in a long time and this would be the reason that the GC would target him, so you could argue that we deserve a better pick as by targeting him the GC have tacitly announced they recognise his potential future value. If he came out and starred next year and we did lose him, I don't think saying we should get pick #1 at some point is too absurd (given how overrated draft picks are I'm sure I'd hear lots of arguments against that though). Clubs should get compensation based not only on players achievements to date but also on what a players potential is, not what they are worth at that exact time they are lost. Of course potential is hard to judge and make blanket rules for, so the AFL will probably just not bother.

This is how trading works. No one trades for young draftees that are gunning it because when both clubs are on equal negotiating levels the club looking to trade for the player would have to pay over the odds because of perceived talent and potential. The AFL will effectively bypass this balance by allowing the GC to target out of contract players and will then short change clubs by "compensating" them in a way only the AFL can.

I'm not against expansion by any means, and honestly I'm not even against the GC being able to target players from other clubs. But they should be made to pay for those players with their picks, I mean the AFL has gifted them enough first round picks. The simple fact that the AFL want them to be instantly successful isn't a good enough reason for them to be allowed to horde their draft picks and gain good players too.

Having said all that, I wouldn't blame players for chasing money. It may be a sport, but it is also their careers. It isn't their fault the rules are what they are and I don't have a problem with them maximising their earnings from what is a short profession.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Compensation wise, makes you wonder how much McPhee would have been worth had we lost him to the Gold Coast. Former B&F winner, AA and happy to stab a team in the back. I would assume 2nd rounder.
 
We can not lose Hurley. We have got to do whatever is possible to make sure he stays at the Essendon Football Club. I will be very dissapointed if we just let him go like that. :(

It's not like we don't have the money - open the coffers and start offering it out!
 
This whole GC situation sucks big time and as much as i hate you guys ( ;) ) the GC can go get stuffed as far as i am concerned. The AFL is robbing Melbourne clubs giving this team rights to other players out of contract and so many draft picks etc etc.

We have Gibbs coming out of contract at the end of the year and i am praying we sign him up soon to avoid this dilemma that you guys are in ATM. Melbourne clubs are what made the AFL what it is today and we are ALL about to be r*ped by this blow in team and it is pissing me off big time.

The AFL needs healthy and competitive Big 4 Melbourne clubs and this will not happen if we try to rebuild and this Johnny come lately club starts throwing enormous amounts of $$$$ towards our young stars due to the AFL NOT having a level playing field regarding the Salary Cap enticing them to leave with the backing of the AFL. :mad:

I hope you guys sign Hurley quick smart as he is a definate talent and the GC can go to hell and rebuild from scratch like everyone else had to do when they first entered the league.

Just my thoughts and i feel the anguish you guys are currently going through because if they manage to get Gibbs i will be mighty pissed as well. Hopefully we sign him soon and you guys as well with Hurley.
 
It's not like we don't have the money - open the coffers and start offering it out!

Exactly. Paper today said GC could offer him $500k. Big deal we could and should match that easily. Ifwe're only going to get some pissy 20-30 pick in a compromised draft then you'll offer Hurley whatever it takes. Hurley, Pears, Gumbleton, Ryder are untouchables.

Anyway I think Hurley would stay.
 
But should we blame Essendon too?... i was reading another thread where many many Essendon players are out of contract this year. If they truely wanted those players they should of sorted contracts last year!!!. I WANT AT LEAST 10 players contracted to us by 1st May 2010 if not we are in alot of trouble guys :confused::eek:

Coopster09:thumbsu:
 
If Hurley was offered 3 million over 5 years, do you think essendon would match it? Gold coast has alot of money and while at Essendon he has his family and friends, it's just a question of what is worth more to him.
 
This whole GC situation sucks big time and as much as i hate you guys ( ;) ) the GC can go get stuffed as far as i am concerned. The AFL is robbing Melbourne clubs giving this team rights to other players out of contract and so many draft picks etc etc.

We have Gibbs coming out of contract at the end of the year and i am praying we sign him up soon to avoid this dilemma that you guys are in ATM. Melbourne clubs are what made the AFL what it is today and we are ALL about to be r*ped by this blow in team and it is pissing me off big time.

