Sydney get Buddy, Carlton get Thomas, we get all excited about possibly getting Viv Michie.

He might come to us and he might even be a good player for us.

The point that I find perplexing is that he has played 1 senior match in 3 years which, in MHO is not a lot to get excited about.

Or am I missing something?

I guess he's reported as saying that he wants to play for us (or Paul Roos), so that makes him rather unique.

Got it. Moving on.

Sydney get Buddy, Carlton get Thomas, we get all excited about possibly getting Viv Michie.

He might come to us and he might even be a good player for us.

The point that I find perplexing is that he has played 1 senior match in 3 years which, in MHO is not a lot to get excited about.

Or am I missing something?

I guess he's reported as saying that he wants to play for us (or Paul Roos), so that makes him rather unique.

If I were a Swans supporter, I'd hardly be excited about the Franklin deal.

In fact, I genuinely think it's the dumbest deal I've ever observed.

And as for Daisy Thomas - not sure I'd be paying so much for an out of form half forward flanker.

And as for Daisy Thomas - not sure I'd be paying so much for an out of form half forward flanker.

With dodgy ankles.

If I were a Swans supporter, I'd hardly be excited about the Franklin deal.

In fact, I genuinely think it's the dumbest deal I've ever observed.

And as for Daisy Thomas - not sure I'd be paying so much for an out of form half forward flanker.

Agreed.

If we got Franklin and were giving him the same deal I would be furious

Sydney get Buddy, Carlton get Thomas, we get all excited about possibly getting Viv Michie.

He might come to us and he might even be a good player for us.

The point that I find perplexing is that he has played 1 senior match in 3 years which, in MHO is not a lot to get excited about.

Or am I missing something?

I guess he's reported as saying that he wants to play for us (or Paul Roos), so that makes him rather unique.

I reckon we've done alright. I'd take Roos over Buddy and Thomas every day of the week.

It's probably more based on his WAFL performances, rather than his 1 senior appearance. He is the type of player that we need anyhow.

matty bate used to put some impressive VFL performances in.

Agreed.

If we got Franklin and were giving him the same deal I would be furious

Not to forget that they've effectively chopped out a stack of good talls in Mumford, White and Reid.

Reid is still there.

Reid is still there.

Headed for the backline.

You would expect so.

It'll be interesting to see how the Buddy deal plays out.

Might be failure, might be great work. Salary cap will likely double in 10 years, so his wage will be a drop in the oceans of cash splashed around.

matty bate used to put some impressive VFL performances in.

So did Sam Mitchell.

Apparently Viv's got the pace that Bate never did, makes a big difference.

Matty Bate...

Turning circle of a tugboat.

Awkward action for everything he did on the field.

He could run fast in straight lines once he built up enough speed, but don't ask him to change direction.

I'm confident Michie is nothing like Bate.

And as for Daisy Thomas - not sure I'd be paying so much for an out of form half forward flanker.

What is even more perplexing is that the Pies are expected to receive pick 11 as compensation for that out of form half forward flanker with dodgy ankles.

Edited October 14, 201311 yr by P-man

What was Daisy's B&F finish like..?

It's not so much that he's out of form, it's that his ankle health is suspect.

What was Daisy's B&F finish like..?

It's not so much that he's out of form, it's that his ankle health is suspect.

and that he is being offered a $700,000 a year contract ...

_{Looking at Freo's website and found this interesting little detail:}

Viv Michie

Junior Clubs: Fitzroy
Clubs: Fremantle
Draft information: National Draft 2010, pick 44
Debut: Yet to debut
Recruited from: Oakleigh Chargers
Brownlow Votes:

It's been rumoured that he wants to play under Roosy - I wonder if there is more to it and there is a connection to the Roy boys somehow.....or just a coincidence?

Edited October 14, 201311 yr by Roosy's Bruisers

What is even more perplexing is that the Pies are expected to receive pick 11 as compensation for that out of form half forward flanker.

who hasn't played in 2 years.

It basically will prove that the "compensation" is based only on money paid and perception of quality, not actual value to clubs.

Also they take into account "age", which I assume is so that they factor in how many years a player has left (ie in theory, a 26 year old FA has more years left than a 30 year old FA) however in not sure that it is fair that the AFL predicts how many years a player has left in their career as part of a formula. Some players are shot by 29, some last till 35. Is Daisy worth pick 11? To Collingwood us, but would anyone have paid that for him given his injuries?

who hasn't played in 2 years.

It basically will prove that the "compensation" is based only on money paid and perception of quality, not actual value to clubs.

Also they take into account "age", which I assume is so that they factor in how many years a player has left (ie in theory, a 26 year old FA has more years left than a 30 year old FA) however in not sure that it is fair that the AFL predicts how many years a player has left in their career as part of a formula. Some players are shot by 29, some last till 35. Is Daisy worth pick 11? To Collingwood us, but would anyone have paid that for him given his injuries?

True. Even taking age and money into account, the formula needs tweaking if Daisy is worth Pick 11. As it stands, or limps, he plainly isn't.

There's a little comfort in knowing that there isn't a huge variance in quality from Pick 2-20, compared to previous years.

