Oppo Camp Non-Essendon Football Thread XVI

[Lore]

 

[Lore]

 

[faible]

Por que?

 

[ghostdog]

Por que?

He thinks he can look Charlie in the eye.

 

[jmoo wan]

Por que?

essentially, because they want him back....

"Brisbane expects Chris Fagan to resume his duties at the club before the start of the pre-season after the AFL formally put in place the terms of reference for the investigation into First Nations allegations at Hawthorn.

The Herald Sun can reveal the Lions are preparing for Fagan to be back at the club well before Christmas after he took a leave of absence when the allegations first broke.
Fagan has categorically denied any allegations of wrongdoing but the shaken coach took time away as Brisbane worked through the fallout.
Lions football boss Danny Daly told the Herald Sun on Thursday the Lions wanted Fagan back, and were planning for him to be at the club while the investigation proceeded.
“We are open to him coming back. He has taken a leave of absence. The main thing about him being away was he was able to talk to his lawyers and not have the stress of being at the footy club. Once we feel he is in a position that he is mentally OK to come back and has worked through what he has to, there is no reason he can’t come back.
“He is only on a leave of absence. We are still chatting about stuff. We haven’t been told he isn’t able to do that.”

Chris Fagan is on a leave of absence. Picture: Daniel Pockett/Getty Images
The Lions players and staff have another six weeks until pre-season training begins, although the club is moving its headquarters to its new Brisbane training base.
Brisbane is determined that Fagan take some time away with family on holidays, so there is no real rush for him to move back.
He has been in discussions with the club over football matters and there are no rules preventing him from doing so given it was his decision to temporarily step away.
Alastair Clarkson is keen to resume at North Melbourne after spending time informally at the club before he was stood down. The Roos still say his November 1 start date has been postponed indefinitely.
But now that the terms of reference have been established and the league has made clear it will not have a ruling on the investigation until close to Christmas, it might pave the way for the Roos to make a decision on his start date.

Alastair Clarkson’s return date is up in the air. Picture: Darrian Traynor/Getty Images
Fagan is confident he will be exonerated by the AFL investigation, which he and Clarkson will be involved in after not being interviewed for the Hawthorn review.
“I deny, categorically, the allegations of wrongdoing by me in relation to First Nations players at the Hawthorn Football Club, and that I intend to defend myself,” he said.
“I also confirm my intention to participate fully in any investigative process, provided that it is independent, fair and impartial, and respects my right to be heard.”
The league has not been able to confirm that the five First Nations families who have made accusations will testify in front of the four-person panel.
But AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan said on Wednesday when the panel was announced that it was their chance to put their story on the record for the AFL, with the league to proceed regardless.

 

[citizen-erased]

Cats F2 for Bowes and 7 is going to seriously undermine the AFL trade rules
Pretty sure they knocked back a deal between the Dees and Swans recently as it didn't smell right.

how this passes, I'm ****ing stumped.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Cats F2 for Bowes and 7 is going to seriously undermine the AFL trade rules
Pretty sure they knocked back a deal between the Dees and Swans recently as it didn't smell right.

how this passes, I'm ****ing stumped.

Not really, it's using up a lot of Geelong's available cap space.

 

[citizen-erased]

Not really, it's using up a lot of Geelong's available cap space.

Not really that much considering it gets flattened out.
But its more they get 7 for what is likely 35+.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Blame Gold Coast's cap management.

 

[boncer34]

Cats F2 for Bowes and 7 is going to seriously undermine the AFL trade rules
Pretty sure they knocked back a deal between the Dees and Swans recently as it didn't smell right.

how this passes, I'm ****ing stumped.

They've changed the rules to allow salary cap dumps.

 

[boncer34]

Blame Gold Coast's cap management.

People were fine with it when they thought it'd be us getting the steal.

 

[Lore]

People were fine with it when they thought it'd be us getting the steal.

People would be fine with it if it was North or Hawthorn or any of the other 6 clubs that missed finals too, getting a former first round pick and a top 10 pick in the current draft is a pretty helpful start in a rebuild. Probably wouldn't begrudge Fremantle either, given they have a lot of talent leaving.

 

[citizen-erased]

People were fine with it when they thought it'd be us getting the steal.

People would be fine with it if it was North or Hawthorn or any of the other 6 clubs that missed finals too, getting a former first round pick and a top 10 pick in the current draft is a pretty helpful start in a rebuild. Probably wouldn't begrudge Fremantle either, given they have a lot of talent leaving.

yeah agree
I don't think you should be able to change the contract terms and take the pick with the dump. once the contract is re-negotiated then the AFL rules around equitable pick trades should kick in.

