Gold Coast rumour

[beelzebub 23,313]

Incorrect.

GC draft rules AFL

"6. 2010 Post-season, AFL listed player access

Gold Coast to have capacity to pre-list 10 players who had previously nominated for the AFL Draft, or were previously listed with an AFL club.

Gold Coast to have capacity to sign up to 16 uncontracted players"

and somewhere there is mention they can take two years to do it.

Edited July 13, 2010 by belzebub59

[beelzebub 23,313]

Jim Stynes was on 3AW last night and when asked about the Bruce rumour he didn't sound too convincing when he said he didn't think it would happen.

I guess if both parties want it to happen, then it's going to be a win-win we should try and make it happen.

dont tease !!!

[Inner Demon 1]

gc draft rules...afl

"6. 2010 Post-season, AFL listed player access

Gold Coast to have capacity to pre-list 10 players who had previously nominated for the AFL Draft, or were previously listed with an AFL club.

Gold Coast to have capacity to sign up to 16 uncontracted players"

and somewhere there is mention they can take two years to do it.

Here's the link you were after

They don't get two years.

I think you may just be confused with GWS. They get up to 16 over 2 years. As per this article

[Inner Demon 1]

By the way, if you haven't read that GWS concessions article before, brace yourself. Horror movie stuff.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,024]

Have heard from a Hawthorn player that i live next door to that Jordan Gysberts may be the player from Melbourne's list heading north with some suncreen.

Would be absolutley [censored] off and devastated if this was the case- seeing as a) he's a number 11 pick and B) he played very well in his first few games

i'm wondering whether the club has found out hence the reason to not play him- the back injury seems a little dodgy as he pulled up fine after collingwood game and then had a week off for the crows.

Thoughts? You've got to understand that there will be at least one player going to the GC from our list

No chance at all. He's contracted.

[beelzebub 23,313]

Here's the link you were after

They don't get two years.

I think you may just be confused with GWS. They get up to 16 over 2 years. As per this article

quite probably ..cheers

[Guest DeesPower]

Have heard a similar rumour but relating to a senior player, and absolutely not gysberts...but for two reasons I am not going to offer the name.

The reasons?

one is I'd like it to happen, and so would most who contribute to this site, so let's not spoil it.

two is that the source, while connected, has sometimes seemed to me to be a source of deliberate misinformation.

best take all rumours with a pinch (ps. It ain't Brad Miller.)

No, it's Cam Bruce......unfortunately. How long then Brad Green since they are such good mates...

[RalphiusMaximus 6,024]

No, it's Cam Bruce......unfortunately. How long then Brad Green since they are such good mates...

I have no fear of Green leaving. He's already had the opportunity to chase more money and turned it down.

[Dr. Mubutu 831]

Free tickets to wet n wild - thats really got to be the sealer :

I heard he's holding out for Dreamworld tickets, which is causing some delay.

[beelzebub 23,313]

By the way, if you haven't read that GWS concessions article before, brace yourself. Horror movie stuff.

very much so...but more so for other clubs who havent had thechance to stock up... Weve times it beautifully ( hopefully...lol )

[Demonland 71,622]

I think it's more likely the player has his wires crossed and is talking about Jordie McKenzie...

I think it's more likely the player has his wires crossed and is talking about Campbell Brown or perhaps Gary Ablett.

[ox_5 163]

Have heard from a Hawthorn player that i live next door to that Jordan Gysberts may be the player from Melbourne's list heading north with some suncreen.

Would be absolutley [censored] off and devastated if this was the case- seeing as a) he's a number 11 pick and B) he played very well in his first few games

i'm wondering whether the club has found out hence the reason to not play him- the back injury seems a little dodgy as he pulled up fine after collingwood game and then had a week off for the crows.

Thoughts? You've got to understand that there will be at least one player going to the GC from our list

HAHA! Close to one of the best (read worst) rumours about GC I have heard to date.

You've got to understand that there will be at least one player going to the GC from our list

This quote is wrong too - they have the ability to lure one un-contracted player from each side. It may or may not happen, and I think there will be many sides where they do not get a player from.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,024]

This quote is wrong too - they have the ability to lure one un-contracted player from each side. It may or may not happen, and I think there will be many sides where they do not get a player from.

Agreed. If you look at the concessions they have been given, to take a player from every club would be idiotic. If they used every one of the available options to take players they would have room for only 10 drafted players. That takes them to their first second round pick and nothing else. I'm pretty sure the GC people have said that they are only after certain players and if they can't get them will not waste spots on their list.

[Grandson of a gun 276]

Have heard from a Hawthorn player that i live next door to that Jordan Gysberts may be the player from Melbourne's list heading north with some suncreen.

Would be absolutley [censored] off and devastated if this was the case- seeing as a) he's a number 11 pick and B) he played very well in his first few games

i'm wondering whether the club has found out hence the reason to not play him- the back injury seems a little dodgy as he pulled up fine after collingwood game and then had a week off for the crows.

Thoughts? You've got to understand that there will be at least one player going to the GC from our list

GC17 have the ability to lure 1 player from every club if cap/list permits. They do not get 1 from every club as a matter of right.

I would say that they are more than likely only going to have say about half a dozen to 10 at the most.

