Can we get pick 3 of GC & use it for Trelor?? Pies wouldn't have an early pick like that???

Imagine shafting the filth twice on 2 players!

Frankly, right now I just want to get that git off our list and make him someone else's problem.

Can we trade him to GC on the understanding that he'll chuck such a sook-fit that they'll want to get rid of him and on-trade him right away?

Players choosing the club they want to be traded to.. Just another form of free agency... Afl need to change the rules, when a player who wants to leave theyb should be traded to a club which gives the best trade deal... If player wants to choose a club of choice wait unti free agency ... Can't have it both ways! ... Trelor has been in the game for 5 mins & is demanding which club how is that right???

Edited October 17, 20159 yr by Hogan2014

Frankly, right now I just want to get that git off our list and make him someone else's problem.

Can we trade him to GC on the understanding that he'll chuck such a sook-fit that they'll want to get rid of him and on-trade him right away?

out of curiosity can a player be traded twice in one trade period?

Can we get pick 3 of GC & use it for Trelor?? Pies wouldn't have an early pick like that???

Dream on I think we're the ones who have been shafted.

out of curiosity can a player be traded twice in one trade period?

Wouldn't think so

It was reported on channel 7 sport news that Howe also met this week with Roos coach Brad Scott. Not sure of the validity of the report.

Howe is a home grown talent from down Sth of Hobart iirc.

Not sure of the relevance of your comment, dee-luded, to Bonkets' post, to which you responded.

I think Mahoney and Ashcroft will still be work out a deal centering around the pick 3 and 6 swap even with Howe off the radar. Anyone else get that vibe?

Why didn't howe have these meetings prior to trade period? Too busy with Bali?

The Age is reporting: Collingwood and Melbourne were also locked in negotiations over what could become a multi-club deal for Jeremy Howe to move to Collingwood, Jimmy Toumpas to move to Port Adelaide, Paul Seedsman to Adelaide and Ben Kennedy to the Demons. A complicated exchange of second and third round draft picks is also involved in the mega deal.

Jack Nial and Emma Quayle have been spot on so far so no reason to doubt them.

So much for Mahoney saying last night that Kennedy and Howe would be separate deals!

No matter what the exchange of later picks is, losing both Toumpas and Howe for a kid who has barely played and some picks does not fill me with any joy...

...yes I know, your advice is to wait till officially announced...sure!

Footnote: the article says Treloar and Aish to Pies deals almost done.

I reckon that is where Pies good picks have gone...I guess we get the dregs...yes I know wait till the deal is done etc etc etc

Totally agree - beyond belief that the Dees would take Kennedy for those two (tho Toumpas aka notolliewines is a dud) - Kennedy is 175cm for goodness sake - not even 5 foot 10 inches in the old. And the club has Garlett (good) and JKH (???) - so why another midget. What about some support for Jesse H who will have three defenders jumping all over him next year - and Dawes is not the big man forward answer to back Jesse up.

Really?

I'm really surprised at the posters fawning over Angry's ridiculous proposal.

Really?

I'm really surprised by posters who can't tell the difference between a comment and a fawn.

Is it ridiculous? Probably - but then no more/less ridiculous than many of the proposals and comments floating round here, and at least someone had put some real work/time into what they posted.

It will be Howe and pick 43 for Kennedy and pick 27.

Collingwood will dictate the terms on this one.

Collingwood can take a flying leap if they think they can give us that deal. Once again, we demand their first round pick. If they want to spend it on someone else, it's "Sorry Jeremy, they obviously didn't want you at their club after all. Fortunately we've got another club who'd be happy to take you..."

Old system was a lot better points for picks trading future picks what if a club ends up with someone like Barry P, Christ they would go insolvent you shouldn't be able to trade future picks.

This whole system, (and it's flaws are becoming increasingly apparent) was agitated into existence by greedy player agents. In theory, equalization should increase the chances of all 18 clubs to succeed. Right now, it's never been further from the truth as, amongst other things, players insist upon where they go.

I wonder whether it's time to stop the backending of contracts that has allowed stronger clubs to bring in big name players. If a player is on 2 mil over 4 years it should be $500 grand a year rather than graduated. Good luck to the clubs that can do it but it's becoming a two tiered competition because of it....imo.

And yes, Middymalt, future pick trading is also a crock of shite......imo

Edited October 17, 20159 yr by Return to Glory

Really?

I'm really surprised by posters who can't tell the difference between a comment and a fawn.

Is it ridiculous? Probably - but then no more/less ridiculous than many of the proposals and comments floating round here, and at least someone had put some real work/time into what they posted.

No more or less ridiculous is true, as all the proposals are flat out ridiculous.

I don't know why anyone wastes their time & energy personally.

Trade period has turned into 'how to facilitate all the players wanting to play for Collingwood'

Crock of [censored] every year, everything is always held up by the same [censored].

Old system was a lot better points for picks trading future picks what if a club ends up with someone like Barry P, Christ they would go insolvent you shouldn't be able to trade future picks.

There is a restriction on how many 1st round picks a team can trade in consecutive years.

If the MFC could survive how it was 'sanctioned/drafted/retained players' from 1999 to 2012 then trading some future draft picks for known talents won't ruin a club...

There is a restriction on how many 1st round picks a team can trade in consecutive years.

If the MFC could survive how it was 'sanctioned/drafted/retained players' from 1999 to 2012 then trading some future draft picks for known talents won't ruin a club...

My point rpfc, is not that it will ruin a club, but rather, keeps stronger clubs where they are.

Unfortunately nearly every single Trade idea purported relues on one assumption, that being any other team really gives a flying @#*! ABOUT us! !

Heads up they don't. Many of these fanciful..and the not so fanciful rely on team B being accommodating to OUR ideals. They might but only if it suits them.

When you start combining one low % occurrence with another it all unfortunately ,imho , will unravel.

Only deals that manoeuvre another team's greed might stand a chance.

Play on...

My point rpfc, is not that it will ruin a club, but rather, keeps stronger clubs where they are.

Well, the lower clubs still have to give over the picks, and I was responding to another poster.

Collingwood were the club pushing hardest for future picks trading.

No surprise why.

I think Mahoney and Ashcroft will still be work out a deal centering around the pick 3 and 6 swap even with Howe off the radar. Anyone else get that vibe?

Bloody hope so.

Collingwood were the club pushing hardest for future picks trading.

No surprise why.

Agreed

I wonder if the GWS and GCS's give any weight to who they are trading with, i.e. trading good players or early draft picks to top clubs just makes them stronger.

As for the players being able to veto player trades we need to have a better system in place or some other compensating control to stop clubs being shafted. it looks like a points system is being used, so what about where we have two clubs looking at a player i.e. howe that you give an appropriate point weighting to the trade for instance if GCS is prepared to give up a 1st round pick that Collingwood would need to match that number of points, if they failed the player had the option to go to gold coast, or if the club chose to keep him under the same money he was prepared to accept, or stand out of football..