What's to stop Geelong taking on 5+ pick dumps in any given year because players want to play for the premier, and spreading contracts over, 4 to 10 years?

 

[DonsRule]

People were fine with it when they thought it'd be us getting the steal.

I think I've seen it explained well somewhere.

The Suns offered pick 7 to take the salary owed off them. Than perhaps the terms of his contract should have to remain unchanged, Otherwise they are getting the pick and someone (on the agreement of both I accept) and a pretty average price
If they pay him the $800k~ in the first 2 years he was owed and bugger all in the following few well, thats adifferent story. But they are following the rules so nothing wrong with it.

 

[boncer34]

People would be fine with it if it was North or Hawthorn or any of the other 6 clubs that missed finals too, getting a former first round pick and a top 10 pick in the current draft is a pretty helpful start in a rebuild. Probably wouldn't begrudge Fremantle either, given they have a lot of talent leaving.

Would they? Plenty seemed upset at the thought of Hawthorn too.

yeah agree
I don't think you should be able to change the contract terms and take the pick with the dump. once the contract is re-negotiated then the AFL rules around equitable pick trades should kick in.

What's to stop Geelong taking on 5+ pick dumps in any given year because players want to play for the premier, and spreading contracts over, 4 to 10 years?

Because they're not wasting 5+ list spots.

 

[boncer34]

I think I've seen it explained well somewhere.

The Suns offered pick 7 to take the salary owed off them. Than perhaps the terms of his contract should have to remain unchanged, Otherwise they are getting the pick and someone (on the agreement of both I accept) and a pretty average price
If they pay him the $800k~ in the first 2 years he was owed and bugger all in the following few well, thats adifferent story. But they are following the rules so nothing wrong with it.

But traded players can have their contracts renegotiated. Do you stop that rule?

 

[Lore]

Would they? Plenty seemed upset at the thought of Hawthorn too.

Because they're not wasting 5+ list spots.

Some people would be upset at anything, but the broader argument that is popping up in the media and from neutrals isn't because it's not Essendon.

 

[boncer34]

Some people would be upset at anything, but the broader argument that is popping up in the media and from neutrals isn't because it's not Essendon.

No. It's because it's not their club.

 

[Lore]

No. It's because it's not their club.

"The rich get richer" being an issue for everyone except Geelong supporters is actually quite logical.

 

[mike14]

But traded players can have their contracts renegotiated. Do you stop that rule?

Ideally, yes.
I admit that AFL trading (and even drafting) is far too complex for me compared to the relevant simplicity of the NHL model, but being able to trade players and then just have contracts ignored seems so stupid.
In the case of Bowes, if he's being traded because of cap implications that involve needing to throw in a draft pick as a sweetner, of course the cap conditions necessitating needing that pick should travel with him

 

[boncer34]

"The rich get richer" being an issue for everyone except Geelong supporters is actually quite logical.

So is sour grapes.

 

[boncer34]

Ideally, yes.
I admit that AFL trading (and even drafting) is far too complex for me compared to the relevant simplicity of the NHL model, but being able to trade players and then just have contracts ignored seems so stupid.
In the case of Bowes, if he's being traded because of cap implications that involve needing to throw in a draft pick as a sweetner, of course the cap conditions necessitating needing that pick should travel with him

One problem is players negotiate contracts with their clubs with sweetners and performance based bonuses.

When you change clubs your ability to reach those targets for the bonuses changes.

 

[Lore]

 

[DonsRule]

But traded players can have their contracts renegotiated. Do you stop that rule?

Maybe they could look at restrictions around big renegotiation. It gas to be within XXX% of the original terms .

The Cats play the system well, I don't have an issue with it from their side at all.


The opportunity to play for the reining premiers, be playing finals. You'd be stupid to pass that up, I don't blame Bowes either, smart on his pov.

 

[mike14]

One problem is players negotiate contracts with their clubs with sweetners and performance based bonuses.

When you change clubs your ability to reach those targets for the bonuses changes.

Simple fix is that all contracts are with the AFL not a club, so the bonuses etc travel with the contract. Seeing as players can't be tradede without their say-so, if they don't think they can hit the bonuses they don't ok the trade
I know this is just wishful thinking on my part as the AFL doesn't seem to have any interest in changing the model, it just seems really 'dumb' to me.