I think every team has to delist a min. of three bb

But with the Bombers exclusion from the first two rounds of the draft I have no idea what that means to them.

Any idea?

does it mean you have to delist 3,,, or does it mean you have to take Min' 3 from the draft?

or can you churn 3 via trades?

i assume our offer will be better so the only thing on offer is finals, which will depend of ASADA.

Why would our offer be necessarily better ? They , the Mess , have more to play with. we are trying to coax players to us ; that will cost.

We have to be efficient with our money.

What is that good case? If you believe in equalisation, then the AFL handing out compensation helps weaker clubs who have their good players poached by rich clubs. It's not any restraint of trade because the compensation is independent of the deal between the FA player and his new club(*). Of course if you don't believe in equalisation, then it is another story.

(*) except in the extremely weak sense that the new club might not want to take the FA player if it knows that the club he is coming from might gain some benefit from the AFL. But compared to the other vagaries of the draw etc whereby the AFL advantages some clubs over others, this is not significant. For example, it is a similarly weak restraint of trade for a player to be discouraged from moving to us if the AFL gives us bad draws.

Compensation is an unnecessary complication IMO - it makes FA a pseudo trade market which has the potential to gum up the works and and creates the unhealthy discussion about whether Sylvia is worth pick 19 or 35 and causes funky things like the Monfries trade to avoid compensation dilution. The salary cap prevents rich clubs poaching weak clubs players. The compensation is salary cap space. Nothing will protect successful clubs poaching unsuccessful clubs players but that is a different story.

Compensation is an unnecessary complication IMO - it makes FA a pseudo trade market which has the potential to gum up the works and and creates the unhealthy discussion about whether Sylvia is worth pick 19 or 35 and causes funky things like the Monfries trade to avoid compensation dilution. The salary cap prevents rich clubs poaching weak clubs players. The compensation is salary cap space. Nothing will protect successful clubs poaching unsuccessful clubs players but that is a different story.

OK. But in the unequal battle to have an 'equal' competition you need every leg-up for the weak clubs you can muster. As you indicate in your last sentence, the cap is not enough. I'm not sure that the discussion about whether Sylvia is worth pick x or y is relevant. What does it matter? Just an internal matter for the AFL who can be trusted to be consistent (ha ha). So how is it unhealthy? Sorry, I'm not familiar with the Monfries situation so I may be missing something.

OK. But in the unequal battle to have an 'equal' competition you need every leg-up for the weak clubs you can muster. As you indicate in your last sentence, the cap is not enough. I'm not sure that the discussion about whether Sylvia is worth pick x or y is relevant. What does it matter? Just an internal matter for the AFL who can be trusted to be consistent (ha ha). So how is it unhealthy? Sorry, I'm not familiar with the Monfries situation so I may be missing something.

Port lost D Pearce and Chaplin in free agency last year. Then were ready to sign Monfries. But they did the maths on losing Pearce and Chaplin and worked out for their sake they were better sending a pick to Essendon for Monfries (who gladly accepted something over nothing) and then receiving better compensation.

Melbourne should've done the same thing as we lost Rivers and Moloney and brought in Byrnes. If we traded a late rubbish pick to Geel for Byrnes we may well have got better compo for Moloney and Rivers.

I actually agree with compensation because the FA market place is so weak. Who were St Kilda meant to replace Goddard with? If Frawley leaves where are the good key defenders on the FA market? It's not EPL or NFL where you just sign a similar player from some other team on a big market.

Port lost D Pearce and Chaplin in free agency last year. Then were ready to sign Monfries. But they did the maths on losing Pearce and Chaplin and worked out for their sake they were better sending a pick to Essendon for Monfries (who gladly accepted something over nothing) and then receiving better compensation.

Melbourne should've done the same thing as we lost Rivers and Moloney and brought in Byrnes. If we traded a late rubbish pick to Geel for Byrnes we may well have got better compo for Moloney and Rivers.

I actually agree with compensation because the FA market place is so weak. Who were St Kilda meant to replace Goddard with? If Frawley leaves where are the good key defenders on the FA market? It's not EPL or NFL where you just sign a similar player from some other team on a big market.

Thanks for the explanation. So it does make pseudo market as 55 said. But I don't feel that Port's machinations for example interfere with the FA market in such a serious way that it should rule out the benefits of compensation. However, I suspect if I was a supporter of a powerful club I'd be keen on no compensation.

Fifty 5 FA compo for mine comes under the same umbrella as PP...if its on offer..I'll take it.

