GWS is 600k over the cap.

[dazzledavey36 54,889]

Surprised no one has mentioned this but Warrior on thursday night mentioned that GWS are well over the cap and will continue to trade out decent players even if their still contracted to clear some cap space.

There are some genuine guns ripe for the pickings so KP talls and outside mids would be our number 1 target i would think.

[Gorgoroth 12,950]

Cameron said last night they are not over the cap. But did say some older players may mean kids missing out. 

Edited May 20, 2016 by Gorgoroth

[Whispering_Jack 30,054]

Actually, what was said was not that GWS is over the salary cap at the moment but rather, that it will need to make room for $600k of salary cap space to cater for increased payments negotiated for next year. That's before the next collective bargaining agreement which is certain to give clubs more room in their total player payments so the story sounds like a storm in a teacup to me.

[Little Richard 6,262]

If they were over the cap, could they be sanctioned? Take them for all they're worth!

Obviously it wouldn't happen.

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

Gw$ can do no wrong

we must accept them. We have been told

[Redleg 40,905]

26 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Surprised no one has mentioned this but Warrior on thursday night mentioned that GWS are well over the cap and will continue to trade out decent players even if their still contracted to clear some cap space.

There are some genuine guns ripe for the pickings so KP talls and outside mids would be our number 1 target i would think.

DD I posted this a while ago that because of their cap they will release more talent. We have a good relationship with them and this is probably the last year to get a good player or two as they reduce their list and payments. 

I think Hurley is looking doubtful and he may be using a few clubs to drive up his price so he gets the maximum and stays with his mates. Also now that we need to trade with Essendon, it has become difficult. 

Prestia may be gettable, though as I have said, I see bigger needs for us. 

GWS can provide a player or two who could really add to our list and they would be my first stop. 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

18 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Gw$ can do no wrong

we must accept them. We have been told

Yes, we must accept them.

It's old ground, but they and the Suns are where they precisely because they are not in footy heartland.

That's why a team in Tassie will never get up. Unless it's a transplant which is also unlikely. Tassie is heartland and does not need to be conquered.

The AFL are not squirting money up against a wall because they enjoy doing it. In a rare visionary moment, they looked ahead 50 years to forecast the sporting landscape in Australia. Some scenarios emerged.

• Aussie Rules still the biggest baddest most watched and (one of the) most participated in sports. Possibly expanding into other countries in a serious (non-boutique) way.
• Aussie Rules overtaken by soccer, or (less likely but still conceivable) rugby league. AFL where soccer is now: modest crowds, limited TV exposure, battling for sponsors in a crowded market.
• Aussie Rules a niche sport, swamped by soccer, RL, basketball and gridiron. Aussie Rules a quaint relic of the nation's barely remembered past. Like squash, billiards, pony racing, tug of war, or croquet.
• Aussie Rules and all other outdoor games barely played at all in favour of computer games. (Not so likely, but again, due to lack of space for one thing, feasible.)

Which is it to be?

The AFL have seized the moment with their bags of TV cash to make a pre-emptive strike at scenario #1. This is like nation building infrastructure. They have the money and the will to do it. And now is the time.

Not to do it, to sit on their laurels, would be to concede the initiative and risk one of the less preferable scenarios to come into being.

In the battle for the survival of this game, they have to go forward, or go backward. Life has a way of showing us that things don't stay the same. Which is it to be?

We may quibble with many things about the formation of GWS and GC, and of course we do, but the whole point of their existence is something we should all be behind.

We must accept them.

[Willmoy1947 4,085]

And then they have so much talent to spare, they just come along and take a struggling Club's best prospect. Make no bones about it. They deserve nothing but scorn...

One would think that someone in the Media would have enough backbone to write about this duopoly they have with the AFL.

[old dee 23,788]

6 minutes ago, willmoy said:

And then they have so much talent to spare, they just come along and take a struggling Club's best prospect. Make no bones about it. They deserve nothing but scorn...

One would think that someone in the Media would have enough backbone to write about this duopoly they have with the AFL.

And bight the hand that feeds them I don't think so!

[Bitter but optimistic 22,239]

Fat Phil will have to cut back on the pies.

[Willmoy1947 4,085]

6 minutes ago, old dee said:

And bight the hand that feeds them I don't think so!

