I'm not exactly sure how it works, but from what I understand, GC 17 have the option to take 1 uncontracted player from each club. I'm not sure if they need that player's consent, but presuming they can pick anybody, and have openly stated they want Riewoldt, Buddy, Petterd etc, is it not true that the smartest clubs will move now to prevent their biggest stars from being poached? I for one would be gutted if, let's say, we built ouselves back into contention with a list based around players we developed into stars, back into finals contention, only to lose a vital cog in that wheel (eg. and important KPP or a genuine A-grader star) to the CG team. So whatt can we do to prevent this? Can all players who are due to come out of contract in 2010 and who we believe to be in the 'untouchable' category be signed to new contracts that don't expire until 2011 before their current contract expires (ie now)? Is this a legitimate tactic? And what other methods can you guys come up with to ensure we don't get shafted? I believe that a couple of clubs will get short-changed and be helpless in losing a player they put years of development into. This seems unfair, and I can't understand how the clubs agreed to this concession...

And people thought re-signing Newton was folly...

And people thought re-signing Newton was folly...

I see your Newton and raise you Meesen :D

Exactly my point though. Happy for these 2 to be out of contract, but what if it was Watts??? Who actually probably has a 2 year contract to begin with... What's to stop them from poaching Watts?

who cares if they do poach watts. he wont want to leave anyway

i share exactly the same concern pringle. and as i understand it, it doesn't matter if the player does or does not want to go to the GC, if they are chosen they have to.

As for Watts, he'll be signed up quick fast (before next season is over), no worries there. I'm hoping that our brains trust signs up all of our talent, before the GC can pillage us. Bastards. hope they fall on their sword. They have a joke of a name, a joke of a guernsey, a joke of a mascot, they'll have a joke of a theme song, and they'll be joking themselves if they think that Queenslander's will give a [censored] about them. Just don't sign up questionable players. There are a few players on our list that i wouldn't mind see going. give the poachers some dead wood.

They can have one of Meesen, Newton, and to a lesser extent Bell or Dunn. They can keep their filthy hands off any other players. They are going to be so universally hated before they even enter the comp. it's not funny (almost as much as the filth)

i share exactly the same concern pringle. and as i understand it, it doesn't matter if the player does or does not want to go to the GC, if they are chosen they have to.

As for Watts, he'll be signed up quick fast (before next season is over), no worries there. I'm hoping that our brains trust signs up all of our talent, before the GC can pillage us. Bastards. hope they die on their arses. Just don't sign up questionable players. There are a few players on our list that i wouldn't mind see going. give the poachers some dead wood.

That's what I'm getting at. Leave only dead wood available. Is this possible though? can you re-sign contracted players before their contract expires? Happy to leave Meesen to be poached. Surel GC will need a ruckman...

what is also a problem is that we are only going to be able to pay 92% of our total salary cap, so we are going to struggle to keep all our boys together. Talk about front and back-loading contracts. Having said that, i have full confidence in CC and CS in getting ourselves in the best position possible.

I don't see how this works. Surely clubs will just renegotiate with players they intend to keep midway through 2010. All GC17 will be left with is the uncontracted players that clubs don't want anyway.

I don't see how this works. Surely clubs will just renegotiate with players they intend to keep midway through 2010. All GC17 will be left with is the uncontracted players that clubs don't want anyway.

correct.

however: not all clubs will have money when they need it. not all players are happy where they are. not all players will baulk at the money that GC17 will throw at them. some players might want to go home.

some players will try to use this as a strategy to push their own price up: if you think i am that good, pay me more for it or i'll go, but if 1/4 of the list asks that there is no way we can pay them all.

The AFL will ask all 16 clubs to nominate 12 untouchables.

watts, strauss, blease, mclean, frawley, petterd, morton, martin, garland, cheney, grimes and maric. i'm not sure what the deal is with contracts etc. but these are my 12 most important players for our club because they are our future.

watts, strauss, blease, mclean, frawley, petterd, morton, martin, garland, cheney, grimes and maric. i'm not sure what the deal is with contracts etc. but these are my 12 most important players for our club because they are our future.

I'd say Buckley before Frawley.

The untouchables is not true. Every club can just name 12 people coming out of contract and voila.

I'd say Buckley before Frawley.

each to their own. both cant kick but Frawley plays key position which is more important.

I think on paper; our team for the future is looking quite good.

FB: Cheney Garland Frawley

HB: Strauss Rivers Petterd

C: Blease Mclean Morton

HF: Wonaeamirri Watts Sylvia

FF: Maric ? S.Martin

Foll: Spencer, Jones, ?

Int: Buckley, Bate, Dunn, Grimes

Gee, if only those question marks represented Butcher and Scully. I think Scully would have gone number 1 in last years national draft. Best handballer ive seen. A quicker version of Simon Black basically.

Enjoy Petterd's second last season at the club.

who cares if they do poach watts. he wont want to leave anyway

God bless you Freak.

i share exactly the same concern pringle. and as i understand it, it doesn't matter if the player does or does not want to go to the GC, if they are chosen they have to.

We need to get a definitive word on this, as my understanding is, it's the opposite.

Gee, if only those question marks represented Butcher and Scully. I think Scully would have gone number 1 in last years national draft. Best handballer ive seen. A quicker version of Simon Black basically.

Yup. I go a big rubbery one when I see his footage. Personally given where our team is at, I'd take Scully first...