We thought we were doing the clever thing when we got Byrnes in FD. The afl initially said that you would get a pick based on the net loss of players and us getting a low player would mean our loss of two medium level players would mean 1 goo pick as opposed to two average picks.

It didn't work as pressure was applied by some that said we were getting rid of Moloney like Geelong of Byrnes.

Anyway, it was clever but not thought out as clarification should have be asked for.

Port did the right thing, learning from our experience, and got two band three for Chaplin and Pearce and snagged Monfries from a grateful Essendon who would have lost him for nothing.

I would simplify the comp but not get rid of it, I agree if it is going to be an impediment to movement it needs to be tweaked.

It's reported by Greg Denham. 'Nuff said

It's reported by Greg Denham. 'Nuff said

what ?

And with whom and how would we replace an experienced hard bodied player.

Certainly not with what we would receive as compensation.

Would prefer to keep Col than see him walk to Essendon for next to nothing, especially since Roos has intimated that he would like him to stay.

While no one is irreplaceable the fact is we are short of experience and older hard bodies, both of which is a tick for Sylvia.

He has been a much more consistent player over the past two seasons and I hope he stays.

While I agree with your take on his output over the last few years, it is obviously up to Col whether he stays or goes. So as to your initial query: Daniel Cross, for one would more than adequately play his role while younger bodies come on.

I got the phone call about the raffle today from MFC. In the call she said that Sylvia had signed a 3 year deal and Sylvia signed on so should I. Just wondering why this hasn't been reported. Phone call at 2:14pm.

While I agree with your take on his output over the last few years, it is obviously up to Col whether he stays or goes. So as to your initial query: Daniel Cross, for one would more than adequately play his role while younger bodies come on.

Thing is Cross IS a mid...Col isnt. This is also where we need to look to as to his value "today' A number of ppl can fill the position that Col currently occupies, from within..or import. Mids ... well this is our dire need

I got the phone call about the raffle today from MFC. In the call she said that Sylvia had signed a 3 year deal and Sylvia signed on so should I. Just wondering why this hasn't been reported. Phone call at 2:14pm.

I think they were confusing Col for Jack Watts.

Unfortunately, Col is entertaining suitors.

I got the phone call about the raffle today from MFC. In the call she said that Sylvia had signed a 3 year deal and Sylvia signed on so should I. Just wondering why this hasn't been reported. Phone call at 2:14pm.

Did she have an Indian accent?

i assume our offer will be better so the only thing on offer is finals, which will depend of ASADA.

Not necessarily. Dons lose Crameri -frees up some $s.

Also Dons have no draft picks, so to improve their list they must trade in. With no draft picks to trade, they must target free agents and throw $s. So who is there? Thomas, restricted and Sylvia, unrestricted. Not much else?

So it will be $s if Sylvia gets to the Dons.

My only problem is: if Sylvia goes, who do we spend our salary cap on?

Geez.

We turn on our own very quickly...

Quickly??

10 years at the club?? Never inside the top 5 in the B&F??

He'll be a star one day that boy.Mark my words. Just wait til he gets a full pre season....

Writing is on the wall. Hate to state the obvious, but for anyone for any club who hasn't signed yet, they're going to be looking at their options.

Col is one of those.

I think they were confusing Col for Jack Watts.

Unfortunately, Col is entertaining suitors.

I don't think it's unfortunate at all, for me there's a big difference between Rivers exploring his options last year and Col this year. I hope he is offered a modest contract and if he chooses to leave so be it.

Edited September 26, 201311 yr by Al's Demons

Sylvia is pretty good icing.... To bad we don't have a cake....

I don't know why there is any free agent compo anyway

Restraint of trade if you ask me........

restraint of trade? you unshackle the finances of the AFL (the salary cap is a clear restraint of trade also), and you'll be watching collingwood vs west coast grand finals every year for the next millennia.

Isn't he overseas with his mrs?

Fair enough he hasn't signed a contract yet, he is partying it up in the US.

Maybe once he gets to tullamarine and still hasn't signed, then we can turn on him.

P.s. surely no one would go to efc with the asada crap still hanging round...

Isn't he overseas with his mrs?

Fair enough he hasn't signed a contract yet, he is partying it up in the US.

Maybe once he gets to tullamarine and still hasn't signed, then we can turn on him.

P.s. surely no one would go to efc with the asada crap still hanging round...

A reunion with Dean Bailey maybe?

The pitchforks have been out for Sylvia for years now.

Deservedly so.

It's amazing how perceptions of how good a player could be lead to people turning on their own.

It's especially sad when the bloke bleeds red and blue and has done his absolute best during a horrendous period for the club.