23 hours ago, SaberFang said:

It makes me sick that they get rewarded with pick #1 for finishing last after having an entire team full of elite players banned for drug cheating. Next year they can just re-inject these players with no further sanction and take home pick 1 for their troubles. 

If a team around the periphery of the top 8 deliberately dropped their 12 best players for an entire year purely to top-up with pick 1 before challenging for finals, they'd have their draft picks stripped and would be charged with bringing the game into disrepute!

But, nah, gotta protect Essendon so they get "back to being a powerhouse" as Gil keeps reminding us. He wants his Christmas bonus this year.

So Essendon are in an enviable position? Come on.

Weekly thrashings are all but certain next season meaning a huge drain on the younger players and we've seen first hand the effect that can have. As for the 12 suspended players, I'll be surprised if more than half of them walk back into that club. It's a complete unknown the toll this will take as far their career in general is concerned, let alone their ties with the EFC. They will be seeking fiscal compensation which could be a significant factor in their decision depending how that plays out.

Essendon's youth isn't much to write home about to begin with outside of Daniher, Merrett and a sprinkling of others. The #1 pick will provide little solace during the next three years of them being largely uncompetitive. They were already staring down the barrel of a rebuild before this all went down. They are fooked.

3 minutes ago, P-man said:

So Essendon are in an enviable position? Come on.

Weekly thrashings are all but certain next season meaning a huge drain on the younger players and we've seen first hand the effect that can have. As for the 12 suspended players, I'll be surprised if more than half of them walk back into that club. It's a complete unknown the toll this will take as far their career in general is concerned, let alone their ties with the EFC. They will be seeking fiscal compensation which could be a significant factor in their decision depending how that plays out.

Essendon's youth isn't much to write home about to begin with outside of Daniher, Merrett and a sprinkling of others. The #1 pick will provide little solace during the next three years of them being largely uncompetitive. They were already staring down the barrel of a rebuild before this all went down. They are fooked.

Not to mention that one of their best players, Cale Hooker, is a free agent at the end of the next year and there will be plenty of clubs chasing him.  If I were Essendon I'd be worried about the next few years and the very real possibility that their best players will get the hell out at their first opportunity.

26 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Not to mention that one of their best players, Cale Hooker, is a free agent at the end of the next year and there will be plenty of clubs chasing him.  If I were Essendon I'd be worried about the next few years and the very real possibility that their best players will get the hell out at their first opportunity.

Hooker will be a free agent at the end of this year. If he goes they could well have picks 1 and 2 in the next draft. They will, by the same token, have a void of players in the 22-28 age bracket.

Not sure if it was mentioned, but Kelly has been playing in the NTFL, so he should be in reasonable nick.

1 hour ago, Nasher said:

I can't understand the logic in not allowing us a top-up, but I'm not really bothered by it.  2016 model James Kelly does zero for me and if we'd picked up Ryan Crowley I would have spontaneously vomited.  The pickings out there are very slim and Essendon are going to be crud because of it.  It means Mitch White will play instead of Melksham; I can live with that.

The issue being opportunity.

Yes, some clubs might have knocked it back electing to upgrade rookies instead but the sheer fact the option was made available exclusively to Essendon and no one else is highly unjust.

Port lost 2 players including their #1 ruckman, the tallest player on the rookie list is 189cm.

6 hours ago, M_9 said:

Hooker will be a free agent at the end of this year. If he goes they could well have picks 1 and 2 in the next draft. They will, by the same token, have a void of players in the 22-28 age bracket.

Not sure if it was mentioned, but Kelly has been playing in the NTFL, so he should be in reasonable nick.

With Hooker not playing this year, how does that affect his free agency status? ie, where he finished best and fairest etc when working out compo.

My understanding is that compo would depend on the contract he was offered.

This would have been a perfect time to send the scum packing and get a Tasmanian team to join the comp.

Just shows that the AFL are not serious about going to Tassie.

3 hours ago, Gorgoroth said:

With Hooker not playing this year, how does that affect his free agency status? ie, where he finished best and fairest etc when working out compo.

