Traded Patrick Dangerfield [traded w/ pick 50 to Geelong for 9, 28 and Gore]

[grassrootsfooty]

If the Crows have already agreed to something it would have to be very generous.

I doubt that Geelong have agreed to anything. They will be playing the (crows won't match) bluff until the crows match.

Tend to agree with you, but then again is Dwaynes source good?

 

[Myles]

In this particular scenario, it's one of the best players in the competition leaving so before you go sprouting the "oh no wallow in your pity" BS, try to consider this for a moment - our club has spent the last 8 years heavily investing our time and resources, both financial and coaching, into developing one of the sport's most talented and exciting products. Largely, we have made him the player he is today, as we did with blokes like Tippett, Davis and Gunston before him before they decided to piss all that hard work and investment down the shitter. For you to expect our key stakeholders, we the members who cough up in excess of $400 a year, and a loyal supporter base to just accept it and not be perturbed by it is just insulting. Likewise the club, who continually invest their efforts and manpower into these young men only to be shafted.

On the second bolded point, exactly what guarantee do we have going into the draft, and this draft in particular that the likely compensation (at this stage a pick immediately after our pick according to FA rules -currently somewhere in the teens or mid-late 1st round if you like, as the AFL is yet to decide Carlton and Brisbane's compo for Kreuzer and Leuenberger leaving if they do so) is going to net us as you put it, "one of the top prospects in the nation" given this draft tails off dramatically after the first 5-10 picks - can we possibly have that guarantee in writing perhaps?? Can we reasonably expect to get another Dangerfield with said pick?

Furthermore, it only completely screws with everything our list management has planned for and put in place leading up to this point for us to now turn around and spend a pick on a complete unknown who will more than likely take another 5 years minimum before we begin to see any sort of return/fruition from the time and money invested as I mentioned earlier. It's one big ******* merry-go-round without a prize waiting at the end, without any reward for what we've worked so hard to achieve.

I understand it's easy to have this opinion from where you stand, that is as a supporter of a club who has been previously giftwrapped a great big ******* chunk of the nation's "top prospects" as you put it in years gone by (not just one year of it but multiple years), just because the AFL wanted to pour all their resources into non-traditional football states and ensure your club would become and remain competitive and successful enough to retain an interested and loyal supporter base... Oh and then threw in recruitment zones to further aid your long-term viability.. Yes, I can completely understand where you're coming from. My club has been around for 25 years and hasn't been allowed a single F/S pick to speak of because the "VFL/QFL/NSWFL" or AFL as you know it to be created such rigid stipulations and restrictions on our ability to draft F/S that we basically had to have those players' fathers play over 15 seasons of SANFL footy in as many seasons (but only on the proviso of those seasons falling between certain years, just to give us a real good kick in the guts and ensure it would never happen). Yet your club, was giftwrapped every possible chance of storming into the top 8 within the first 5 years of your existence and remaining there for the forseeable future. My club started out of a tin ******* shed, how many tin sheds did the AFL throw at you guys?

Let's just suck it up and get on with it shall we? No qualms whatsoever!

I understand your point but what I was trying to say is compensation rules are flawed and should not be in place the way they stand now. I may have used a bad example but it still stands, I don't believe Free Agency the way it is now will succeed with the inconsistent awarding of compensation picks. It is in my opinion that Compensation picks should be removed, as should priority picks. It allows clubs to take players early in the draft that they know could move back to their home state so they can be provided with extra 1st round picks in the future.

 

[Nintendo Jones]

Yeah but they can ask for a trade if they really want to leave. If they want to go as an FA they can wait til they are unrestricted. Otherwise why have RFAs at all ?

The AFLPA are massively in favour of a player's ability to move... I can't see them allowing things to be tightened up too much

 

[Taylor]

I expect him to announce his intentions when the destination club is no longer in the finals.

 

[zb14]

Again, plenty of people replied to my earlier post but nobody addressed the KEY point I made. Free Agency was never designed to operate in the same manner as an ordinary out-of-contract player. If it were, there would be no need for the system to exist in the first place. This is simple logic.

Given this, people need to ask then what the matching mechanism was intended for in operation. As I said, it was for a situation where a player was open to staying at his club but wanted to test the open market on $$. It was not intended for deriving a club a better trade outcome. Adel can play "hardball" all they like, but they won't get Geelong to become Guinea pigs on this.

Salary is in effect irrelevant in the context of Free Agency's operation. The one great anomaly in the systems operation is ladder position. But this is not Geelong's problem, and it shouldn't pay the price for the systems flaw I this regard. If Adel want a better outcome it is the AFL's door they should be knocking on.

 

[Suma Magic]

I expect him to announce his intentions when the destination club is no longer in the finals.

Nominate the Hawks in his Brownlow acceptance speech?