If you are correct and both parties want it to happen then IMO it would be most likely done as a trade rather than an uncontracted player selection. Cam is a Life Member and has had a great career with Melbourne and if he wanted to head north for a couple of years I am sure he would want us compensated immediately and to ensure he left on good terms. A swap for a draft pick could be negotiated fairly easily as the GC will have plenty of them. That will leave open their chance of another uncontracted player from another club.

Have to disagree Redleg.

Firstly- make no mistake, GC17 are out for themselves and are more than entitled to lure a player away without trading a pick.

Secondly- the AFL have devised a system to compensate clubs with picks.

Thirdly- the compensatory pick for a player like Bruce is likely to be low so why would GC bother giving us anything better?

Therefore if i was the recruiting manager at GC17 i would say to Melbourne (if hypothetically a player goes)- stuff you, we ain't giving you squat, you will get a compensatory pick from the AFL in the future and we are acting within our entitlements.

Football is a brutal world and it is dog eat dog. They are out to build the strongest list possible and are holding all the aces (and a couple of spares as well). We will just have to grin and bare it as we are blissfully taken from behind!!!!!

[dee-luded 2,959]

Free tickets to wet n wild - thats really got to be the sealer :

Cam may be a trade there anyway.

What about Pyjamas, any chance?

[RalphiusMaximus 6,024]

Have to disagree Redleg.

Firstly- make no mistake, GC17 are out for themselves and are more than entitled to lure a player away without trading a pick.

Secondly- the AFL have devised a system to compensate clubs with picks.

Thirdly- the compensatory pick for a player like Bruce is likely to be low so why would GC bother giving us anything better?

Therefore if i was the recruiting manager at GC17 i would say to Melbourne (if hypothetically a player goes)- stuff you, we ain't giving you squat, you will get a compensatory pick from the AFL in the future and we are acting within our entitlements.

Football is a brutal world and it is dog eat dog. They are out to build the strongest list possible and are holding all the aces (and a couple of spares as well). We will just have to grin and bare it as we are blissfully taken from behind!!!!!

I'd be quite happy with them doing this. Firstly, as a player nearing the end of his career he would probably not be worth much (if anything) in trade, and secondly if we traded him to them, they could still use their player-pinching powers on one of our young guns. I mean no disrespect to Bruce when I say this, but he is unlikely to be in the side in three years, so it will hurt us a lot less if he goes than if they were to nab someone like Grimes or Watts.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

The best way to stop GC17 from taking one of our good players is to make sure they are all contracted and if they want to take one from us it will be a fringe player at best.

If our top players can't see where we are headed then they can leave. I very much doubt Cam Bruce will be going anywhere, he is a required player; maybe not by some of the posters on here but by the club.

[Face Your Demons 175]

I don't think we will lose anyone to GC. At least no one will don't wont to lose.

[Guest The Boss]

If you are correct and both parties want it to happen then IMO it would be most likely done as a trade rather than an uncontracted player selection. Cam is a Life Member and has had a great career with Melbourne and if he wanted to head north for a couple of years I am sure he would want us compensated immediately and to ensure he left on good terms. A swap for a draft pick could be negotiated fairly easily as the GC will have plenty of them. That will leave open their chance of another uncontracted player from another club.

That is the stupidest thing I have ever read.

If GC17 wants Bruce, why on earth would Gold Coast want to give up draft picks/players to make it happen?!?! It makes no sense from GC17's point of view to trade for an out of contract player, when they can just sign them.

[jayceebee31 759]

Firstly Petterd was leaving, now Gysberts and possibly Bruce.We know that for a fact- Petterd has just signed a new contract, Gysberts gained a two year contract when taken as our No 11 pick and Cam Bruce ,well actually I don't mind if they take Cam- he has serviced this club well.However he could take Belly,PJ,Miller, Meeson, Healey and we will take No3 & No 5 picks.This is just as stupid as some of these rumours.

[Redleg 40,843]

That is the stupidest thing I have ever read.

If GC17 wants Bruce, why on earth would Gold Coast want to give up draft picks/players to make it happen?!?! It makes no sense from GC17's point of view to trade for an out of contract player, when they can just sign them.

Just started reading then have you?

What about if they gave up pick 50 for Bruce and then they retain an extra spot for an uncontracted player that they may want. They wouldn't want or need pick 50 but they may have their eyes on more than the 8 players they are allowed as uncontracted picks. Do you get it now?

Obviously it is just another rumour and we all know most of them are wrong, however, Cam and his new family might like a couple of years by the sea in the sunshine.

Edited July 13, 2010 by Redleg

[beelzebub 23,313]

just byway of curiosity werent Cam and Jeff god mates....both keen golfers ??

[Inner Demon 1]

In more realistic Gold Coast rumour news - Rumour File this morning had a tip-off that they are going to be called Gold Coast Suns. Not bad.

[old55 23,404]

What about if they gave up pick 50 for Bruce and then they retain an extra spot for an uncontracted player that they may want. They wouldn't want or need pick 50 but they may have their eyes on more than the 8 players they are allowed as uncontracted picks. Do you get it now?

It's one uncontracted player per club - they're allowed up to 16 uncontracted players - they said they're targeting less than this.

The only club that would leave the uncontracted player option open with is Melbourne. It makes sense for GC but it's very hard to see how MFC would benefit from this.

Edited July 14, 2010 by old55