True. Even taking age and money into account, the formula needs tweaking if Daisy is worth Pick 11. As it stands, or limps, he plainly isn't.

There's a little comfort in knowing that there isn't a huge variance in quality from Pick 2-20, compared to previous years.

Hopefully the AFL doesn't work to a strict formula and that they take certain intangibles into account (this compo system is now only in its second year and they are surely still tweaking it)... the impact of a player's loss should play a significant part, and it could easily be said that Sylvia's loss will have a far greater impact on the MFC than Thomas' loss will have on the CFC. Not only are we losing a player who was showing form in the second half of the year, but we are losing one of our more experienced players and therefore the impact on the young playing group will be more significant.

The other thing I am hoping for is that the AFL will see this as a chance to give a little back after dangling the prospect of a PP in front of us and then taking it away... after all, they are not entirely against us as has been proven with the assistance package, the installing of PJ and, I am guessing, their not insignificant help in getting Roos across the line.

Edited October 14, 201311 yr by hardtack

Hopefully the AFL doesn't work to a strict formula and that they take certain intangibles into account (this compo system is now only in its second year and they are surely still tweaking it)... the impact of a player's loss should play a significant part, and it could easily be said that Sylvia's loss will have a far greater impact on the MFC than Thomas' loss will have on the CFC. Not only are we losing a player who was showing form in the second half of the year, but we are losing one of our more experienced players and therefore the impact on the young playing group will be more significant.

The other thing I am hoping for is that the AFL will see this as a chance to give a little back after dangling the prospect of a PP in front of us and then taking it away... after all, they are not entirely against us as has been proven with the assistance package, the installing of PJ and, I am guessing, their not insignificant help in getting Roos across the line.

Respectfully, I disagree.

The system already overcompensates lower teams and under compensates higher teams because the picks are handed out after ladder position. The formula in theory works to establish the band, which is consistent across all teams, and then the team's ladder position modifies to be better or worse because it is tied to another pick.

If Daisy gets band 1, it's because he would have been on huge money at Collingwood and a huge offer from Carlton. I wonder if 'time spent injured' figures at all into their formula. Maybe they do have an 'injury prone' modifier or something that will reduce his value. But who knows? The AFL isn't known for its transparency.

Hopefully the AFL doesn't work to a strict formula and that they take certain intangibles into account (this compo system is now only in its second year and they are surely still tweaking it)... the impact of a player's loss should play a significant part, and it could easily be said that Sylvia's loss will have a far greater impact on the MFC than Thomas' loss will have on the CFC. Not only are we losing a player who was showing form in the second half of the year, but we are losing one of our more experienced players and therefore the impact on the young playing group will be more significant.

The other thing I am hoping for is that the AFL will see this as a chance to give a little back after dangling the prospect of a PP in front of us and then taking it away... after all, they are not entirely against us as has been proven with the assistance package, the installing of PJ and, I am guessing, their not insignificant help in getting Roos across the line.

you can be assured the afl will take into account intangibles

only problem is you will never know what they are - lol

Respectfully, I disagree.

The system already overcompensates lower teams and under compensates higher teams because the picks are handed out after ladder position. The formula in theory works to establish the band, which is consistent across all teams, and then the team's ladder position modifies to be better or worse because it is tied to another pick.

If Daisy gets band 1, it's because he would have been on huge money at Collingwood and a huge offer from Carlton. I wonder if 'time spent injured' figures at all into their formula. Maybe they do have an 'injury prone' modifier or something that will reduce his value. But who knows? The AFL isn't known for its transparency.

I do understand what you are saying, but surely it should be equated to the money that a player is on relative to their team mates? That is, was Sylvia one of our higher paid players? If so, then we are losing a highly valued player. I may be thick when it comes to such things, but I really cannot understand why the amount offered to a player should in any way affect the compensation levels for the club losing the player.

If I were a Swans supporter, I'd hardly be excited about the Franklin deal.

In fact, I genuinely think it's the dumbest deal I've ever observed.

And as for Daisy Thomas - not sure I'd be paying so much for an out of form half forward flanker.

It is a bit of a ridiculous deal.

Although if his acquisition turns out to be a paramount step to acquire another premiership within their next nine years and further grow their local supporter base I would consider that a massive win and excellent move from the Swans. If the Dees were in a similar position and looking more likely to win another flag I would happily pay overs to improve the chances of obtaining that flag.

Alternatively if they don't it will be a massive failure.

Time will tell.

Edit: Phone related typos

Edited October 15, 201311 yr by ignition.

Compensation isn't about actual fair compensation for the team losing a player.

It's another equalisation measure.

I do understand what you are saying, but surely it should be equated to the money that a player is on relative to their team mates? That is, was Sylvia one of our higher paid players? If so, then we are losing a highly valued player. I may be thick when it comes to such things, but I really cannot understand why the amount offered to a player should in any way affect the compensation levels for the club losing the player.

As I understand it, that is correct.

Sylvia may earn proportionately more than Daisy does when compared to their team mates. However the incoming contract for Daisy will be well above what Sylvia will be getting, as well as a longer duration I think. Both are factors as I understand it.