FAREWELL BRENT MOLONEY

[Devo 104]

RE the compensation system.

I believe that the FA agency compo system is just a transition measure and will be scrapped by next season. It was just to get supporters used to the whole idea. First of all, it goes completely against what free agency is about (no other FA system that I know of has this kind of measure).

It also has the potential to create monumental problems for the AFL.

Firstly, as has been mentioned, clubs do not want to recruit any FAs who might cost them a lucrative compensation pick (and the clubs don't know what it is until far too late). This goes against the whole point of the system - to encourage player movement and freedom.

Secondly it is unfair on clubs that are below wherever the AFL arbitrarily inserts the pick; clubs that have done nothing to deserve being shunted down the draft order.

Hypothetically, if Buddy has a falling out with Clarko in 2013 (not beyond the realm of possibility given their personalities) and decides to leave the Hawks after next year (and the Hawks don't get many or any FAs back to right the ledger) then you would have a hard time arguing that he is not worth at least a top five or even top three draft pick (he would be getting a huge contract wherever he goes).

Say there is a massive talent drop off after those first 5 picks. - it's often the case that a draft is relatively top heavy.

What happens to the team that originally had pick 5? Do they just get shafted to pick 6 despite having done nothing wrong? Should the AFL take the talent likely to be available with the comp. picks into account when giving them out?

Not such an issue when a comp pick is in the teens or later, but if a club gets shunted down the draft order in the top 5 or 10... well there would be hell to pay.

It's unworkable and creates too many possibilities for perceptions of bias and conflicts of interest.

Agree. While I understand its worth as a transition measure, the compo system has to be scrapped after this year so we can have a truly free market for player movement.

[Sir Why You Little 34,762]

Love to know what was going on in Beamers head since 186. He was useless in 2012....The truth will come out one day...

[jnrmac 19,259]

goes there on a 2 year deal.

manager says brisbane's game plan suited him. haha as opposed to needy's defensive one!

Heard that and peed myself laughing too...

[dees189227 10,952]

Im surprised he is at brisbane. But I guess there were as many offers for him as reported. He wanted to play finals and im not sure brisbane will be successful in the next 2 years. Maybe he wanted to get out of melbourne (the city) and be an unknown in brisbane.

The thng is he thought Neeld was tough. Voss wont be any easier on him and would expect a high level. Also Brent will go from playing under 2 very young captains to Jonathan Brown. Hope he's ready.

[BarnDee 287]

Im surprised he is at brisbane. But I guess there were as many offers for him as reported. He wanted to play finals and im not sure brisbane will be successful in the next 2 years. Maybe he wanted to get out of melbourne (the city) and be an unknown in brisbane.

The thng is he thought Neeld was tough. Voss wont be any easier on him and would expect a high level. Also Brent will go from playing under 2 very young captains to Jonathan Brown. Hope he's ready.

moloney and brown will get on ok , both from the roosters , south warrnambool and prob mates from way back , hpe he goes ok , loved it when be bought all the players here for boxing etc , cheers , but such is life

[Jaded No More 58,826]

Michael Voss: amazing player, crap list manager

Good luck with Beamer, I genuinely harbor no ill feelings towards him. Hope he goes on to play some finals before his days are up.

[Whispering_Jack 28,037]

On the question of FA compensation I heard Terry Wallace state on radio today that Melbourne might get very little compensation for Moloney because the club played him at Casey for a few games this year. The rationale was that if we're playing him there then he wouldn't be worth much. I don't know if the powers that be would see it that way because it's also hard to dismiss a recent club b & f and 19 vote Brownlow season which has to be factored into the equation. By the same token, how do you then take into consideration the amount of offset you allow for taking Shannon Byrnes? After all, Moloney only played four games at VFL level and still managed 15 at AFL level with some good stats in some areas while Byrnes hardly saw any AFL action at all. Further, players are sent to the VFL for various reasons, not necessarily directly related to ability as a player.

I'm not expecting the compensation for Moloney to be massive but given the sort of deals that we're seeing in trades, a second rounder would not be out of the question. I expect the Jarod Rivers compo to be slightly better given his consistency in the past couple of seasons and the position he plays.

[beelzebub 22,271]

We're currently at nett 0

[Red Demon 67]

Michael Voss: amazing player, crap list manager

Good luck with Beamer, I genuinely harbor no ill feelings towards him. Hope he goes on to play some finals before his days are up.