Yea i know, but it gets in my "craw". The older i get the more confrontational i become apparently.

[Return to Glory 8,436]

1 hour ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

Fat Phil will have to cut back on the pies.

Damn you BBO. Nine minutes too late. I was going to go with kebabs but hey.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Return to Glory

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

42 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

Yes, we must accept them.

It's old ground, but they and the Suns are where they precisely because they are not in footy heartland.

That's why a team in Tassie will never get up. Unless it's a transplant which is also unlikely. Tassie is heartland and does not need to be conquered.

The AFL are not squirting money up against a wall because they enjoy doing it. In a rare visionary moment, they looked ahead 50 years to forecast the sporting landscape in Australia. Some scenarios emerged.

• Aussie Rules still the biggest baddest most watched and (one of the) most participated in sports. Possibly expanding into other countries in a serious (non-boutique) way.
• Aussie Rules overtaken by soccer, or (less likely but still conceivable) rugby league. AFL where soccer is now: modest crowds, limited TV exposure, battling for sponsors in a crowded market.
• Aussie Rules a niche sport, swamped by soccer, RL, basketball and gridiron. Aussie Rules a quaint relic of the nation's barely remembered past. Like squash, billiards, pony racing, tug of war, or croquet.
• Aussie Rules and all other outdoor games barely played at all in favour of computer games. (Not so likely, but again, due to lack of space for one thing, feasible.)

Which is it to be?

The AFL have seized the moment with their bags of TV cash to make a pre-emptive strike at scenario #1. This is like nation building infrastructure. They have the money and the will to do it. And now is the time.

Not to do it, to sit on their laurels, would be to concede the initiative and risk one of the less preferable scenarios to come into being.

In the battle for the survival of this game, they have to go forward, or go backward. Life has a way of showing us that things don't stay the same. Which is it to be?

We may quibble with many things about the formation of GWS and GC, and of course we do, but the whole point of their existence is something we should all be behind.

We must accept them.

Ted that is not what i meant. 

Shovelling $$$ at GW$ will achieve nothing except keep 9 games on the idiot box

when they win flags the G will be a soulless pile of concrete..

[Return to Glory 8,436]

7 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Ted that is not what i meant. 

Shovelling $$$ at GW$ will achieve nothing except keep 9 games on the idiot box

when they win flags the G will be a soulless pile of concrete..

Inclined to agree. What do we have to accept? The only thing I accept is that the AFL can construct a team solely for marketing purposes and that it is irrelevant as to whether it catches the hearts and minds of the community it's in. I accept that, in doing so, it prioritizes this marketing exercise over the rusted on supporters of footballing States and effectively creates a two tier competition of haves and have nots. I accept its the reality but I despise it.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Return to Glory

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

I don't think Gold Coast will survive long term

nothing does up there

GW$ probably will survive because the AFL will refuse to be proven wrong twice

But no one will care....

[Return to Glory 8,436]

1 hour ago, Ted Fidge said:

Yes, we must accept them.

It's old ground, but they and the Suns are where they precisely because they are not in footy heartland.

That's why a team in Tassie will never get up. Unless it's a transplant which is also unlikely. Tassie is heartland and does not need to be conquered.

The AFL are not squirting money up against a wall because they enjoy doing it. In a rare visionary moment, they looked ahead 50 years to forecast the sporting landscape in Australia. Some scenarios emerged.

• Aussie Rules still the biggest baddest most watched and (one of the) most participated in sports. Possibly expanding into other countries in a serious (non-boutique) way.
• Aussie Rules overtaken by soccer, or (less likely but still conceivable) rugby league. AFL where soccer is now: modest crowds, limited TV exposure, battling for sponsors in a crowded market.
• Aussie Rules a niche sport, swamped by soccer, RL, basketball and gridiron. Aussie Rules a quaint relic of the nation's barely remembered past. Like squash, billiards, pony racing, tug of war, or croquet.
• Aussie Rules and all other outdoor games barely played at all in favour of computer games. (Not so likely, but again, due to lack of space for one thing, feasible.)

Which is it to be?

The AFL have seized the moment with their bags of TV cash to make a pre-emptive strike at scenario #1. This is like nation building infrastructure. They have the money and the will to do it. And now is the time.

