5 minutes ago, Redleg said:

The Saints are considering a PP request on the basis of their injuries this season.

Not really...

The way the AFL have worded their criteria for the PP opens it up for the Saints to at least think about it.

It's not injuries as such that they are citing but the situations with one player maybe forced into retirement with heart problems, another with concussion issues and still another with ongoing mental problems.

They have been unfortunate losing the 3 players like this.

...but I think this has been drummed up by Nick & Gary this morning and nothing much will come of it.

A bit of a media beat up...who would have thought?

4 minutes ago, rjay said:

Not really...

The way the AFL have worded their criteria for the PP opens it up for the Saints to at least think about it.

It's not injuries as such that they are citing but the situations with one player maybe forced into retirement with heart problems, another with concussion issues and still another with ongoing mental problems.

They have been unfortunate losing the 3 players like this.

...but I think this has been drummed up by Nick & Gary this morning and nothing much will come of it.

A bit of a media beat up...who would have thought?

I think it's probably Stkilda saying no way the Gold Coast get an early pick and compromise our pick as much as anything.

2 minutes ago, rjay said:

Not really...

The way the AFL have worded their criteria for the PP opens it up for the Saints to at least think about it.

It's not injuries as such that they are citing but the situations with one player maybe forced into retirement with heart problems, another with concussion issues and still another with ongoing mental problems.

They have been unfortunate losing the 3 players like this.

...but I think this has been drummed up by Nick & Gary this morning and nothing much will come of it.

A bit of a media beat up...who would have thought?

KK not looking great with concussions, AVB may have to retire with long term foot problem, Joel Smith has missed 2 years of footy. Don’t think it has to be the cause of the lost games but the fact and impact of it, as a factor to be considered.

That said, of course we won’t get a PP, even if we asked for one.

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Not as stupid as it sounded when I posted it. 

The Saints are considering a PP request on the basis of their injuries this season. 

Well guess what, on the published list of injuries to clubs this season we were rated far and away the hardest hit by injuries, both in total games lost and most importantly, games lost by best 22 players on the list. 

There was a large gap to second placed team in both categories.

Well if the Saints are contemplating a request with less injuries and a higher ladder position, ( we could be 2nd last Sunday night ), then so should we. 

Any advantage helps in this competition. Just ask the Cats if they would give up their huge advantage at skilled.

 

With our luck, the AFL will grant us permission to engage a nurse.

Instead of a PP, as some have suggested they should be able to offer rival clubs either draft picks or salary cap relief to other clubs to access veterans with strong leadership. All AFL backed of course, if a vetern leaves a team to help GC then maybe that team gets whatever GC pays them as salary cap relief to help retain or attract other players. For instance if Nate Jones was targeted and GC paid him $400k for 2 years, then we get that added to our salary cap to help the retention of Trac, Oliver etc. So clubs know they aren't going to be left with nothing and the GC should become more competitive over time rather than die a slow death. 

In my opinion Nate Jones should and will rightfully continue on in 2020 with us, he's adjusting well to the half back role (last week as an exception) and that's where I think he'll see out his playing days. 

Given he rode out some of the worst days of our club he should stay, however, he would be one of a handful of guys the Gold Coast should be looking at to give some real steal and leadership to their group. If the AFL were serious about getting GC up and going then they need 3 or 4 experienced leaders, they wouldn't have to play every game, but would help drag the kids into a more competitive/professional environment. We've had Cross/Lewis, Hodge has been a great success and GWS early days got JMac, Chad etc. At the moment across the comp these players should be approached for a similar role - Jones, Kade Simpson, Zararachis, Easton Wood, Harry Taylor, Mundy, Westoff, Ebert, Houli ect. 

Either us Adelaide & maybe Sydney are going 2 finish second last. The AFL need 2b consistent an end of first round priority pick is bearable. Not pick 2. They could even give them more access 2 state league or contracted players providing both the player and club want it.

It is a nice thought, and I will be more than annoyed if 1 and 2 go to GCS.  But the AFL can ‘get away with it’ because:

1.GCS are a basket case

2. Melbourne, who will finish 17th, had a good year last year so not getting pick 2 wont be seen by the wider community as such a crime.

3.  We don’t make a fuss, so if they decide, MFC will go quietly.

4.  Picks 1 and 2 are ‘good mates’ and apparently (not proven) this will help retain them both.

I would prefer to see end of first round, access to state leagues as a priority, or some free agency hand-out.  However, I completely expect us to get shafted.  #3 seems to be OK, though, but 1 and 2 are apparently a class above.

Crows or swans a chance of finishing 17th. Huh?

What makes you think they're not????

The only club not lobbying against a start of first round priority pick is GC....

I can't see the problem. So we get pick 3 instead of pick 2 (or 4 instead of 3). The history of drafting suggests there's no difference between the likelihood of pick 2 being better than pick 3 (or vice versa). The bigger picture of getting the Suns competitive is a far more compelling issue.

