Opinion Non-Crows AFL 11

[Cromulant]

Trading players with value who won't be around for the next premiership is how you accelerate a rebuild.

They won't be good for a few years but then suddenly that investment will pay off, as it did for Hawthorn

In theory.

Look they probably will be, but theyve lost some key background staff from their dynasty as well as on field talent. They might struggle a little longer than we think.

 

[Scorpus]

In theory.

Look they probably will be, but theyve lost some key background staff from their dynasty as well as on field talent. They might struggle a little longer than we think.

It's a five year plan minimum

 

[Mutineer]

Could they go with Jack Riewoldt perhaps?
They probably want a bit more of an eccentric character to bounce off Gerard. Jack has been pretty good on his pre/post game Fox spots.
Jack knows 360 Pretty well too

Gary Lyon is the favourite.

 

[Mutineer]

I don’t mind father son. Every club has the same opportunity when it comes to this.

Academies and zones though. Either get rid of them, or give them to every club.

It's odds on Tassie's new team will have a Tasmanian Academy you would think...some pretty decent talent has come out of there over the years.

 

[AFC979810]

I don’t mind father son. Every club has the same opportunity when it comes to this.

Some more than others.

Ross Gibbs played 253 games for Glenelg between 1984 and 1994 - we dont get him.

Peter Daicos plays 250 games for Collingwood between 1979-1993 - they get him.

By the time the Father son squares itself out - it will be extinct.

 

[jenny61_99]

Gary Lyon is the favourite.

Booo

 

[Slime Roy]

David Quiche just mentioned the "excuse that isn't an excuse, that he never uses" AGAIN (on 5aa for the second time alone)

"Never mind The Baby Hawks, WE were the Youngest team in the finals"

First off, I've never actually heard that term for the Hawks,
secondly I just had to look it up (hoping to call it Kocshit)
turns out he's right, they were 25 yrs 37 days on average, a WHOPPING 15 days younger than The Hawklings!
Oh how I wish they wheeled out "The late great Hannibal Dixon" for that final.
Wonder what excuses Davey would have hidden behind then.

 

[Geoffa32]

In theory.

Look they probably will be, but theyve lost some key background staff from their dynasty as well as on field talent. They might struggle a little longer than we think.

I reckon Richmond had a good 6 year run under Gale and will now fall back into the Abyss they lived in for most of the AFL era.



Hawthorn have success as part of their club culture/dna/intrinsic knowledge, so did bounce back.


Richmond won't.

 

[El Doederino]

Some more than others.

Ross Gibbs played 253 games for Glenelg between 1984 and 1994 - we dont get him.

Peter Daicos plays 250 games for Collingwood between 1979-1993 - they get him.

By the time the Father son squares itself out - it will be extinct.

Yeah but Collingwood is one club. Glenelg was one of 4 clubs (or thereabouts). If it was the same number of games, we’d have 4x the advantage.

 

[Rabish Binney]

Were they allowed to attend?

Yes they did.

I read this morning that the President gave a subtle drive-by to those players that are going to leave.

 

[Rabish Binney]

David Quiche just mentioned the "excuse that isn't an excuse, that he never uses" AGAIN (on 5aa for the second time alone)

"Never mind The Baby Hawks, WE were the Youngest team in the finals"

First off, I've never actually heard that term for the Hawks,
secondly I just had to look it up (hoping to call it Kocshit)
turns out he's right, they were 25 yrs 37 days on average, a WHOPPING 15 days younger than The Hawklings!
Oh how I wish they wheeled out "The late great Hannibal Dixon" for that final.
Wonder what excuses Davey would have hidden behind then.

That segment he did after their loss to Sydney was a train wreck.

Several times he said that PA were a young team....in the same breath he then said ' but we don't talk about that at PA'

He is a nutjob.

 

[FR0GGY]

Yes they did.

I read this morning that the President gave a subtle drive-by to those players that are going to leave.

Yeah I did hear it this morning, wasn’t really subtle at all.
Also Bakers speech was pretty awkward.

 

[Rabish Binney]

Yeah but Collingwood is one club. Glenelg was one of 4 clubs (or thereabouts). If it was the same number of games, we’d have 4x the advantage.

Didn't Rucci dob us in to the AFL over Gibbs eligibility?

And yet he kept his mouth shut with Brett Ebert?

 

[SugarShane]

Didn't Rucci dob us in to the AFL over Gibbs eligibility?

And yet he kept his mouth shut with Brett Ebert?

I believe so, yes. I think the wheels were in motion for us to get him and then Rucci dobbed that some of the games were after the Crows came in to the AFL something like that and thus he was actually a few games short of eligibility.

 

[Redline]

David Quiche just mentioned the "excuse that isn't an excuse, that he never uses" AGAIN (on 5aa for the second time alone)

"Never mind The Baby Hawks, WE were the Youngest team in the finals"

First off, I've never actually heard that term for the Hawks,
secondly I just had to look it up (hoping to call it Kocshit)
turns out he's right, they were 25 yrs 37 days on average, a WHOPPING 15 days younger than The Hawklings!
Oh how I wish they wheeled out "The late great Hannibal Dixon" for that final.
Wonder what excuses Davey would have hidden behind then.