I am sure that the AFL will work out some one off ad hoc arrangement that doesn't disadvantage EssUndone too much 

I believe that the 12 essendon players can place themselves as delisted free agents at the end of the year.  I read it somewhere. This means Essendon will get nothing in return if this occurs. If even 3 or 4 players do this and say Watson and Stanton retire they will battle in 2017 as well.

If half of the suspended players do not want to return to the club,does that mean they can be traded and therefore receive early draft picks along with No.1 or 2 (carlton is a good chance to come last). Another alternative to tanking,what's net. The remaining clubs should get clarifation from the AFL before the season starts. Perhaps the all suspended Essendon players should be un-tradable,or be flogged off to bottom sides at a discounted rate/value.

9 hours ago, Carlos Danger said:

The issue being opportunity.

Yes, some clubs might have knocked it back electing to upgrade rookies instead but the sheer fact the option was made available exclusively to Essendon and no one else is highly unjust.

Port lost 2 players including their #1 ruckman, the tallest player on the rookie list is 189cm.

If Port's tallest player on their rookie list is only 189 cm and they knew there was a risk that Ryder might be suspended, I think Port needs to consider whether they might have contributed to their own dilemma by not planning better.

19 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

If Port's tallest player on their rookie list is only 189 cm and they knew there was a risk that Ryder might be suspended, I think Port needs to consider whether they might have contributed to their own dilemma by not planning better.

but gill assured them that worst case would effectively be only a few games suspension 

26 minutes ago, Demanding Success said:

I believe that the 12 essendon players can place themselves as delisted free agents at the end of the year.  I read it somewhere. This means Essendon will get nothing in return if this occurs. If even 3 or 4 players do this and say Watson and Stanton retire they will battle in 2017 as well.

I read that somewhere too.

It sure will be interesting to see how many of the players take up this option. It'll allow them to walk out of the EFC and go wherever they want with no compensation for the club.

If enough of them do it, Essendon could be in the poo even more next year than this year.

9 minutes ago, Choke said:

I read that somewhere too.

It sure will be interesting to see how many of the players take up this option. It'll allow them to walk out of the EFC and go wherever they want with no compensation for the club.

If enough of them do it, Essendon could be in the poo even more next year than this year.

Conversely, if only one or two do leave the salary cap space freed up will allow those remaining a possible windfall as the club potentially overpays just to keep those players from leaving too. In the end (now that virtually everyone involved with the supplements program will have left), I expect money to talk the loudest. And therefore I expect most of those suspended will stay.

Even with some of them potentially launching legal action against the club?

I suppose it depends on what sort of deals end up happening. If it's settled out of court then yeah, a lot might stay. But if the compo claims go to court I'd expect those players to leave.

I'm mot sure if the AFL have announced what will happen re the 12 at eos.  As I see it there are several options:

1. AFL allow Delisted FA status and players walk with no compensation to EFC  (Can't see the AFL letting this happen.).

2. AFL allow FA status and EFC will get AFL determined compensation (which you can bet the AFL will err on the generous side).

3. AFL do not allow any FA status and players request trades and EFC get picks/players (as determined by the 'market').

I prefer option 3 - the AFL do nothing - it is the fairest to the rest of the comp especially in terms of the draft. Also any club taking an FA/DFA doesn't get a player for free.

However, I fear it will be option 2.  It is by far the best outcome for EFC.  I would be willing to bet EFC will do a deal with the AFL to make this happen.  If they lose the likes of Hurley, Hooker, Watson you could easily see them all getting band 1 compo picks.  That is a lot of high end round 1 picks. 

There is no doubt in my mind there is no limit to what the AFL will do to help EFC.  It is wrong but as we know the AFL is a law unto itself.

 

 

Edited January 21, 20169 yr by Lucifer's Hero

Goddard named captain hahahaa

Think ill put some money on them not winning  a game now

38 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I'm mot sure if the AFL have announced what will happen re the 12 at eos.  As I see it there are several options:

1. AFL allow Delisted FA status and players walk with no compensation to EFC  (Can't see the AFL letting this happen).

2. AFL allow FA status and EFC will get AFL determined compensation (which you can bet the AFL will err on the generous side).

3. AFL do not allow any FA status and players request trades and EFC get picks/players (as determined by the 'market').

I prefer option 3 - the AFL do nothing - it is the fairest to the rest of the comp especially in terms of the draft. 

