By the way, if Harmes has signed on today does that mean the futures of Georgiou and King are still up in the air?

I'm not against keeping either of them, but at the same time I wonder if they did enough and if we will miss anything by moving them on.

For example Mitch Brown from Geelong could take Georgiou's rookie spot and play either back or forward as a depth player. I had respect for what Georgiou did at the start of the year by playing hard and physical footy and giving it a shot. But he looked very much a state league player.

You know that whole best available method of drafting thing? Where you take the talent more so than when they are ready to play. They were both 18, one had played only school footy and had more athletic traits, the other a TAC midfielder, but it's not like either were really in line for senior selection last year.

I do like Harmes. But Hunt has rare speed. I think every now and then you risk burning a late draft pick on a quick guy because it's very hard to manufacture speed.

Harry will be a great role model for Hunt to base his game on.

Are we delisting anyone from Demonland ?

Yes you Nutbean, that avatar is making me hungry!

i really like what I've seen from chomp. some of his possession gets have been really good. Interesting to see how he turns out.

Rookies are given a 1+1+1 contract.

It is utterly ridiculous that a supposed professional sport has such a nonsensical device such as the rookie list.

Paid less, less freedom than similar structures in other sports, and less security than a Primary list spot.

The rookie base was upped in current CBA so comparison for 2015 is as per below. Reasonable base given most rookies are under 21.

1 + 1 + 1 has to be more secure than a 10 day NBA contract.

2015 Salary Base/Game Base (for additional bells and whistles google the CBA!)

Non 1st/2nd Yr/Rookie - $80,815/$3,500

1st Year/1st Round - $71,515/$3,500

1st Year/2nd Round - $65,000/$3,500

1st year/3rd Round + - $61,600/$3,500

Rookie - $55,440/$3,500

Edited October 22, 201410 yr by demoniac

Rookies are given a 1+1+1 contract.

It is utterly ridiculous that a supposed professional sport has such a nonsensical device such as the rookie list.

Paid less, less freedom than similar structures in other sports, and less security than a Primary list spot.

NFL practice squad. 5k per week for the 16 week season so hardly much more money. No security. Can be cut at any time. But do have the option of being signed to any other team at any time (after which they can be cut again the next day).

Now that the minimum salary is 55k I don't feel so bad for them but it's pretty restrictive. I presume Harmes gets some VFL match payments on top of that for the games he played? Maybe 1,000 per game extra?

You could make all rookies free agents at the end of 3 years. If they aren't upgraded by then and have had 3 years of limited rewards maybe the deserve a shot to pick their club if they aren't happy at their current club. That said I presume they can be traded or not sign on for the 2nd and 3rd years and enter the drafts if they so wish.

1 + 1 + 1 has to be more secure than a 10 day NBA contract.

NFL practice squad. 5k per week for the 16 week season so hardly much more money. No security. Can be cut at any time. But do have the option of being signed to any other team at any time (after which they can be cut again the next day).

The ten-day contract and practice squad mechanisms are hardly the same as the Rookie List. The AFL has nothing like the 10-day, but would have been helpful (and a great story) for us last year in Rd 1 against the Saints - we could have hired a tall bloke for a couple of weeks.

The practice squad is coming soon to the AFL I think but the flexibility of a player in that squad makes this a much better system than the Rookie List.

The RL essentially creates subclass of players that are no different to those taken in the ND, but for some reason require these 4-6 spots on a separate mechanism - where they have less security, are paid less, and have lower guaranteed match payments.

The should scrap the RD, and the RL and simply have those players taken in the ND and placed on the primary list. For injury replacements - allow for these players to come from outside the system as agreed between them and the club

The rookie base was upped in current CBA so comparison for 2015 is as per below. Reasonable base given most rookies are under 21.

1 + 1 + 1 has to be more secure than a 10 day NBA contract.

2015 Salary Base/Game Base (for additional bells and whistles google the CBA!)

Non 1st/2nd Yr/Rookie - $80,815/$3,500

1st Year/1st Round - $71,515/$3,500

1st Year/2nd Round - $65,000/$3,500

1st year/3rd Round + - $61,600/$3,500

Rookie - $55,440/$3,500

I'd take $55 grand a year to play footy any day. Footballers have no idea just how easy they have it. Anyone who says other wise should try get on the end of a wheelbarrow full of concrete or work on as a labourer on a building site 8 hours a day 6 days a week and then tell me footballers have it tough.

I'd take $55 grand a year to play footy any day. Footballers have no idea just how easy they have it. Anyone who says other wise should try get on the end of a wheelbarrow full of concrete or work on as a labourer on a building site 8 hours a day 6 days a week and then tell me footballers have it tough.

I am not comparing the Rookie List to your job on the work site...

I am comparing it to a spot on the Primary List.

As of 2013 - I know of the experience of Nathan Stark on our rookie list and aside from being paid less and having less security than the peers he was taken with in the same off season - he was treated differently by coaches and physios compared to those on the Primary List.