 

[Suma Magic]

Again, plenty of people replied to my earlier post but nobody addressed the KEY point I made. Free Agency was never designed to operate in the same manner as an ordinary out-of-contract player. If it were, there would be no need for the system to exist in the first place. This is simple logic.

Given this, people need to ask then what the matching mechanism was intended for in operation. As I said, it was for a situation where a player was open to staying at his club but wanted to test the open market on $$. It was not intended for deriving a club a better trade outcome. Adel can play "hardball" all they like, but they won't get Geelong to become Guinea pigs on this.

Salary is in effect irrelevant in the context of Free Agency's operation. The one great anomaly in the systems operation is ladder position. But this is not Geelong's problem, and it shouldn't pay the price for the systems flaw I this regard. If Adel want a better outcome it is the AFL's door they should be knocking on.

Not quite.

RFAs gives the opportunity for a player to leave under FA if his current and future club agree to it.

If his current club doesn't agree to it, it's a normal trade scenario.

 

[SA_Stazza]

I understand your point but what I was trying to say is compensation rules are flawed and should not be in place the way they stand now. I may have used a bad example but it still stands, I don't believe Free Agency the way it is now will succeed with the inconsistent awarding of compensation picks. It is in my opinion that Compensation picks should be removed, as should priority picks. It allows clubs to take players early in the draft that they know could move back to their home state so they can be provided with extra 1st round picks in the future.

Yeah because that's exactly what clubs want to do..... Seriously?

I guess Brissy just knew they were going to get a first rounder back for Polec (a top 5 pick) when he left for Port.... oh wait....

 

[manboob]

In this particular scenario, it's one of the best players in the competition leaving so before you go sprouting the "oh no wallow in your pity" BS, try to consider this for a moment - our club has spent the last 8 years heavily investing our time and resources, both financial and coaching, into developing one of the sport's most talented and exciting products. Largely, we have made him the player he is today, as we did with blokes like Tippett, Davis and Gunston before him before they decided to piss all that hard work and investment down the shitter. For you to expect our key stakeholders, we the members who cough up in excess of $400 a year, and a loyal supporter base to just accept it and not be perturbed by it is just insulting. Likewise the club, who continually invest their efforts and manpower into these young men only to be shafted.

On the second bolded point, exactly what guarantee do we have going into the draft, and this draft in particular that the likely compensation (at this stage a pick immediately after our pick according to FA rules -currently somewhere in the teens or mid-late 1st round if you like, as the AFL is yet to decide Carlton and Brisbane's compo for Kreuzer and Leuenberger leaving if they do so) is going to net us as you put it, "one of the top prospects in the nation" given this draft tails off dramatically after the first 5-10 picks - can we possibly have that guarantee in writing perhaps?? Can we reasonably expect to get another Dangerfield with said pick?

Furthermore, it only completely screws with everything our list management has planned for and put in place leading up to this point for us to now turn around and spend a pick on a complete unknown who will more than likely take another 5 years minimum before we begin to see any sort of return/fruition from the time and money invested as I mentioned earlier. It's one big ******* merry-go-round without a prize waiting at the end, without any reward for what we've worked so hard to achieve.

I understand it's easy to have this opinion from where you stand, that is as a supporter of a club who has been previously giftwrapped a great big ******* chunk of the nation's "top prospects" as you put it in years gone by (not just one year of it but multiple years), just because the AFL wanted to pour all their resources into non-traditional football states and ensure your club would become and remain competitive and successful enough to retain an interested and loyal supporter base... Oh and then threw in recruitment zones to further aid your long-term viability.. Yes, I can completely understand where you're coming from. My club has been around for 25 years and hasn't been allowed a single F/S pick to speak of because the "VFL/QFL/NSWFL" or AFL as you know it to be created such rigid stipulations and restrictions on our ability to draft F/S that we basically had to have those players' fathers play over 15 seasons of SANFL footy in as many seasons (but only on the proviso of those seasons falling between certain years, just to give us a real good kick in the guts and ensure it would never happen). Yet your club, was giftwrapped every possible chance of storming into the top 8 within the first 5 years of your existence and remaining there for the forseeable future. My club started out of a tin ******* shed, how many tin sheds did the AFL throw at you guys?

Let's just suck it up and get on with it shall we? No qualms whatsoever!

Ablett Jnr.

 

[grassrootsfooty]

I understand your point but what I was trying to say is compensation rules are flawed and should not be in place the way they stand now. I may have used a bad example but it still stands, I don't believe Free Agency the way it is now will succeed with the inconsistent awarding of compensation picks. It is in my opinion that Compensation picks should be removed, as should priority picks. It allows clubs to take players early in the draft that they know could move back to their home state so they can be provided with extra 1st round picks in the future.

The AFLPA demand a lot but then again so do the clubs there needs to be a compromise which is what we have. Will it ever be fair with two parties wanting a different result, is it the bet it will be to satisfy both parties. There wasnt this problem when there wasnt FA, the fans care more for the clubs than the palyers there is no I in team. Whose demands should be taken into consideration the most, the majority would say the fans!