The AFL needs healthy and competitive Big 4 Melbourne clubs and this will not happen if we try to rebuild and this Johnny come lately club starts throwing enormous amounts of $$$$ towards our young stars due to the AFL NOT having a level playing field regarding the Salary Cap enticing them to leave with the backing of the AFL. :mad:

I never realised that the AFL only comprised the bid 4 clubs.

I am certain that the GC and GWS will target the best available players, whether they come from Melbourne based clubs or Interstate based clubs.

I hope you guys sign Hurley quick smart as he is a definate talent and the GC can go to hell and rebuild from scratch like everyone else had to do when they first entered the league.

Just my thoughts and i feel the anguish you guys are currently going through because if they manage to get Gibbs i will be mighty pissed as well. Hopefully we sign him soon and you guys as well with Hurley.

I never realised that the AFL only comprised the four big Melbourne Clubs.

I am certain that GC and GWS will target the best available players, whether they are with Melbourne based or Interstate based clubs.
 
Agreed, this is my concern also. Forgetting whether one is for or against some form of free agency for a minute, if it did exist then losing a good player wouldn't hurt clubs as much as they could try and attract another good player to fill the hole left.

But in a system that is set up to distribute talent and limit coaxing of other clubs' talent (draft, salary cap, trading system), the fact that new startup teams have advantages in all of those areas means that they will attract some players and this leaves those players old clubs at a disadvantage to other clubs that managed to retain all their players.



Not having a go at you, but you say that as if there is some sort of solace to be had in it. The problem here being that the AFL has a history of calculating things poorly, and seeing things through their own bias or to their own advantage.



It's understandable that they would keep it a secret, but it's probably more to do with how much animosity they would receive if clubs and fans knew how poorly they will be compensated ahead of time.



This would be my problem. Hurley is young and was taken a pick #5, this is a huge investment for any club and a club should get at least equal return on their investment (especially given the system the AFL uses as mentioned above) if it is as young as Hurley.

Having said that Hurley is one of the most talented KPP I've seen in a long time and this would be the reason that the GC would target him, so you could argue that we deserve a better pick as by targeting him the GC have tacitly announced they recognise his potential future value. If he came out and starred next year and we did lose him, I don't think saying we should get pick #1 at some point is too absurd (given how overrated draft picks are I'm sure I'd hear lots of arguments against that though). Clubs should get compensation based not only on players achievements to date but also on what a players potential is, not what they are worth at that exact time they are lost. Of course potential is hard to judge and make blanket rules for, so the AFL will probably just not bother.

This is how trading works. No one trades for young draftees that are gunning it because when both clubs are on equal negotiating levels the club looking to trade for the player would have to pay over the odds because of perceived talent and potential. The AFL will effectively bypass this balance by allowing the GC to target out of contract players and will then short change clubs by "compensating" them in a way only the AFL can.

I'm not against expansion by any means, and honestly I'm not even against the GC being able to target players from other clubs. But they should be made to pay for those players with their picks, I mean the AFL has gifted them enough first round picks. The simple fact that the AFL want them to be instantly successful isn't a good enough reason for them to be allowed to horde their draft picks and gain good players too.

Having said all that, I wouldn't blame players for chasing money. It may be a sport, but it is also their careers. It isn't their fault the rules are what they are and I don't have a problem with them maximising their earnings from what is a short profession.

No reason to shoot the messnger.

I was merely clarifying some inaccurate information that had been posted.

Everybody realises that the compensatory picks for uncontracted players is nowhere near market value if the GC sign quality players.

The clubs did agree to the compensation package.

My feeling is that Hurley will stay at Essendon because it would be difficult for a young player to uproot and move to another state.
 
i dont thinkk a 3 mill over 5 year deal would be that good for him
if he is truly after money he wouldnt sign a long term deal because if he becomes one of the gun KPP in the comp he could command 700-800k a year in years 3-4-5 of a deal he is only getting 500.

i think mcviegh is vet list next year ?
 
i dont thinkk a 3 mill over 5 year deal would be that good for him
if he is truly after money he wouldnt sign a long term deal because if he becomes one of the gun KPP in the comp he could command 700-800k a year in years 3-4-5 of a deal he is only getting 500.

i think mcviegh is vet list next year ?


2012 i think...hille will be eligable aswell!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

If we lost Hurley to GC17

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top