Don't agree with this. Kerr calls most of the shots up here now (I live in Brisbane) and he has been shown to be a shrewd operator. Didn't budge on the 2 year offer to Moloney even though he and his idiotic manager wanted 3. He will be a good fit for Brisbane, I watch most of their games and while they have a good young developing midfield with Rich, Redden, Rockliff, Beams etc, they need someone to help Black win their clearances.

I think the "Voss has no idea" is a myth as well. Obviously Fevola was a massive [censored] up but you always take that risk with a bloke like him. Most of their other recent recruits have been very good. Raines was outstanding this year as a tagger-always thought he was a complete dud, and Maguire and Hudson had great years. Even Staker was one of their most important players last year before doing his ACL in the pre-season.

Edited October 10, 2012 by Red Demon

[Pates 9,537]

Sad to see him go but it's the best thing for both him and the club. Clearly was not one that bought in to Neelds grand plan, wasn't going to figure as a key player next year and he's found a club that seems to like him. I don't know how he'll do there, but I wish him all the best.

[Range Rover 1,935]

Glad he's gone. Poor attitude, poor influence on the younger players. Adios.

[skills32 229]

Love to know what was going on in Beamers head since 186. He was useless in 2012....The truth will come out one day...

It will you know.

In the tell all book he is going to write.

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

I don't think Beamer's going to write a book laddy-boy

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

Anyway what can anyone do with him? This guy supposedly "bled for the club" (so happy we wont have to hear that cliche anymore btw,) yet ended his career with us at Casey.

We were a third-world midfield, and if you can't dominate in that, let alone play good, then there are some major issues with either your game or your psyche- either way you are a damaged player.

Beamer is a good person and he served us for many years, it is very hard to see a person in a negative light if 90% of the time they did the best they could for your club- so I actually do wish him luck, obviously not against us, not going to boo him or anything but I will always think what could have been. Moloney could have easily been a one club player and been a role model and mentor to the next batch of superstars coming through- instead he threw in the towel.

Tragedy

[QueenC 74]

Manager said he has coaching aspirations. Time will tell on that.

And was looking forward to "working with a young mid field".......

As opposed to ours, who are apparently drawing pensions!!!

[darkhorse72 1,745]

Moloney could have easily been a one club player and been a role model and mentor to the next batch of superstars coming through- instead he threw in the towel.

Tragedy

If he stayed at Geelong he could have

[rpfc 27,611]

RE the compensation system.

I believe that the FA agency compo system is just a transition measure and will be scrapped by next season. It was just to get supporters used to the whole idea. First of all, it goes completely against what free agency is about (no other FA system that I know of has this kind of measure).

1. You don't know of Major League Baseball? You don't know the National Football League?

Firstly, as has been mentioned, clubs do not want to recruit any FAs who might cost them a lucrative compensation pick (and the clubs don't know what it is until far too late). This goes against the whole point of the system - to encourage player movement and freedom.

2. You are right but removing compensation for losing top quality players isn't the answer. St Kilda deserve Pick 13 for Goddard. Perhaps the NFL model of having a level of offer to get to before picks are allocated is preferable. That way only the most expensive contracts will be rewarded with a pick. Right now some teams are not signing UFAs and trading for RFAs because it may affect their compensation pick. If teams were given picks for every FA they lost this wouldn't be an issue.

Secondly it is unfair on clubs that are below wherever the AFL arbitrarily inserts the pick; clubs that have done nothing to deserve being shunted down the draft order.

Hypothetically, if Buddy has a falling out with Clarko in 2013 (not beyond the realm of possibility given their personalities) and decides to leave the Hawks after next year (and the Hawks don't get many or any FAs back to right the ledger) then you would have a hard time arguing that he is not worth at least a top five or even top three draft pick (he would be getting a huge contract wherever he goes).

Say there is a massive talent drop off after those first 5 picks. - it's often the case that a draft is relatively top heavy.

What happens to the team that originally had pick 5? Do they just get shafted to pick 6 despite having done nothing wrong? Should the AFL take the talent likely to be available with the comp. picks into account when giving them out?

3. You don't seem to understand the 'Bands of Compensation' - The "Hawks would have to finish 15th to get Pick 5 as compensation for Franklin. How likely is that scenario? And if a lowly team loses a player to massive contract, they should get a very good pick.

And it won't happen often at the top end of the draft. The highest pick that looks like being awarded at this stage is St Kilda's 13.

