Dollars?

Premiership Window?

Chance to help develop and build a list?

Are we no longer a Destination club because we don't have the $$$ or the picks to throw around?

There are some big names bandied about, (Gaff, Shiel) but none of them want to play for the Dees. Why?

I'm not counting Steven May because his priority seems to be to desperately get out of the Suns rather than specifically go to the Dees.

So is there such a thing as a destination club or does the timing of $$$ and picks have to be right to be considered one?

A destination club is a status that enables clubs to get big, important players onto their list for little financial expense, because they have nominated the club as their choice destination. Invariably, the deal gets done.

Having lots of money to throw around usually means you don't have the stars, otherwise you'd be paying those stars.

Edited October 4, 20186 yr by A F
As SWYL says below... yes, being in your premiership window is a significant factor at play too.

Premiership Opportunities 

  On 04/10/2018 at 04:14, A F said:

A destination club is a status that enables clubs to get big, important players onto their list for little financial expense, because they have nominated the club as their choice destination. Invariably, the deal gets done.

Having lots of money to throw around usually means you don't have the stars, otherwise you'd be paying those stars.

So are we no longer perceived as a destination club?

Gaff is either chasing dollars or thinks North are better placed at a Premiership tilt. He obviously wants to come home but what is his other motivation.

If Shiel is choosing the Blues then his decision is purely cash based.

Why not choose the Dees? I'd play for us given ability and the choice and I'm not biased at all.

Edited October 4, 20186 yr by pewpewpew

this year apparently it is:  missing the 8 and throwing buckets of money around

potentially: Hannebery, Shiel, gaff. Polec, Hogan etc

seems to be a shift from glory hunters to money grabbers

Interesting topic and I am not sure of the answer.

As a related question do clubs have different characters or are they merely one homogeneous group such as the world's shopping malls.

If I was a player at the top end I would be motivated by the crowds (they are entertainers after all) and the team environment whatever that  means.

Certainly winning but perhaps more importantly not constantly losing would be relevant.

Whatever makes a destination club I am sure that the MFC is not one at present.

  On 04/10/2018 at 04:24, pewpewpew said:

So are we no longer perceived as a destination club?

Gaff is either chasing dollars or thinks North are better placed at a Premiership tilt. He obviously wants to come home but what is his other motivation.

If Shiel is choosing the Blues then his decision is purely cash based.

Why not choose the Dees? I'd play for us given ability and the choice and I'm not biased at all.

Because as I say, having lots of money to throw around usually means you don't have the stars, otherwise you're paying those stars.

North and Carlton are both outside the 8 and are purely attracting players with cash.

The problem/danger of this is that you put your list structure/payment structures out of whack and it hurts you big time down the line.

Edited October 4, 20186 yr by A F

  On 04/10/2018 at 04:36, A F said:

Because as I say, having lots of money to throw around usually means you don't have the stars, otherwise you're paying those stars.

North and Carlton are both outside the 8 and are purely attracting players with cash.

It does seem to be the case of cash making a club a destination club.

I think we were all fooling ourselves that we were a destination club due to the direction that we were heading in.

There's no such thing as a destination club, that's just media BS to hype up whatever agenda their trying to get through at the time. Each year there are more than 30 players (normally a lot more) who change clubs, either through trades or free agency, some are superstars some have other uses (role player, depth etc.).

Given the media is currently driven by a heap of people trying to stay relevant to stay employed - Kane Cornes, Dal Santo, McClure, Llyod, etc, etc. They throw up terms like destination club, even if it's just getting a role player like J.Lewis for us a couple of year back, not downgrading Lewis' contribution (overall not in the prelim), but he was no longer a star when he came to us, but has been more than handy. 

Yeah, see, I don't think North are a destination club just because they're paying way above the market value to attract players. That's not how I'd define 'destination club'.

Edited October 4, 20186 yr by A F

  On 04/10/2018 at 04:45, Red and Blue realist said:

There's no such thing as a destination club, that's just media BS to hype up whatever agenda their trying to get through at the time. Each year there are more than 30 players (normally a lot more) who change clubs, either through trades or free agency, some are superstars some have other uses (role player, depth etc.).

Given the media is currently driven by a heap of people trying to stay relevant to stay employed - Kane Cornes, Dal Santo, McClure, Llyod, etc, etc. They throw up terms like destination club, even if it's just getting a role player like J.Lewis for us a couple of year back, not downgrading Lewis' contribution (overall not in the prelim), but he was no longer a star when he came to us, but has been more than handy. 

Hawthorn 08-17 got every player they wanted I think. First miss was Tom Lynch. All without paying big money.

Plenty of teams wanted Burgoyne, Hale, Gunston, O’Rourke, Frawley, Mitchell, O’Meara. They all chose the Hawks. That’s a destination club.

They had the list, the coach, proven premiership success and medical/fitness staff to develop players.

Getting the guys you want without having to pay top dollar is a huge advantage.

Paying extra cash is what non-destination clubs do to be competitive with destination clubs

A club where players want to go to without being payed ‘overs’ to go there. 

A club players don’t want to go to unless they’re asked, because they’d struggle to get a game...

  On 04/10/2018 at 04:51, DeeSpencer said:

Hawthorn 08-17 got every player they wanted I think. First miss was Tom Lynch. All without paying big money.

Plenty of teams wanted Burgoyne, Hale, Gunston, O’Rourke, Frawley, Mitchell, O’Meara. They all chose the Hawks. That’s a destination club.