 

[SA_Stazza]

Ablett Jnr.

Yes, another F/S you paid exactly what for again?

 

[SA_Stazza]

Shall I rattle off all the other F/S picks like Scarlett you got for sfa?

What were the "restrictions" the VFL.. err AFL placed on Victorian clubs' F/S criteria.. what 50 games was it?

 

[Blueboys11]

Would a team be able to take him in the draft and then trade him to Geelong later down the line?

Carlton select him with pick 1. Pay his exorbitant salary for 1 season (even if danger refuses to play), then trade to geelong the following season for two first round picks.

Could be the greatest investment ever!

No way will danger go to the psd as clubs will be clamouring at the thought of this sort of deal

 

[manboob]

Shall I rattle off all the other F/S picks like Scarlett you got for sfa?

What were the "restrictions" the VFL.. err AFL placed on Victorian clubs' F/S criteria.. what 50 games was it?

Oh ok now so it matters what the player cost you. For ****'s sake give me a spell.

Oh and you can make all the VFL jibes you like but it's irrelevant you are an AFL franchise club with no history outside of it. Port on the other hand.

 

[Taylor]

Nominate the Hawks in his Brownlow acceptance speech?

Too young for the Roos you think?

Your club has the outside run and carry sorted, just need a bull to compliment Priddis and replace him when he finishes up.

 

[Taylor]

Oh ok now so it matters what the player cost you. For ****'s sake give me a spell.

Oh and you can make all the VFL jibes you like but it's irrelevant you are an AFL franchise club with no history outside of it. Port on the other hand.

There is a point that the expansion sides had much tougher regulations for father sons given the best talent went to play in the VFL.

 

[manboob]

We invested one of the highest picks we had in our clubs history for Danger you ******* spud.. get a clue

I never said you didnt.

 

[Myles]

We invested one of the highest picks we had in our clubs history for Danger you ******* spud.. get a clue

I don't see why you need to abuse people just cos they ask questions and help contribute to discussion.

 

[SA_Stazza]

I never said you didnt.

You were directly comparing the Danger situation I spoke of to Ablett Jnr... so kinda has a fair bit of relevance

 

[manboob]

You were directly comparing the Danger situation I spoke of to Ablett Jnr... so kinda has a fair bit of relevance

Yeah and I said - why does it matter what you paid for the bloke? Do you think Dees deserve top 10 pick for Watts cause they too him with pick number 1? By your logic they do.

 

[SA_Stazza]

I don't see why you need to abuse people just cos they ask questions and help contribute to discussion.

Sorry where exactly was he asking me a question?? The only contribution he made was being completely condescending. I responded with an appropriate answer

 

[Footy Smarts]

I'm sure Danger wont mind Geelong prioritising other players over him and making it harder for him to get there

From everything I've heard he seems a hugely driven and competitive guy. He's been pretty active in giving Adelaide advice on list management and the like. I think he'd be pretty angry at Geelong unnecessarily giving up a couple of first round picks for him instead of using them to pick up the best player they can when he's highly likely to end up there regardless.

 

[SA_Stazza]

Yeah and I said - why does it matter what you paid for the bloke? Do you think Dees deserve top 10 pick for Watts cause they too him with pick number 1? By your logic they do.

We're comparing two of the games greats, let's not let context go out the window here. You gave up sfa to get the greatest player of this generation and possibly in history.. because why?

 

[craig crowing]

2015 - Not announced yet. Probably wins, maybe top 2?
2014 - 3rd
2013 - 3rd
2012 - 2nd

So "not even close" is the same as "top 3"?

Wow. And that's using your own metric.



And as much as whoever votes for your B&F, right?



You're knocking him because he wasn't great, just very good. Very hard marker.

Well guess first thing to do is repeat a major question you forgot to answer and that is how many premierships you would have won if Voss and Black etc got enticed back home with FA at age of 25 . Guess lucky not around then wasn't you.
Here is this game super star that has dominated for 8 years according to you that has not won our B&F before this season which seems to be last .
Yes finished 2nd a third 3 previous years and if played like he has this year would he have finished behind Sloane Douglas and CHB Talia in what were very average last 2 previous years .
You can create what you want out of what I posted but my whole basis of original post is that we have not got 8 top Dangerfield years and you should not be losing top players at age of 25 .
Coming back currently of course you will not have to worry as can't keep them much more than 2 years let alone 8 but if you could you would find that this as a lot of rules are waited to the Victorian teams with greater go home factor along being at the heart of AFL for which is a leading factor here for Danger media aspirations.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

No worries champ
How was the humble pie given he was never leaving

I was never adamant he was staying.

I was adamant Afc would match unless a buddy-like offer.

There are plenty of my posts on this thread.

You were adamant that Afc would not match - howling down anyone who said otherwise.

Man up - you were making up shyte all along, as you have no clue what Afc would do!