(Another issue related to this is 'accumulated' points that I have brought up a few times now. If we lose Bate, Moloney, and Rivers and gain Byrnes and Salopek (for example) then our 1 pick may be far better than we deserve for losing those players.)

Not such an issue when a comp pick is in the teens or later, but if a club gets shunted down the draft order in the top 5 or 10... well there would be hell to pay.

It's unworkable and creates too many possibilities for perceptions of bias and conflicts of interest.

4. So it isn't such an issue with how it is happening right now? Then why should we legislate for something that might be a problem?

The AFL have half-arsed this and it shows but scrapping compensation is not the way to go.

I would give picks for every FA lost IF their contract reached a certain level. This way only the top couple of rounds will be affected and only for the few 'bumper' FAs that will leave each season.

[picket fence 15,448]

Good luck Beamer,maybe a champion midfielder in Vossy will know how to play you.

We picked up Shannon [censored] Byrnes!!!!!!

We're going places

And in yet another fantastic piece of player management our 2011 Best and Fairest just walks away!!

I don't beleive all the bultish about not doing hard yards not conforming et al

IMO We have lost out again big time!

Just watch Beamer Rip it up with the Lions.

Good luck Beamer, a true Demon gone! Pity

[Jack Jack 415]

Anyway what can anyone do with him? This guy supposedly "bled for the club" (so happy we wont have to hear that cliche anymore btw,) yet ended his career with us at Casey.

We were a third-world midfield, and if you can't dominate in that, let alone play good, then there are some major issues with either your game or your psyche- either way you are a damaged player.

Beamer is a good person and he served us for many years, it is very hard to see a person in a negative light if 90% of the time they did the best they could for your club- so I actually do wish him luck, obviously not against us, not going to boo him or anything but I will always think what could have been. Moloney could have easily been a one club player and been a role model and mentor to the next batch of superstars coming through- instead he threw in the towel.

Tragedy

Are you saying he should have stayed at Geelong?

I agree with your sentiment though. He had some good years with us and I hope he comes good for Brisbane.

[beelzebub 22,271]

Thank you Brisbane.

[hardtack 10,127]

BM just tweeted an instagram under the hash title of "#thanksforthememories":

http://instagr.am/p/PJSfRtrpxR/

[cfe 30]

1. You don't know of Major League Baseball? You don't know the National Football League?

Yes, but their systems are so dissimilar to ours that I don't consider them in the same league. I must admit I have only a superficial knowledge of baseball, but I know the NFL system fairly well. I don't want to get into the intricacies of it all, but I'm going to generalise and say that the NFL/MLB systems are complex, based on a well defined and publicised criteria and designed to minimise the impact on other teams.

You may be aware the that highest possible compensation pick that you can get from the NFL draft compensation is an end of 3rd round pick. In a roughly 250 strong draft, you're looking at pick 95 (highest pick ever awarded was to Oakland this year at 95 IIRC). That's about 40% of the way through the draft.

Brendon Goddard is mooted to get the saints pick 13 in a roughly 90 player draft. That's in the top 15% of picks in the very first season of the compensation system to a mid table team for a player that a lot of people don't think is that good.

2. You are right but removing compensation for losing top quality players isn't the answer. St Kilda deserve Pick 13 for Goddard. Perhaps the NFL model of having a level of offer to get to before picks are allocated is preferable. That way only the most expensive contracts will be rewarded with a pick. Right now some teams are not signing UFAs and trading for RFAs because it may affect their compensation pick. If teams were given picks for every FA they lost this wouldn't be an issue.

Picks per player lost would be even worse, in my opinion. The draft order would be so convoluted and so many teams would be shunted around that the only people who knew where there club truly stood would be list managers. Supporters would have no certainty. Certainly, if they are going to retain a compensatory model, though, they need a far more precise, transparent and speedy system for making compensation picks known.

I don't understand why St Kilda "deserve" anything for Goddard. Every FA or RFA has given their club 8 years of their lives. St Kilda got some very good football from Goddard and nearly won a premiership. If they choose not to resign him at his adjudged market value, it is their decision and their loss.

3. You don't seem to understand the 'Bands of Compensation' - The "Hawks would have to finish 15th to get Pick 5 as compensation for Franklin. How likely is that scenario? And if a lowly team loses a player to massive contract, they should get a very good pick.

And it won't happen often at the top end of the draft. The highest pick that looks like being awarded at this stage is St Kilda's 13.