That being said, my suggestion for the AFL is to give the Suns two picks immediately after the first Round which they can only trade. That way they should get one or two decent more mature players. They have enough kids already.

4 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I can't see the problem. So we get pick 3 instead of pick 2 (or 4 instead of 3). The history of drafting suggests there's no difference between the likelihood of pick 2 being better than pick 3 (or vice versa). The bigger picture of getting the Suns competitive is a far more compelling issue.

That being said, my suggestion for the AFL is to give the Suns two picks immediately after the first Round which they can only trade. That way they should get one or two decent more mature players. They have enough kids already.

agree they have enough kids already. if they are to make a reasonably speedy turnaround they need to get some good ready to play trades. other concessions granted can then be more mid term in effectiveness

Early draft picks are wasted up there, as is Tony Cochrane. 

He ruined V8 Supercars and is doing another superb job 

The Crossley situation may hurt their chances of getting a PP now.

 

15 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

The Crossley situation may hurt their chances of getting a PP now.

 

Mmm, I get your point - I assume the AFL will see these things as mutually exclusive and not be punitive to the Suns for one individuals decision making.

Edited August 8, 20196 yr by Engorged Onion

Just now, Engorged Onion said:

Mmm, I get your point - I assume the AFL will see these things as mutually exclusive and not be punitive to the Suns for one individuals decision making.

Yeah true, but it's not a good look for the competition that covered up for Essendon to turn around a give a club with a banned player a 'reward' (perceptually speaking) just a couple of months later.

They will get 1 and 2 and we will not get the player we want supposedly. 

You can take it to the bank, it’s the melb way. 

Funny that the AFL think that there was nothing wrong with the 2017 premiers getting the Suns captain and the best player in free agency, but then think throwing another pick GC way will help. How about giving the priority pick just before Richmond’s first rounder? That’d be evening things up

16 minutes ago, Leoncelli_36 said:

Funny that the AFL think that there was nothing wrong with the 2017 premiers getting the Suns captain and the best player in free agency, but then think throwing another pick GC way will help. How about giving the priority pick just before Richmond’s first rounder? That’d be evening things up

There's a whole lot of irony in what you're saying given the '18 preliminary finalist and widely touted premiership favourites took their other captain and 2nd best player a year before free agency (which probably counts as being a product of free agency) - We don't really have any arguments to make against pick 2 going there, unless it's one purely out of self-interest. I'm all for being mildly annoyed about it, but we have no real leg to stand on on the issue.

Edited August 8, 20196 yr by John Demonic

I am happy for them to get a priority pick, but not pick two, but end of first round is too late for them IMO, I think they should get their priority pick as pick 11, before any of the finalists get their first choice, giving them picks 1, 11 and 19

1 hour ago, John Demonic said:

There's a whole lot of irony in what you're saying given the '18 preliminary finalist and widely touted premiership favourites took their other captain and 2nd best player a year before free agency (which probably counts as being a product of free agency) - We don't really have any arguments to make against pick 2 going there, unless it's one purely out of self-interest. I'm all for being mildly annoyed about it, but we have no real leg to stand on on the issue.

THE difference being we gave up high picks . WE gave up. Our club. What did Richmond forego

I'll be ropable if they get pick 2 as well. It wont do squat

They can have an end of first round pick or, better still, decent but fixed term salary cap concessions. They should be able to get in a position to do something similar to Brisbane. Get in a Burgoyne (Hodge), trade for player upgrades with the lure of the dollar. Brisbane hit the jackpot by bringing in Neil and McCarthy. They just need to manage it so as not to get an pensioners chasing a superannuation bonus.

Remember when we got Trengove and Scully at pick 1 and 2? They were awesome for us. 

How about Jack Watts? He is really tearing it up at Power now with Jack Trengove.

And when we picked up Jimmy Tompus/Toumpus over Ollie Wines. Who's laughing now?...

1 hour ago, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

I am happy for them to get a priority pick, but not pick two, but end of first round is too late for them IMO, I think they should get their priority pick as pick 11, before any of the finalists get their first choice, giving them picks 1, 11 and 19

Complete agree. A mid first round pick (before finalists) gives them a solid trading piece or the ability to pick up a top 10ish talent whilst not disadvantaging teams who missed the finals. 

Everyone should be relatively happy with that.

I feel it should be either at the end of the first round or perhaps at the end of the bottom 8. Throwing picks at them isn’t going to solve the problem, they need to get senior players that will help build a strong culture. They haven’t had that at all, they got star power through Ablett but he isn’t a culture leader. 

The AFL could instead look at an underage mini-draft that can get them 3-4 gun underage youngsters that can go through their system before the usual draft. But if culture is an issue than those kids will just be learning bad habits from an earlier age. 

36 minutes ago, Youngwilliam said:

Remember when we got Trengove and Scully at pick 1 and 2? They were awesome for us. 

How about Jack Watts? He is really tearing it up at Power now with Jack Trengove.

And when we picked up Jimmy Tompus/Toumpus over Ollie Wines. Who's laughing now?...

Or when we took Oliver over Parish