Patrick Dangerfield

[nutbean 8,838]

Why would he come here? Could go anywhere he wanted.

We don't offer enough other than money and possibly Roos.

I think posters forget this. We are hardly an attractive proposition - especially when other successful clubs can offer big bucks to players as well.

[corowa 216]

I think posters forget this. We are hardly an attractive proposition - especially when other successful clubs can offer big bucks to players as well.

How can 'successful' clubs offer 'big bucks' to 'steal' good players from other clubs? Unless, of course, that these 'big bucks' are in brown paper bags of the kind notoriously associated with dubious politicians.

How can the Hawthorns of the competition keep most of their players, when many would be paid only a fraction of what they would get if they went to clubs like MFC? Does on field 'success' provide greater and longer inducement than 'wealth'? Not for the likes of Ablett and Scully and perhaps Franklin.

'Top' clubs don't need to rely on top draft picks, they have a much more reliable system available to them - it's called 'free agency'. All they have to do is sit back and wait for 'weak' clubs to recruit and develop top young talent and then plunder them with offers of providing a winning and successful environment.

It is reported that Geelong could get Frawley and Clark to add to Rivers. How would we look with Taylor, Hawkins and Stevie J in our team? And how would Geelong look without them?

Free agency? It will destroy many teams and create a two tier competition, if it hasn't already done this. Hawthorn have won 53 of 66 'home and away' matches in the last three years. We have won 10 and lost 56. Is it any wonder that many of us give up in disgust.

[Norm Smith's Curse 2,589]

According to trade radio - no deal unless the club wants one.

[s-t-i-n-g-a 439]

You have to take into account that free agency was introduced at a time that the AFL removed the priority pick and two new teams dominated the draft. It has been a perfect storm for bottom clubs like ours.

[John Crow Batty 8,860]

I find amusing the comment on the radio this morning by Dangerfields manager Paul Conners that goes something like "I haven't spoken to him in 2 weeks but I think he would like to stay at Adelaide". Something big is cooking.

[DemonOX 8,779]

Something big is cooking.

Probably but not for us I wouldn't think.

[Devo 104]

I think posters forget this. We are hardly an attractive proposition - especially when other successful clubs can offer big bucks to players as well.

Agree. Doing a deal now is attractive to Adelaide if Danger is set on leaving via FA next year, and it's also attractive to Melbourne for obvious reasons. It just makes no sense for Danger himself from a career standpoint, if indeed he is all about premierships and winning (rather than cash).

I'd love him to turn up at Melbourne though, it puts the club back on the map as a credible destination for talent.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

You have to take into account that free agency was introduced at a time that the AFL removed the priority pick and two new teams dominated the draft. It has been a perfect storm for bottom clubs like ours.

True, but we had our chances. We failed due to poor management and coaching. These issues on thier own can be corrected quite quickly.

Poor recruiting however has a much longer lasting effect. Our playing assets have been going backwards for years.

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

I wrote this in the equalisation thread a few weeks ago and I want to repost it. It breaks my heart to see what is going on with our great competition. I no longer have expectations that the MFC will ever play in a GF again....... this is not right. The reason is FA. It simply does not allow teams like Melbourne any opportunity to climb the ladder. Every year since FA came in we have lost a top 5 player. This year we will lose our best KP player in defence and our best KP player in attack. 2 of our top 5 (one to FA). How can any team rise when they lose there best players at the end of each season to the leading clubs. Unless urgent changes are made to FA Melbourne and other teams will die and the competition will be weaker as a result.

This is what I propose as from the Equalisation Thread:

FA is destroying our competition. Between 1996 and 2006 every team played off in a Preliminary Final, now we have a two tier comp with the smaller clubs nothing more than feeder teams for the large clubs. The AFL needs to step in quickly before its too late. The AFL needs to adopt the US NFL FA system and must urgently make the following adjustments.

Tier 1: Teams 1 - 4: Forbidden from Free Agency. These teams can only lose players not gain players. There is no compensation for lost players.

Tier 2: Teams 5 - 8: Restricted Free Agency. These teams can only gain players if they lose players. There is no other compensation.

