- Apr 29, 2016
- 13,896
- 12,257
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Yeah let's get over the fact that we had one of the best young key position players stolen from us...absolutely not.
Recommitted Mac Andrew [Signs until at least 2030]
- Thread starter GoEaglesGoSGIO
- Start date
- Tagged users None
DRAGONS FFC - Moderator
- #27
Absolutely NGA's a rort.
But the bigger rort was having access removed for some clubs, for a few years, while allowing other clubs free reign.
Cap the access to F/s & Academy for all clubs, allow a rolling x points value across a 4 year period or something, so you can't just wildly benefit from both. or take 5x highly rated in 2 years, that's the real joke.
But the bigger rort was having access removed for some clubs, for a few years, while allowing other clubs free reign.
Cap the access to F/s & Academy for all clubs, allow a rolling x points value across a 4 year period or something, so you can't just wildly benefit from both. or take 5x highly rated in 2 years, that's the real joke.
Would you trade Van Rooyen for him?
Because as one of your supporters helpfully pointed out in this thread, it’s a one or the other situation. If you had access to Andrews, you would have had to use the pick you did use to pick up Van Rooyen.
Melbourne are the victim here only on principle. They are not distinctly (if at all) worse off.
- Mar 19, 2020
- 16,742
- 46,979
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Thread starter
- #29
Only to some. Western Bulldogs are still a big fan...
- Mar 19, 2020
- 16,742
- 46,979
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Thread starter
- #30
Good lord. Andrew is a much much better footballer. Its not even close to being close
That is your opinion.
A wrong one, which is hard to have. But an opinion all the same.
- Mar 19, 2020
- 16,742
- 46,979
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Thread starter
- #32
You think other clubs will be offering Van Rooyen 8 year 12 mill deals? I think its more of a AFL wide opinion this
- Moderator
- #33
Johnny Bananas FYI
Elixuh
See you on the 9th green at 9
But now you have a chance to get him back and right the injustice that befell the demons
What if none of these things existed and the AFL just got off their lazy behinds and ran both Northern and Next Gen Academies themselves, instead of making clubs do it? Then we could all have an unmolested draft.
Didn't say that.
But they are two very good young key position players of the comp. "It's not even close to being close" is just silly.
Besides, that wasn't the point I was making. I was simply highlighting the fact that there wasn't a world in which Melbourne could have walked away with both Andrew and Van Rooyen. It's not as simple as their fans saying "Oh we should have had Andrew".
- Mar 19, 2020
- 16,742
- 46,979
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Thread starter
- #37
They do run it for you by giving you 10s of millions of dollars more then the rest of us....
- Moderator
- #38
Yeah, they won't do that. F/S is too ingrained.
Just have to find a way to limit the impact, and make clubs choose when to match or not.
Would GC have matched on Read if it meant no Lombard?
Would you have matched Fletcher if meant no Levi this year? Even if it drops a couple of extra picks back into the open pool, it's got to be a positive.
Back to Mac, given that not having access, allowed the Dees to get JVR. If they can secure him in a trade now, could work out ok.
The answer is probably no to both, but this could also create perverse incentives. Academies would probably ditch everyone except the very top end of talent much earlier, because they won't be of use to the club in the end. The Lions academy has produced multiple other players for the league that didn't make it at the Lions (Chol, Wagner, Cumberland etc), but if a rule came in only allowing a small number of picks in a period then the 50/50 chances probably wouldn't last.
- Moderator
- #40
That's why you base it on points, no picks.
Walker and Draper for us, still would have had a 0 point value attached. one at pick 50 something and the other a cat B.
It's not about restricting the access, but limiting the cream taken out of the top end.
I suppose that could work.
- Apr 29, 2016
- 13,896
- 12,257
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
yeah cool. but we should have had him for free. Afl absolutely ripped us. Basically had one set of rules benefiting every other club, change the rules so Melbourne lost their future key position player, and then changed the rules back again to benefit other clubs.
An absolute farce that has a 10-15 year impact.
- Apr 29, 2016
- 13,896
- 12,257
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
in a heart beat.
Well there was, it was a world where Melbourne traded for a pick to also select Van Rooyen.
Shocking.
Nah, there isn’t.
- Apr 29, 2016
- 13,896
- 12,257
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
I'm glad that this thread has turned into the rort against the MFC because Mac Andrew not being a demon is probably the biggest disadvantage the afl has given a club in maybe 50 years.
GC’s cap is so stretched they had to give away a quality player with a top 10 pick in desperation to free up space. The problem with GC is that they have several players on big money and a lot of their middle tier players are being overpaid.
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Okay shut the hell up, it sucked but this is ridiculously stupid even for you.
Melbourne definitely would've won the next 10 flags if they were able to take Andrew as NGA for sure.
Now that the rules have changed again, I too hope we can take blokes from our NGA, who have played football their entire junior careers, despite NGA being there to bring kids in who otherwise wouldn't have played.
Can't wait.
Now that the rules have changed again, I too hope we can take blokes from our NGA, who have played football their entire junior careers, despite NGA being there to bring kids in who otherwise wouldn't have played.
Can't wait.