They had the list, the coach, proven premiership success and medical/fitness staff to develop players.

Getting the guys you want without having to pay top dollar is a huge advantage.

Naturally it's a lot easier to get players in when you are successful, a lot of players will sacrifice $ for the chance of a premiership. Does that make you a destination club or just a successful one? If Hawthorn crash and burn from here will they still be a 'destination club' in 3/4 years, who knows, plus there's heaps they have also been linked with but never went there, just Lynch is the biggest this year - Carlisle, Prestia, Wines, Wingard etc. 

What I was saying is that destination club is a term used by ordinary media performers to hype up any club doing a trade (if it suits their narrative at the time), we became a destination club because we got Lewis, last year Essendon and Port were because they got a few in. Nth, Brissy, Freo, Saints are apparently this years destination clubs.

Who knows? The media seem to be raven on about nuff melbourne, paper bags mob, and of course methodon so far this trade period, which makes me want to use one of those calscum paper bags and? in it

  On 04/10/2018 at 05:15, Red and Blue realist said:

Naturally it's a lot easier to get players in when you are successful, a lot of players will sacrifice $ for the chance of a premiership. Does that make you a destination club or just a successful one? If Hawthorn crash and burn from here will they still be a 'destination club' in 3/4 years, who knows, plus there's heaps they have also been linked with but never went there, just Lynch is the biggest this year - Carlisle, Prestia, Wines, Wingard etc. 

What I was saying is that destination club is a term used by ordinary media performers to hype up any club doing a trade (if it suits their narrative at the time), we became a destination club because we got Lewis, last year Essendon and Port were because they got a few in. Nth, Brissy, Freo, Saints are apparently this years destination clubs.

Certainly a vastly overused term.

But I think the Hawks up until this year were a club that players were very keen to get to. They didn't have to sell themselves to recruits, they had recruits coming to them.

I also think the dynamics have changed over the last 18 months with North going really hard at big names and the Tom Boyd deal not exactly crippling the Dogs. Lower teams were previous afraid to make big moves that could hurt their salary caps in the years to come. With the salary cap rising quickly the bottom teams can offer huge money and not worry too much about the depth of their list. 

When everyone was offering similar money the top clubs and the big off field clubs had a huge advantage. 

Winning.

  On 04/10/2018 at 05:42, DeeSpencer said:

Certainly a vastly overused term.

But I think the Hawks up until this year were a club that players were very keen to get to. They didn't have to sell themselves to recruits, they had recruits coming to them.

I also think the dynamics have changed over the last 18 months with North going really hard at big names and the Tom Boyd deal not exactly crippling the Dogs. Lower teams were previous afraid to make big moves that could hurt their salary caps in the years to come. With the salary cap rising quickly the bottom teams can offer huge money and not worry too much about the depth of their list. 

When everyone was offering similar money the top clubs and the big off field clubs had a huge advantage. 

Successful clubs have always got the best of the players who move - Danger to Geel, Buddy to Swans, Lynch to Tigs etc. I don't think the lower clubs were afraid to make moves, the issue was that players choose the most successful clubs.

It's a big issue in the equalisation the AFL wants, often lower clubs have to pay a lot more for NQR's just to met salary cap demands, I remember someone connect with the club once saying with Dawes contract that we had to pay someone.

  On 04/10/2018 at 04:08, pewpewpew said:

Dollars?

Premiership Window?

Chance to help develop and build a list?

Are we no longer a Destination club because we don't have the $$$ or the picks to throw around?

There are some big names bandied about, (Gaff, Shiel) but none of them want to play for the Dees. Why?

I'm not counting Steven May because his priority seems to be to desperately get out of the Suns rather than specifically go to the Dees.

So is there such a thing as a destination club or does the timing of $$$ and picks have to be right to be considered one?

Facilities would play a part too I would think.

Brown paper bags full of cash

1. Premiership window 

2. Respected coach and line coaches whom the player feels will help them reach their potential 

3. Off field stability, reputation for integrity

4. Opportunity to play in front of large crowds in blockbuster games 

5. Quality of training facilities 

 

Edited October 4, 20186 yr by EnterTheDragon

Still don't think we have got a top FA yet.

  On 04/10/2018 at 12:24, Redleg said:

Still don't think we have got a top FA yet.

We haven't. But the top line guys so far have been Buddy, Frawley (just), Lynch and Gaff (overpriced).

Buddy and Lynch were head and shoulders above the rest.

I'm not convinced Goddard or Dal Santo were top liners when they moved. Higgins and Waite weren't. Dale Thomas wasn't. Eddie Betts not really either, although a huge success.

May, Neale, Shiel and Wingard are the best players from next years crop of free agents - the so called pre agents - and all 4 might be traded this year. Clubs don't want to go through the uncertainty.

  On 04/10/2018 at 13:03, DeeSpencer said:

We haven't. But the top line guys so far have been Buddy, Frawley (just), Lynch and Gaff (overpriced).

Buddy and Lynch were head and shoulders above the rest.

I'm not convinced Goddard or Dal Santo were top liners when they moved. Higgins and Waite weren't. Dale Thomas wasn't. Eddie Betts not really either, although a huge success.

May, Neale, Shiel and Wingard are the best players from next years crop of free agents - the so called pre agents - and all 4 might be traded this year. Clubs don't want to go through the uncertainty.

Higgins was a very good get by the Roos.