Tier 3: Teams 9 - 12: Open Free Agency: These teams can poach FA with no restrictions, they can also lose players to FA. No draft compensation.

Tier 4: Teams 13 -16: Open Free Agency but can't lose players. All players wishing to leave must be traded. Therefore no draft compensation required.

Making these changes would reverse the flow of players. The good teams would lose players to the poor teams, the reverse to which it is today. The big teams will still have an advantage when down the ladder as naturally players will want to play for them.

I call on the AFL to urgently make these changes for the long term health of our competition. No one wants to see the same teams win every year like in the EPL. AFL is only played in Australia, destroy the competition and the sport will suffer.

[Guest]

I wrote this in the equalisation thread a few weeks ago and I want to repost it. It breaks my heart to see what is going on with our great competition. I no longer have expectations that the MFC will ever play in a GF again....... this is not right. The reason is FA. It simply does not allow teams like Melbourne any opportunity to climb the ladder. Every year since FA came in we have lost a top 5 player. This year we will lose our best KP player in defence and our best KP player in attack. 2 of our top 5 (one to FA). How can any team rise when they lose there best players at the end of each season to the leading clubs. Unless urgent changes are made to FA Melbourne and other teams will die and the competition will be weaker as a result.

This is what I propose as from the Equalisation Thread:

FA is destroying our competition. Between 1996 and 2006 every team played off in a Preliminary Final, now we have a two tier comp with the smaller clubs nothing more than feeder teams for the large clubs. The AFL needs to step in quickly before its too late. The AFL needs to adopt the US NFL FA system and must urgently make the following adjustments.

Tier 1: Teams 1 - 4: Forbidden from Free Agency. These teams can only lose players not gain players. There is no compensation for lost players.

Tier 2: Teams 5 - 8: Restricted Free Agency. These teams can only gain players if they lose players. There is no other compensation.

Tier 3: Teams 9 - 12: Open Free Agency: These teams can poach FA with no restrictions, they can also lose players to FA. No draft compensation.

Tier 4: Teams 13 -16: Open Free Agency but can't lose players. All players wishing to leave must be traded. Therefore no draft compensation required.

Making these changes would reverse the flow of players. The good teams would lose players to the poor teams, the reverse to which it is today. The big teams will still have an advantage when down the ladder as naturally players will want to play for them.

I call on the AFL to urgently make these changes for the long term health of our competition. No one wants to see the same teams win every year like in the EPL. AFL is only played in Australia, destroy the competition and the sport will suffer.

Agreed GNF but my heart skipped a beat when I saw that you had posted in this thread on the main page. I was sure you were going to give us the inside word that said how we had traded pick two for Danger.

Alas, all I have to do is wait for the NSC and his positive rumblings whatever they may be.

[What 18,810]

I wrote this in the equalisation thread a few weeks ago and I want to repost it. It breaks my heart to see what is going on with our great competition. I no longer have expectations that the MFC will ever play in a GF again....... this is not right. The reason is FA. It simply does not allow teams like Melbourne any opportunity to climb the ladder. Every year since FA came in we have lost a top 5 player. This year we will lose our best KP player in defence and our best KP player in attack. 2 of our top 5 (one to FA). How can any team rise when they lose there best players at the end of each season to the leading clubs. Unless urgent changes are made to FA Melbourne and other teams will die and the competition will be weaker as a result.

This is what I propose as from the Equalisation Thread:

FA is destroying our competition. Between 1996 and 2006 every team played off in a Preliminary Final, now we have a two tier comp with the smaller clubs nothing more than feeder teams for the large clubs. The AFL needs to step in quickly before its too late. The AFL needs to adopt the US NFL FA system and must urgently make the following adjustments.

Tier 1: Teams 1 - 4: Forbidden from Free Agency. These teams can only lose players not gain players. There is no compensation for lost players.

Tier 2: Teams 5 - 8: Restricted Free Agency. These teams can only gain players if they lose players. There is no other compensation.

Tier 3: Teams 9 - 12: Open Free Agency: These teams can poach FA with no restrictions, they can also lose players to FA. No draft compensation.