However, I fear it will be option 2.  It is by far the best outcome for EFC.  I would be willing to bet EFC will do a deal with the AFL to make this happen.  If they lose the likes of Hurley, Hooker, Watson you could easily see them all getting band 1 compo picks.  That is a lot of high end round 1 picks. 

There is no doubt in my mind there is no limit to what the AFL will do to help EFC.  It is wrong but as we know the AFL is a law unto itself.

 

 

agree option 3 is the best. let the market sort it out for itself. essendon should reap what they sow without afl management interference

I'd have honestly thought there would be more than enough grounds for breach of contract from both parties and the players could just walk if they wanted to.

If a club breaches the contract they shouldn't get any compensation 

Stuff letting them trade

 

48 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I'm mot sure if the AFL have announced what will happen re the 12 at eos.  As I see it there are several options:

1. AFL allow Delisted FA status and players walk with no compensation to EFC  (Can't see the AFL letting this happen).

2. AFL allow FA status and EFC will get AFL determined compensation (which you can bet the AFL will err on the generous side).

3. AFL do not allow any FA status and players request trades and EFC get picks/players (as determined by the 'market').

I prefer option 3 - the AFL do nothing - it is the fairest to the rest of the comp especially in terms of the draft. 

However, I fear it will be option 2.  It is by far the best outcome for EFC.  I would be willing to bet EFC will do a deal with the AFL to make this happen.  If they lose the likes of Hurley, Hooker, Watson you could easily see them all getting band 1 compo picks.  That is a lot of high end round 1 picks. 

There is no doubt in my mind there is no limit to what the AFL will do to help EFC.  It is wrong but as we know the AFL is a law unto itself.

 

 

I checked. They can do it. I Heard the AFLPA state it. Also on this article.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/30566332/banned-bombers-can-walk-out-on-club/

19 minutes ago, Demanding Success said:

I checked. They can do it. I Heard the AFLPA state it. Also on this article.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/30566332/banned-bombers-can-walk-out-on-club/

Thanks DS.  I must have missed that in the press on the east cost.

In some respects I prefer they aren't DFA's.  DFA's will hurt EFC but also another club gets a 'free' player and it is probably going to be a top 4 team.  This makes the strong clubs, stronger and IMHO is just as bad for the game and any semblance of equalisation.  

Edit:  Heaven forbid that if EFC lose a few good players to DFA the AFL may deem 'unique circumstances' and give them a priority pick or 2.  I put nothing past the AFL. 

I prefer they leave it alone and players who want to go get traded.  Clubs can now trade future picks so EFC can get market value for them.  But at least it doesn't distort the draft or give other clubs 'free' players. 

Edited January 22, 20169 yr by Lucifer's Hero

1 hour ago, Petraccattack said:

Goddard named captain hahahaa

Think ill put some money on them not winning  a game now

""I won't lie to you … standing in front of you today is the last place I really wanted to be"

Now thats what you want to hear from your newly appointed captain!

3 minutes ago, DSP said:

""I won't lie to you … standing in front of you today is the last place I really wanted to be"

Now thats what you want to hear from your newly appointed captain!

I suspect context matters. I assume he's trying to explain that he would prefer that there were no suspensions and Jobe was still captain. (Mind you, can you imagine any one of our recent knife-wielding PMs saying this at their first media conference after ascending to the top job? Mind boggles with the thought of it.) 

25 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Thanks DS.  I must have missed that in the press on the east cost.

In some respects I prefer they aren't DFA's.  DFA's will hurt EFC but also another club gets a 'free' player and it is probably going to be a top 4 team.  This makes the strong clubs, stronger and IMHO is just as bad for the game and any semblance of equalisation.  

Edit:  Heaven forbid that if EFC lose a few good players to DFA the AFL may deem 'unique circumstances' and give them a priority pick or 2.  I put nothing past the AFL. 

I prefer they leave it alone and players who want to go get traded.  Clubs can now trade future picks so EFC can get market value for them.  But at least it doesn't distort the draft or give other clubs 'free' players. 

How much pull does Goody have with the Ess players, besides Milky I wonder?

3 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

How much pull does Goody have with the Ess players, besides Milky I wonder?

With a few I hope quite a lot.