Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

57 Excellent

About Mega_Watts

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/06/1987

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    New York

Previous Fields

  • Favourite Player(s)
    All the current Melbourne players

Recent Profile Visitors

4,791 profile views
  1. This list is incomplete without former Melbourne great Steven Armstrong I believe it's a Demonland rule that his name be raised in any discussion of undeserving premiership players.
  2. In New York. Any other Dees fans in New York? Also watch every game on WatchAFL (with MFC International membership).
  3. Edit: This seemed suspicious at first glance. However, apparently his "salary payout" goes in the cap for 2018. Assuming that's less than the total he was owed And they can't remove him from the list. So doesn't seem too suspicious.
  4. Very happy for him. Hope he does well. I will continue to cheer for both Jacks indefinitely.
  5. Yeah wtf is the go with this? Has anyone heard from the club? I was going to get the Grand Final Guarantee this year (and in future years), more out of hope than any real expectation. But $229 is crazy. My interstate membership is only $145!
  6. I am in again. Thanks for organising DeeVoted!
  7. Wait. Since when is there an international membership option!? Here I am buying an Interstate membership + WatchAFL pass like a sucker!
  8. Still missing a few: Adel: Matthew Jaensch (retired) BL: Justin Clarke (retired) Haw: Shem-Kelvin Tatupu (NZ rookie, retired) Rich: Reece McKenzie (retired) WCE: Damian Cavka (retired) WB: Luke Goetz (rookie, delisted) Source 1: http://www.afl.com.au/news/features/retirements-and-delistings Source 2: http://www.news.com.au/sport/breaking-news/afl-retirements-and-delistings-every-clubs-list-changes-at-the-end-of-the-2016-season/news-story/ea2d2c2f57154402bbd72122bc6923f1
  9. Where xx=1? We beat them in 2014! In Adelaide too. http://www.afl.com.au/match-centre/2014/7/adel-v-melb
  10. EFA You do realise Wiseblood was correct here with his original post? "Could of" does not exist. "Could have" is always the correct phrase. Or the contraction of this "could've" is also correct. Sorry for the grammar pedantry.
  11. You need to skip to Schedule C. 2. First Year Players (a) An AFL Club shall pay each first year draft choice Player it employs in 2015 and 2016 the base payments and Senior Match payments per Senior Match set out in the following table: 2 (d) A first year draft choice Player shall not be entitled to, nor shall an AFL Club, pay a first year Player more than the amounts prescribed by this item 2, other than: (i) reasonable relocation expenses and living allowances as set out in item 13 of this Schedule C; (ii) bereavement assistance of up to $2,000 per Player; and (iii) any incentive bonus a Player receives for finishing in the top ten of the AFL Club’s best and fairest award. Same wording is there under Second Year Players. Bottom Line - definitely can't pay more than the mandated amounts to 1st/2nd year players.
  12. Fairly certain you can't do this. New draftees earn set wages, which you can't increase. C.f. Tom Boyd in first year at the Dogs was still on rookie wages, with the promise of $millions later.
  13. Off topic, but I think this is a great idea. Simply because it increases the liquidity in the trading market. Historically a lot of trades are hindered/delayed/aborted as the club "buying" does not have enough assets (or the right value of assets) to complete the deal. Consider the Dayne Beams trade. Collingwood considered that he was worth better than pick 1, or two first round picks. (Let's say 4000 points based on the AFL scale). This is probably fair, noting that an unmotivated seller will charge overs. At the time the Lions had the following picks (or something similar depending on free agency compos): 5 - 1878 24 - 785 42 - 395 60 - 146 78 - 0 Total points - 3204, which is not enough. And Brisbane probably don't want to trade all their picks in the draft! If Brisbane can trade their 2015 pick (assuming it is also pick 5) then they have 2*1878 = 3756 points to offer straight up. A much better spot to start negotiations. The deal would probably go through straight away. (This ignores the fact that you would probably discount the value of future picks somewhat. Maybe by 10%?). The combination of picks that Coll and BL could trade (assuming they can each trade 2014 and 2015 picks) should lead to a fair outcome for the Beams trade. And a much more speedy resolution to this trade. (Allowing other lesser trades to be completed that might otherwise be held up). Edit: The main "minus" is that some clubs might mortgage their future, by selling off all their future draft picks. The AFL would probably create a rule to protect clubs from themselves. e.g. you can only trade picks one year in advance. Or you must use a first round pick at least once every two years.
  14. Excellent system. The afl.com.au article describes it better. And also gives this detailed example: http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/AFL/Files/biddingsystemfeedback.pdf The Stretch example is well explained here. Basically we paid very slight unders (after the 15% discount). I had a read of the BigFooty thread and there seemed to be a lot of criticism of the points scale. On the contrary if you analyse every trade of picks for picks over the last few years the proposed points scale seems to be pretty spot on. I would go as far as to suggest AFL club List management departments use this exact scale. And to those Sydney fans who would cry because they would have to give up picks 18, 37 and 38 for Heeney, (and maybe a similar price for Mills next year), consider this: If Melbourne were offered a trade of picks #18, #37, #38 in exchange for #2, would we take it? I seriously doubt it. Therefore the price for Heeney under the new system is fair (in fact still quite discounted).
  • Create New...