Tier 4: Teams 13 -16: Open Free Agency but can't lose players. All players wishing to leave must be traded. Therefore no draft compensation required.

Making these changes would reverse the flow of players. The good teams would lose players to the poor teams, the reverse to which it is today. The big teams will still have an advantage when down the ladder as naturally players will want to play for them.

I call on the AFL to urgently make these changes for the long term health of our competition. No one wants to see the same teams win every year like in the EPL. AFL is only played in Australia, destroy the competition and the sport will suffer.

in the NBA, a players current team can offer them more money and a longer contract than rival teams in Free Agency

So for example when Jesse Hogan comes off his next contract other teams may be able to offer him a maximum 3 year deal at 500k per season, whereas the MFC would be allowed to re-sign him for 5 years at howeverr much $$ they like

We need the same thing in the AFL

[Nasher 33,607]

I call on the AFL to urgently make these changes for the long term health of our competition. No one wants to see the same teams win every year like in the EPL. AFL is only played in Australia, destroy the competition and the sport will suffer.

The problem is GNF is that FA was never introduced with the competition in mind, it was introduced with the players in mind, and probably to avoid a nasty restraint of trade lawsuit. I can't see FA becoming more restrictive of player movements. It will only remain the same, or make moving clubs even easier than it currently does.

[pitchfork 181]

I wrote this in the equalisation thread a few weeks ago and I want to repost it. It breaks my heart to see what is going on with our great competition. I no longer have expectations that the MFC will ever play in a GF again....... this is not right. The reason is FA. It simply does not allow teams like Melbourne any opportunity to climb the ladder. Every year since FA came in we have lost a top 5 player. This year we will lose our best KP player in defence and our best KP player in attack. 2 of our top 5 (one to FA). How can any team rise when they lose there best players at the end of each season to the leading clubs. Unless urgent changes are made to FA Melbourne and other teams will die and the competition will be weaker as a result.

This is what I propose as from the Equalisation Thread:

FA is destroying our competition. Between 1996 and 2006 every team played off in a Preliminary Final, now we have a two tier comp with the smaller clubs nothing more than feeder teams for the large clubs. The AFL needs to step in quickly before its too late. The AFL needs to adopt the US NFL FA system and must urgently make the following adjustments.

Tier 1: Teams 1 - 4: Forbidden from Free Agency. These teams can only lose players not gain players. There is no compensation for lost players.

Tier 2: Teams 5 - 8: Restricted Free Agency. These teams can only gain players if they lose players. There is no other compensation.

Tier 3: Teams 9 - 12: Open Free Agency: These teams can poach FA with no restrictions, they can also lose players to FA. No draft compensation.

Tier 4: Teams 13 -16: Open Free Agency but can't lose players. All players wishing to leave must be traded. Therefore no draft compensation required.

Making these changes would reverse the flow of players. The good teams would lose players to the poor teams, the reverse to which it is today. The big teams will still have an advantage when down the ladder as naturally players will want to play for them.

I call on the AFL to urgently make these changes for the long term health of our competition. No one wants to see the same teams win every year like in the EPL. AFL is only played in Australia, destroy the competition and the sport will suffer.

The players union would never agree to anything like this, and for good reason.

I'm not convinced that it's so simple as blaming the Free Agency system. In fact the Free Agency system could stay with the present rules.

I'm far from a free-market capitalist but if we are to have free agency, it is incumbent upon the league to ensure a few things:

1. Each team are able and capable of spending 100% of the salary cap.

2. There is identical List, salary cap, and spending rules for every club.

If they ensure this, there's some chance that there is balance through FA and draft process. Players might still leave for better clubs - but everyone would have the same access and capacity. Right now it is ridiculous. The Sydney team that trotted out on Saturday can pretty much be replenished annually to ensure a top 4 finish under present rules.

[John Crow Batty 8,860]

Probably but not for us I wouldn't think.

Would be a miracle if Roos could pull this trade off. A monumental confidence booster if so.

