The bottom line is that the club could not afford to fail in the strategy of the last 7 years.

That it failed as bad as it did, Free Agency will hurt for a few more years yet.

His contract was apparently very front loaded and when you factor in the sort of money Dawes, Clark, Watts, Grimes Jones and Howe are on it's not all that surprising, nomatter what he does at the end of 2014 i imagine he will be earning at least twice as much

if he's not in the top 25% that means he's not in the top 10 pay-wise......hard to believe front-end or not

Why do we not have articles explaining why Dunn is not signed.

he is lucky to even still be on our list. can't get angry about him not having a contract past this year based on a "good pre-season", if that was the case then Maric would still be on our list too

thanks AFL for continuing to kill the smaller clubs

So much for equalization

Odd. But it is what it is.

He'd be really nice to keep as FB's don't grow on trees. FB's that can play tall or short moreso.

Dunn... meh.

I agree he signed that contract 12 to 18 months before free agency was even introduced, do we still get a first round pick for him ?

In theory, the compensation should be the same, however, UFA has had a 'stigma' (for a lack of a better word) that has led the AFL to the view that because they have been at their club so long they have 'paid their dues' so to speak and the club will be compensated less.

This has led (and other issues) to people calling for the removal of compensation entirely for UFA.

Thankfully, this has not been realised just yet, but this decision will have a massive effect on our leverage with Frawley and diminishes our ability to keep him. There is now no threat of the draft, and now no trade to be done should he wish to leave.

We are now completely at the mercy of James and if he does go, the AFL compensation committee.

Darkhorse is right - they should appeal.

Way to prevent blowouts AFL. Let a bottom team have 2 of there best 6 backmen leave to better clubs.

In theory, the compensation should be the same, however, UFA has had a 'stigma' (for a lack of a better word) that has led the AFL to the view that because they have been at their club so long they have 'paid their dues' so to speak and the club will be compensated less.

This has led (and other issues) to people calling for the removal of compensation entirely for UFA.

Thankfully, this has not been realised just yet, but this decision will have a massive effect on our leverage with Frawley and diminishes our ability to keep him. There is now no threat of the draft, and now no trade to be done should he wish to leave.

We are now completely at the mercy of James and if he does go, the AFL compensation committee.

Darkhorse is right - they should appeal.

surely there is a case to argue that his "ufa salary" should be his total-contract-salary / contract-length to avoid such anomolies

Way to prevent blowouts AFL. Let a bottom team have 2 of there best 6 backmen leave to better clubs.

Dunn has been an UFA before.

No offence to Lynden, but if you could find 10 people on here worried about Dunn leaving the way you are - I would be surprised.

surely there is a case to argue that his "ufa salary" should be his total-contract-salary / contract-length to avoid such anomolies

Absolutely.

Lawyers assemble.

Twist some arms, Peter. What a ridiculous ruling.

Dunn is hitting his prime. Almost always wins his 1 on 1 contests and has been a highlight in defence this pre-season. Would be a big blow to lose a tough defender and probably the best kick of our back 6.

I honestly can't see much of a difference between rfa and ufa in Frawley's case.

St Kilda set the restricted free agent precedent by not matching Goddard's offer. I doubt mfc would match Chip's offer if he was a restricted free agent and entertaining offers elsewhere.

Saturday did not help matters.

Garland, Dunn, even Tom McDonald, Wait for the replacement, I think we'll be ok He wont come Chipp Chipp Chipp though whoever takes him. sstill hope he stays

At the moment if they keep the same compensation it's better if Frawley is unrestricted. The club would be a horrible position getting a massive offer from another club held over them and then either setting a bad precedent in player payments or having to let him go. We've now got a much simpler proposition. Get the signature or let him go.

I wouldn't like to lose Dunn but i don't concern myself about players leaving after Scully what's the point, if Frawley goes and that non playing FF Clarks contract is front loaded we should have a massive amount of money to spend on a star.

We've already got Dawes !

If he signs he stays.

How wonderful. Of course there is a loophole that gets him out.

But despite how good he is, if he is not proud of wearing the red and blue, then he can defect to bloody Collingwood for all I care.

I don't want to see us held hostage by a player again

He'll stay.

Likes his mates too much to leave.

surely there is a case to argue that his "ufa salary" should be his total-contract-salary / contract-length to avoid such anomolies

Agree. Given his contract was done before current FA rules, the AFL should look at the contract as a whole.

The FA rules certainly aren't going to do us many favours in the future. At the end of the day, if we win more they will want to stay more.

Saturday did not help matters.

Saturday won't make any difference to anything. He's either decided to go already or the first half of the H&A will decide it for him - one way or the other.

Edit: lost track of the day. Not unusual for me though. I was [censored] off to find it was only Tuesday today and I wouldn't be able to read the training reports.

I'm still trying to find where in that article it mentioned either chip or Dunn leaving? Such is the outcry on here. How about we leave it to roos and the like to turn things around and show some genuine direction, in which case frawley will sign!

I honestly can't see much of a difference between rfa and ufa in Frawley's case.

St Kilda set the restricted free agent precedent by not matching Goddard's offer. I doubt mfc would match Chip's offer if he was a restricted free agent and entertaining offers elsewhere.

Saturday did not help matters.

You mean a practice match may determine his long-term future at the club?

This whole process give me the shitzs.

It's better to know now than have a year of "will he wont he stay" again and again year after year.

We will end up like rugby in that players will come out at the start of the year with one yr remaining on their current contract and say I am playing next three seasons with the hawks for example.

It's such a shame we had to go down this path but lets not forget the players wanted this.

I am really tired of liking certain players then they leave.

He'll stay.

Likes his mates too much to leave.

Unfortunately loyalty to your mates just doesn't suffice any more.

Ablett

Franklin

Thomas

Sylvia

Voldemort etc

Money speaks loudest. Success second-loudest. Neither of which we possess currently

Way to prevent blowouts AFL. Let a bottom team have 2 of there best 6 backmen leave to better clubs.

Lets face it if Chip walks to the Hawks or Cats or other top club the trend would be hard to ignore; MFC as feeder club to the rich and successful! We do the development, the top club just pays the money and tops up where ever they may have a gap. Rivers, Maloney, Silvia, I think we are running at 100% hit rate for UFA so far and so early into free agency. The only good news is the AFL decided to keep the current compo rules, so we may get something if Chip walks.

Interesting that the AFL players association is working so hard to develop a two tiered competition of the winners and the feeders just to pander to the wishes of their elite players. Of the 800 players on lists free agency really helps a very small number of top shelf players. Your average journeyman has to battle for a contract, they don't get to play clubs off against each other to bid up their contract income.