Not to do it, to sit on their laurels, would be to concede the initiative and risk one of the less preferable scenarios to come into being.

In the battle for the survival of this game, they have to go forward, or go backward. Life has a way of showing us that things don't stay the same. Which is it to be?

We may quibble with many things about the formation of GWS and GC, and of course we do, but the whole point of their existence is something we should all be behind.

We must accept them.

There's an agency you can go to which is able to create scientific imperatives for why people should buy your product. You know the type, '90 percent of women agree that horseshite will reduce the visible signs of aging'. You want an outcome and the agency will create it for you.

 I have no doubt that this 50 year forecast would have been principally created to enable the AFL to argue their expansion case. However, participation by women in terms of playing and watching is up markedly. Gridiron? Seriously? Auskick numbers are also increasing. And a 50 year forecast is as relevant as a 200 year forecast imo.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Return to Glory

[Bitter but optimistic 22,239]

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I don't think Gold Coast will survive long term

nothing does up there

GW$ probably will survive because the AFL will refuse to be proven wrong twice

But no one will care....

Yes it is sad and silly that AFL didn't pump some of their squillions into having a team in Tassie. However, like it or not, those same squillions will continue to go into the new franchises. There is no way the AFL will let any of them fold.

[What 18,810]

Lets try and get Phil Davis down to Melbourne.  Yeah dreaming, but hes exactly what we need to round out the team.

[Skuit 10,031]

I don't wish to be a stick in the mud, but can someone change the thread title?

[grazman 7,432]

3 hours ago, Redleg said:

 

GWS can provide a player or two who could really add to our list and they would be my first stop. 

Of the two players that I would look at that I think are also gettable (Lobb won't be) I'd look at James Stewart first (third tall/ruck) - Not just because in my dreams I'd like a premiership FF line of Stewart, Weideman and Kennedy (Jesse at CHF) so I could give it to the Pies fans I know  and the second one would be Caleb Marchbank only 193 cms is a little shortish to be a gorilla tamer (same height as Hurley though), but was highly rated and can't get a consistent run at it.

[SaberFang 7,151]

They still have an expanded list, don't they? Like a 4 extra senior players? I imagine the AFL, in all their wisdom, allowed them the equivalent of 4 senior players added to their salary cap.

Just another concession for the Giant$.

[jnrmac 20,060]

3 hours ago, willmoy said:

And then they have so much talent to spare, they just come along and take a struggling Club's best prospect. Make no bones about it. They deserve nothing but scorn...

One would think that someone in the Media would have enough backbone to write about this duopoly they have with the AFL.

Suppose they won a premiership and nobody came ? Or cared?

[Caligula's Cohort! 105]

1 hour ago, grazman said:

Of the two players that I would look at that I think are also gettable (Lobb won't be) I'd look at James Stewart first (third tall/ruck) - Not just because in my dreams I'd like a premiership FF line of Stewart, Weideman and Kennedy (Jesse at CHF) so I could give it to the Pies fans I know  and the second one would be Caleb Marchbank only 193 cms is a little shortish to be a gorilla tamer (same height as Hurley though), but was highly rated and can't get a consistent run at it.

James Stewart is ripe for the taking with their salary cap space and is also out of contract at seasons end. At 196 cms and 93 kgs could be a very good get and still only 22. My other smokey would be Tim Mohr who has been dogged by injuries but I reckon he would be a good FB for us at 198cms and 105 kgs and still relatively young at 27. 

[Biffen 12,943]

1 hour ago, Caligula's Cohort! said:

James Stewart is ripe for the taking with their salary cap space and is also out of contract at seasons end. At 196 cms and 93 kgs could be a very good get and still only 22. My other smokey would be Tim Mohr who has been dogged by injuries but I reckon he would be a good FB for us at 198cms and 105 kgs and still relatively young at 27. 

You must be joking.

Tim Mohr was either on our list or recruited from Casey.

he has a man bun and has lost the ponytail but not much has changed apart from the hair.

[Caligula's Cohort! 105]

11 minutes ago, Biffen said:

You must be joking.

Tim Mohr was either on our list or recruited from Casey.

he has a man bun and has lost the ponytail but not much has changed apart from the hair.

Lol Mohr is in GWS best 22 and are currently 4th on the ladder... I think it's you who is joking...