[Moneider96 1,045]

Barret indicating we are serious chances for Dangerfield, if....we give up pick 2 and 3...which apparently we don't want to.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-09-29/longmire-leaders-let-the-swans-down

[binman 42,468]

The problem is GNF is that FA was never introduced with the competition in mind, it was introduced with the players in mind, and probably to avoid a nasty restraint of trade lawsuit. I can't see FA becoming more restrictive of player movements. It will only remain the same, or make moving clubs even easier than it currently does.

America is the most litigious country on earth, surely if such restrictions can work there they can here.

By the GNF i agree 100% with your sentiments and think your idea has merit. I felt sick after the grand final lamenting with good mates who are dees fans about how we could not even imagine how it would feel like. Meanwhile i received texts from gleeful Hawks fans from the ground celebrating their 3rd flag in seven years. This is not sustainable and it is a folly - a two tier system will ultimately mean the TV rights will halve in value.

[John Crow Batty 8,860]

Barret indicating we are serious chances for Dangerfield, if....we give up pick 2 and 3...which apparently we don't want to.

I think it is worth it. We desperately need a big name to come to us. And a midfielder to boot.

[Jaded No More 68,835]

Barret indicating we are serious chances for Dangerfield, if....we give up pick 2 and 3...which apparently we don't want to.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-09-29/longmire-leaders-let-the-swans-down

Do it Melbourne.

[drdrake 3,151]

Barret indicating we are serious chances for Dangerfield, if....we give up pick 2 and 3...which apparently we don't want to.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-09-29/longmire-leaders-let-the-swans-down

We don't want to a week out from trade week, but behind close doors I bet we are willing to part with 2 and 3 but we want a pick as well as Dangerfield. To me Pick 2 and three for Dangerfield and pick 10 plus some swapping of late picks works and all parties win. Executing the deal is the easy part getting Dangerfield to wanting to come to us is the hard part.

[Biffen 12,940]

We need the ball now so we can butcher it to Hogan.

Do it MFC.

I can't handle four years of development.

[mdemonski2 403]

2 and 3 is a big ask for any player no matter who good he is.

I would rather get two top level players rather than one for those picks.

[Webber 10,448]

The problem is GNF is that FA was never introduced with the competition in mind, it was introduced with the players in mind, and probably to avoid a nasty restraint of trade lawsuit. I can't see FA becoming more restrictive of player movements. It will only remain the same, or make moving clubs even easier than it currently does.

Nail on head, Nasher. The only tool the AFL have to equalise other than through financial gifts (COLA), is through the draft. High draft picks have currency, taken as player/s or for trade. As such, each year the bottom four teams should get the top 12 picks. Those clubs would rise sooner, and the potential for future success for ALL clubs would be alive EVERY year.

[Louie 39]

The players union would never agree to anything like this, and for good reason.

I'm not convinced that it's so simple as blaming the Free Agency system. In fact the Free Agency system could stay with the present rules.

I'm far from a free-market capitalist but if we are to have free agency, it is incumbent upon the league to ensure a few things:

1. Each team are able and capable of spending 100% of the salary cap.

2. There is identical List, salary cap, and spending rules for every club.

If they ensure this, there's some chance that there is balance through FA and draft process. Players might still leave for better clubs - but everyone would have the same access and capacity. Right now it is ridiculous. The Sydney team that trotted out on Saturday can pretty much be replenished annually to ensure a top 4 finish under present rules.

It's quite a short sighted view from the players' union. If four clubs fall over then there's less employment for players, less cash to go around etc.

[Ted Lasso 19,191]

Throw in Lyons and I'd probably do it

[rjay 24,811]

The problem is GNF is that FA was never introduced with the competition in mind, it was introduced with the players in mind, and probably to avoid a nasty restraint of trade lawsuit. I can't see FA becoming more restrictive of player movements. It will only remain the same, or make moving clubs even easier than it currently does.

The sell from the AFLPA was to allow players struggling to get a game to be able to freely move to another club. I know...it's a load of BS but that's what they were pushing.

Anyone could see it would be about more money and opportunity for the top players. The only FA not getting a game that I can remember changing clubs was someone we got from Geelong.