Of course the Hawks would have to finish down the bottom to get a high pick. Teams fall from grace at a fairly meteoric rate all the time. St Kilda was predicted to be a cellar dweller this year by many, despite still having a few stars around. And what if these stars decide to leave because they don't want to be part of a rebuilding project?

Say the Saints had finished 15th this year. As a first band player, the Goddard pick would presumably slot in right after St Kildas natural first selection in the draft. So what happens to the team that originally pinned their hopes on the high draft pick? They get shafted. Their fans feel cheated.

Or does the AFL instead choose to use their "discretion" in deciding that this would be an "anomalous result" and say that they are only giving the Saints pick 10? St Kilda fans feel cheated. The fans of the team that originally had pick 10 feel cheated as well. Everyone ends up hating the AFL and accusing them of bias one way or another.

4. So it isn't such an issue with how it is happening right now? Then why should we legislate for something that might be a problem?

I think its an issue right now, or I wouldn't have brought it up. This year people are still getting used to this system and don't seem to have quite worked out how unfair it is on other clubs. People won't get too upset about going from pick 13 to pick 14. Also the picks haven't actually been released yet.

The reaction will be very different when a team (also, presumably, a "lowly" team who really needs the pick) gets pushed from pick 4 to pick 5 and can't take that KPF everyone has been raving about.

Legislating retrospectively is a very poor approach to anything and I'm surprised that you seem to be suggesting it. It's very obvious that these issues have the potential to crop up. Better to fix the system as soon as possible, before something goes wrong.

I would give picks for every FA lost IF their contract reached a certain level. This way only the top couple of rounds will be affected and only for the few 'bumper' FAs that will leave each season.

The top rounds have by far the most impact on a team's success. If we are going to go with this system, then they should be the ones that are protected, a la the NFL.

Edited October 10, 2012 by cfe

[King Kunta 97]

1. You don't know of Major League Baseball? You don't know the National Football League?

2. You are right but removing compensation for losing top quality players isn't the answer. St Kilda deserve Pick 13 for Goddard. Perhaps the NFL model of having a level of offer to get to before picks are allocated is preferable. That way only the most expensive contracts will be rewarded with a pick. Right now some teams are not signing UFAs and trading for RFAs because it may affect their compensation pick. If teams were given picks for every FA they lost this wouldn't be an issue.

3. You don't seem to understand the 'Bands of Compensation' - The "Hawks would have to finish 15th to get Pick 5 as compensation for Franklin. How likely is that scenario? And if a lowly team loses a player to massive contract, they should get a very good pick.

And it won't happen often at the top end of the draft. The highest pick that looks like being awarded at this stage is St Kilda's 13.

(Another issue related to this is 'accumulated' points that I have brought up a few times now. If we lose Bate, Moloney, and Rivers and gain Byrnes and Salopek (for example) then our 1 pick may be far better than we deserve for losing those players.)

4. So it isn't such an issue with how it is happening right now? Then why should we legislate for something that might be a problem?

The AFL have half-arsed this and it shows but scrapping compensation is not the way to go.

I would give picks for every FA lost IF their contract reached a certain level. This way only the top couple of rounds will be affected and only for the few 'bumper' FAs that will leave each season.

The NFL FA compensation is nothing like AFL's, the earliest any team gets are end of third rounders. Teams don't plan to try and protect their potential first round compensation and the like. The AFL should adopt the same, give very minimal compensation if at all.

[cfe 30]

This morning I thought of another couple of potential problems with this system:

1. It creates further incentives for tanking, something that we can all agree is not needed.

If you're a team that's on the slide, and you know that your star player is going to head off in search of success at the end of the year, you have an incentive to fall as far as possible in order that you are awarded the highest possible compensation pick after your natural first round selection. The incentive to tank is almost doubled.

You also almost have an incentive to encourage that player to leave in FA. You don't want to keep them because you don't want to pay big money to a player while you're languishing at the bottom of the ladder - you'd rather they move on because then you get the benefit of the high draft pick. This is not good for the game.

2. It produces completely different results for the same player depending on their team. Buddy leaving top of the ladder hawthorn would be worth pick 19. Buddy leaving bottom rung Melbourne would be worth pick 3. That is a gigantic gap in terms of the quality of the pick awarded.

Edited October 10, 2012 by cfe

[beelzebub 22,271]

In the same Vein that ol Eddie speaks of ex-pat Filth, that they'd always be considered Pies and welcome at the Filthdom so too would I think Beamer and similar at Melbourne. There are exceptions and at the risk of banning just leave it there lol