I am not comparing the Rookie List to your job on the work site...

I am comparing it to a spot on the Primary List.

As of 2013 - I know of the experience of Nathan Stark on our rookie list and aside from being paid less and having less security than the peers he was taken with in the same off season - he was treated differently by coaches and physios compared to those on the Primary List.

While I agree with your basic premise that the Rookie list is an anachronism, the last point you made reflects a problem at the club, not a problem with the rookie list per se. There is no reason why and no excuse for treating players differently just because of the mechanism by which they joined the club.

I'd take $55 grand a year to play footy any day. Footballers have no idea just how easy they have it. Anyone who says other wise should try get on the end of a wheelbarrow full of concrete or work on as a labourer on a building site 8 hours a day 6 days a week and then tell me footballers have it tough.

To be honest, both jobs involve flogging your body almost 24/7...

I am not comparing the Rookie List to your job on the work site...

I am comparing it to a spot on the Primary List.

As of 2013 - I know of the experience of Nathan Stark on our rookie list and aside from being paid less and having less security than the peers he was taken with in the same off season - he was treated differently by coaches and physios compared to those on the Primary List.

Surely the problem that Nathan Stark faced was that he was so far off being an AFL player that it was clear from very early in the season that he wouldn't be at the club long term.

I would expect that a player like James Harmes who showed plenty of promise would be looked after as well as any of his listed teammates.

While I agree with your basic premise that the Rookie list is an anachronism, the last point you made reflects a problem at the club, not a problem with the rookie list per se. There is no reason why and no excuse for treating players differently just because of the mechanism by which they joined the club.

The mechanism created that, and it is the same at other clubs apparently. The investment isn't as large, and so they are treated differently.

That's human nature to some extent - Nathan Jones will be treated better than every other bloke on the list - but the RL mechanism legislatively adds to it.

Surely the problem that Nathan Stark faced was that he was so far off being an AFL player that it was clear from very early in the season that he wouldn't be at the club long term.

I would expect that a player like James Harmes who showed plenty of promise would be looked after as well as any of his listed teammates.

Nathan was constantly injured and jettisoned after a year. If picking him up in the first place is the problem - it's a different problem.

I would prefer a culture that treats the 44 players more-or-less equally - especially injured teenagers - and not just the ones 'that show promise.'

Surely they all do if they are picked up in the first place?

The mechanism created that, and it is the same at other clubs apparently. The investment isn't as large, and so they are treated differently.

That's human nature to some extent - Nathan Jones will be treated better than every other bloke on the list - but the RL mechanism legislatively adds to it.

But the difference between a 3rd rd pick and a rookie is 20k and a 2 yr deal v a 1 yr deal.

Only poor clubs would treat guys differently. Hawthorn have created this culture at Box Hill where young players go to Box Hill to feel part of the Hawthorn system. No doubt they don't exactly get anything like the support given to the Hawthorn players but the feel like they do.

Apparently even this year the guys at Casey felt like second rate citizens around the club. Especially late in the year. They weren't happy with the MFC coaching provided to them whilst they were at Casey and late in the year they frequently trained separately to those who were lining up for Melbourne.

We wont get anywhere as a club until that kind of attitude is fixed. So I see the hiring of the new Casey coach as crucial and I hope he has Roos' ear as well as the guts to reform the system even if that means calling Roos or Allison out.

But the difference between a 3rd rd pick and a rookie is 20k and a 2 yr deal v a 1 yr deal.

Only poor clubs would treat guys differently.

The difference is laid out in the CBA and it is more than just guaranteed years on the list.

Yes you Nutbean, that avatar is making me hungry!

I'm taking my bat and ball and going home.

I'm taking my bat and ball and going home.

Leave the waffles though yeah?

mmmmm waffles.

Got a special mention in this weeks Roos Views.

Could he be getting close to being in the seniors this week?

Got a special mention in this weeks Roos Views.

Could he be getting close to being in the seniors this week?

I doubt it, only because we have a few returning this week. Lumumba, Grimes and to a lesser extent VDB could all play, and it looks like Brayshaw is right to go as well.

If he can keep up this form then he would most certainly be a chance later in the year, but with the injury list getting better it makes it harder for him to find a spot in the side.

Harmed upgraded to senior list... Points to a debut this week you'd think

Harmed upgraded to senior list... Points to a debut this week you'd think

If one of Brayshaw or Vanders don't get up you'd think he'd get a gig. Might be good for Brayshaw to get a rest. Boy is he important though!

Edited July 9, 201510 yr by praha

Well done chomp

Congrats Harmesy

For those who have watched him closely at Casey, what kind of player can we expect to see? His form has been outstanding

Medium sized mid with good pace, but capable of winning his own ball. Strong in the air and on the ground. Would imagine he'd play half forward/wing in the seniors.

Done a lot of work on his defensive game, which still isn't great, but is a lot better then it was. He does make the occasional blue, but he'll fight to rectify it straight away. Think we could have a player in Harmsey. Has some similar traits to Mitch Duncan.