As for the thread topic, Petterd is the biggest concern here, as he's likely to have the desire to wander back home, and you would assume MOST footy fans would not have a problem with him being homesick, so he can be safe in the knowlege no-one will feel ENORMOUSLY let down. But there are a couple of other factors here.

- How hungry is he for a flag? The demons will be threatening from 2011 onwards. All the work hes put in at his club, with his friends and team-mates around will be wasted. If he's more into flags than being at home then there's every likelihood he'll want to stay.

- If he were to go to the GC side, unless I'm mistaken he'd be (at about 21/22 years old) one of the older players. This would automatically put him in a leadership role. If he likes the idea of being captain, or VC then it may be something he has to weigh up.

- Again, I'm a bit hazy on the rules here. How does the trading work, particularly in regards to the draft picks on offer in 2010? Does the nominated player have to up and leave with no reparations being made to MFC? Or are both clubs forced to broker a deal in order to send the player north? I would absolutely assume Petterd would want to do the right thing by the club, so instead of just up and leaving, maybe we would work out a deal with GC17? If they said to me their pick 5, or maybe pick 9 (or thereabouts) in a straight swap for Petterd, I might feel the need to consider it. We took him in the thirties in the last superdraft, in many ways that'd be an absolute steal.

Hey Freak where is Jurrah?

I'm not exactly sure how it works, but from what I understand, GC 17 have the option to take 1 uncontracted player from each club. I'm not sure if they need that player's consent, but presuming they can pick anybody, and have openly stated they want Riewoldt, Buddy, Petterd etc, is it not true that the smartest clubs will move now to prevent their biggest stars from being poached? I for one would be gutted if, let's say, we built ouselves back into contention with a list based around players we developed into stars, back into finals contention, only to lose a vital cog in that wheel (eg. and important KPP or a genuine A-grader star) to the CG team. So whatt can we do to prevent this? Can all players who are due to come out of contract in 2010 and who we believe to be in the 'untouchable' category be signed to new contracts that don't expire until 2011 before their current contract expires (ie now)? Is this a legitimate tactic? And what other methods can you guys come up with to ensure we don't get shafted? I believe that a couple of clubs will get short-changed and be helpless in losing a player they put years of development into. This seems unfair, and I can't understand how the clubs agreed to this concession...

Of course clubs can re-sign players to new contracts before they expire, but player agents will be using GC17 as a bargaining tool to inflate the salaries, and will invariably tell the player to hold out.

Clubs that lose uncontracted players will be compensated by a draft choice determined by the standing of the player, ie; b&f results and $contract. For example, if Cam Bruce was out of contract and was being pursued by GC, based on his current salary and B&f results, we would probably receive a 1st round draft pick for him. So it may well be in the interests of a club not to re-sign an uncontracted player.

BTW, at the end of the day, all players do have a say as to whether they go to GC. It's just that they will have to either re-sign with their club or have their club broker a trade deal with another club. They will only end up at the GC against their wishes if they nominate for the PSD, and the GC want them.

We need to tie up ricky petterd ASAP!!!!!!

Clubs that lose uncontracted players will be compensated by a draft choice determined by the standing of the player, ie; b&f results and $contract. For example, if Cam Bruce was out of contract and was being pursued by GC, based on his current salary and B&f results, we would probably receive a 1st round draft pick for him. So it may well be in the interests of a club not to re-sign an uncontracted player.

I don't like this criteria at all if it is accurate. Unless it is a superstar like Riewoldt, GC will be going for up and coming youth and that in turn will not relinquish substantially high picks to the recipient club despite being hurt by losing a young up and comer. Different clubs will obviously have different tactics based on their list as time goes on I guess. Bruce, as an example wouldn't be on GCs radar (you'd think) as he is almost finished and would require a higher pick than one of our youngsters - unless GC are totaly stupid then one of our good youngsters will go IMO. We may end up having a few players uncontracted who are on the senior side but do we honestly have any real quality there besides say Green that GC would bite at?

I don't like this criteria at all if it is accurate. Unless it is a superstar like Riewoldt, GC will be going for up and coming youth and that in turn will not relinquish substantially high picks to the recipient club despite being hurt by losing a young up and comer. Different clubs will obviously have different tactics based on their list as time goes on I guess. Bruce, as an example wouldn't be on GCs radar (you'd think) as he is almost finished and would require a higher pick than one of our youngsters - unless GC are totaly stupid then one of our good youngsters will go IMO. We may end up having a few players uncontracted who are on the senior side but do we honestly have any real quality there besides say Green that GC would bite at?

The compensatory draft picks would be in addition to the normal draft, sought of like the priority picks. So GC won't be giving up their draft picks as compensation. GC can however trade draft picks for contracted players.

And you are right. GC will either be targetting superstars or promising youngsters. So Petterd will definitely be on the radar, but Miller won't.

The compensatory draft picks would be in addition to the normal draft, sought of like the priority picks. So GC won't be giving up their draft picks as compensation. GC can however trade draft picks for contracted players.

And you are right. GC will either be targetting superstars or promising youngsters. So Petterd will definitely be on the radar, but Miller won't.

I see - this is going to be very interesting then.

If we are going to continue developing our list it may be wise to trade some player/s of value to GC17 in 2010 because the return will be well above what you would get any other year.

Obvioulsy we need the players we value contracted for 2010, I wouldn't be putting Petterd in the 'untouchables' list just yet though because GC17 will be willing to pay well above the going rate for him.

Enjoy Petterd's second last season at the club.

****ing hell dude don't say that.