Average age and games played can be misleading but overall they have a fairly young side.

Of their best players Aliir, Rioli and Wines might only have a few more years and obviously Houston is on the way out.

Powell-Pepper is a really good player up forward and they should get him back.

In 2025 Georgiadis showed he will be a long term option, Sweet looks like he can hold down the ruck and Burgoyne looks like he will be a ten year player.

I don't think they will win it in 2025 but no reason they can't be back around the finals and who knows if you get some luck what can happen.

 

[Vader]

I actually agree with the St Kilda Chairman. People love the father / son rule for its romanticism but when you get the actual stats its a horrendous read. The odds of getting generational type talent as a father son is like winning the lotto which means its a monumental unfair advantage. We havent played finals in 7 years, we have only had the first pick once and didnt get the best player in the competition and yet Brisbane has played finals every year but 2018 and have walked away with three highly rated father sons, two of which are number one picks and they just won the premiership.

There is just no need for either the academy systems or the father son.

I'm happy for F/S and Academy selections to continue, but the price paid has to more accurately reflect the value of the players being selected. Teams shouldn't be able to match a pick #1 bid with a handful of 2nd round picks.

Personally, I think any club matching a 1st round bid must include a pick within 10 picks of where the bid comes in. Thus, if a bid comes in at pick #1, the "match" would need to include a pick in the 2-11 range. Second and later rounds can continue as they do at present.

Clubs could obtain the required picks through pre-draft trading or live trading, but if they can't obtain a pick in the required range before the time limit expires, then they are unable to match the bid.

It's quite likely that this would require clubs to relinquish an A-grade player, in order to match a bid on a potential A-grade player in the draft. This would restore fairness to the system.

 

[Vader]

Classic case of right place, right time. If you were building a competition from scratch they would not even be considered, but they managed to survive long enough to be gifted a place in the national comp. Their existence in the AFL (along with Footscray and North Melbourne) is the ultimate insult to the 18 SANFL and WAFL clubs who have had their prominence in the game reduced to playing in glorified reserves leagues (or merged away in the case of Torrens and Woodville).

All of which is true, but completely fails to address the real issue - the issue of clubs paying too low a price when matching F/S and NGA bids.

 

[Crow till I die]

 

[Vader]

Father Son / Academy selections / cola's are counter intuitive to the equalization system we are trying to achieve.

The fact we have 10 teams in one city also doesn't lend itself to a fair system, not to mention the money isn't good enough in the AFL so we are the only real professional league that has homesickness.

Not sure what the answer is.

The AFL also went half-arsed when they introduced Free Agency.

What they should have done was to give the clubs the right to trade contracted players without their consent, as a balance to giving uncontracted players the ability to leave via FA.

 

[GreyCrow]

In theory.

Look they probably will be, but theyve lost some key background staff from their dynasty as well as on field talent. They might struggle a little longer than we think.

Maybe. But I like their thinking - they are going at it the right way.

Its a proactive approach to a downturn they knew was coming in a draft which is alleged to be strong

I even mentioned I would do it . Which of course makes it a great idea

But they DO have the benefit of 3 flags to wipe away any tears. Unfortunately Yze will be hurt by this the most

 

[hugecannon]

I'm happy for F/S and Academy selections to continue, but the price paid has to more accurately reflect the value of the players being selected. Teams shouldn't be able to match a pick #1 bid with a handful of 2nd round picks.

Personally, I think any club matching a 1st round bid must include a pick within 10 picks of where the bid comes in. Thus, if a bid comes in at pick #1, the "match" would need to include a pick in the 2-11 range. Second and later rounds can continue as they do at present.

Clubs could obtain the required picks through pre-draft trading or live trading, but if they can't obtain a pick in the required range before the time limit expires, then they are unable to match the bid.

It's quite likely that this would require clubs to relinquish an A-grade player, in order to match a bid on a potential A-grade player in the draft. This would restore fairness to the system.

A sensible and logical approach, the AFL will never go for it.

 

[hugecannon]

The AFL also went half-arsed when they introduced Free Agency.

What they should have done was to give the clubs the right to trade contracted players without their consent, as a balance to giving uncontracted players the ability to leave via FA.

Also remove compensation, they’ve added so many compromises to the draft and made it much harder for teams to rebuild their lists.

 

[El Doederino]

What a shmozzle

No wonder port can’t win finals when all their players are such lightweights

I had more respect for Lever and Cameron who said I’m outta here and **** you to us.

 

[Vader]

Also remove compensation, they’ve added so many compromises to the draft and made it much harder for teams to rebuild their lists.

Compensation should be removed if the ability to trade contracted players without consent comes in. Otherwise, it's necessary.

 

[Crow till I die]

What a shmozzle

No wonder port can’t win finals when all their players are such lightweights

I had more respect for Lever and Cameron who said I’m outta here and **** you to us.

I am fully expecting them to at the last minute when it looks like Houston won't get them what they want for pushing him out, another player with worth being told to look around. They are DESPERATE to get into this draft AND Draper is their primary target. I heard this a long way out from a couple of my Port mates who are in and around the club. Will be interesting to see if they can make it happen now if Houston ends up staying