Jump to content

Hugh Greenwood jumps ship to North Melbourne

whatwhat say what
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

 

I think this is great event to stop clubs screwing around with players.  They'll think twice about doing that with a required player as the ice has been broken on how to pinch these players. 

  • Quote
    6 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

    Gold Coast are the worst run team by a country mile they just should pack it in.

    Basket case Shamateurs!

    Edited by picket fence

  • Quote
    •  
    4 hours ago, Elwood 3184 said:

    Didn’t we do a similar thing last year when we dropped James Jordon off the senior list and then rookied him. It sounded like a smart move to enable us to have an extra pick in the main draft but could it also have backfired?

    No, because of the uncertainty of the  Covid situation back then, the AFL put in a rule that clubs could move players to the rookie list from the senior list.  That rule has since been removed.

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    7 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

    I'd be livid if I were a GC supporter.

    I mean, for one, I'd have had no finals in 11 years.

    But to take one of the club's better players and turf him because list management is so poor you couldn't find the minimum three picks without having to delist him, only to have a rival take him for free, is a failure of the highest order.

    It's a fine ball with the Pies scenario last season with Adam Treloar being dumped ( for his salary overload of approx $900,000) which bit them on the bum as they paid off $300,000 to the Dogs not for ONE season but 3 it appears. Adding insult was a disgraceful propaganda beat up highlighted by his Coach ( of a combined 28 years playing and coaching without an AFL flag to his name) advising him that he was "disliked " ( or was it hated?)  by his teammates.

    All of this was a mastermind of someone at  the Pies who obviously had to dream up the "Great Big Fire Sale Salary Dump of 2020". 

    Is it any wonder the Club finished with a paltry 6 wins and 17th on the AFL ladder with a credibility rating of ZERO in 2021!!!

     We now move on to the perennially lowly Gold Coast Suns who were just caught napping ( asleep on the job like  their players after about Round 7 each year) with there panse down. To be honest this trick is older than Tony Cochrane by taking a player off their list Recruiting another and then reinstating said player on the Rookie list. But good on Kangaroos last on the 2021 ladder for footy  but not for brain power as both ex Crows Noble the Coach and Greenwood the player fooled  the footy "brains" at Metricon with a pre Draft heist to be savoured. 

    When evaluated I reckon the Suns were just plain DUMB but the PIes to be in their position were just plain DUMBER.

    Even the AFL rules makers can't protect some Clubs against themselves!

    But it does justify the average fans reluctance to embrace the series of rules changes for the playing of games that seem to be rushed into every pre season by an AFL administrator desperate to leave a big blob on his CV for his grandchildren  to be proud of! 

    The off season ( or Pre season) just gets weirder by the day but the AFL without doubt loves any publicity bad or otherwise!

    Can't wait for the Draft.
     

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    10 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

    All a bit strange this. A few weeks ago the Suns were struggling with their salary cap to the point where they tried desperately to ditch a player who ended up not wanting to leave.

    Now, they've managed to ditch a player to North Melbourne which is taking up the Suns' contractual obligations.

    I'm not a conspiracy theorist but ...

    Hmmm …

    8CE4859A-53F6-4515-9B3B-37B0726294D2.jpeg

    Edited by Chelly

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    I think they changed the regulations from last year the where the clubs could move players to the rookie list from the main list and opposition clubs could not get them but players like James Jordan are UFA when their contract expires.

    Now you have to delst the player and redraft him to the rookie list.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    10 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

    I'd be livid if I were a GC supporter.

    you would be livid if you were the GC supporter

  • Quote
    • Haha 2
     
    4 hours ago, Chelly said:

    Hmmm …

    8CE4859A-53F6-4515-9B3B-37B0726294D2.jpeg

    I know it looks like a mistake made by the GC...but is it? Freeing up salary cap space by losing a 29/30 year old who's not going to be there when GC is challenging for a flag doesn't seem like much of a "mistake" to me. On the other hand, player relationship management is also important and if Greenwood is leaving because of the way he was treated, that doesn't send a positive message to the rest of the list. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    9 hours ago, IvanBartul13 said:

    No, because of the uncertainty of the  Covid situation back then, the AFL put in a rule that clubs could move players to the rookie list from the senior list.  That rule has since been removed.

    Correct but Melbourne and all clubs have done it before. Usually player is re-drafted onto the rookie list.

    1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    I know it looks like a mistake made by the GC...but is it? Freeing up salary cap space by losing a 29/30 year old who's not going to be there when GC is challenging for a flag doesn't seem like much of a "mistake" to me. On the other hand, player relationship management is also important and if Greenwood is leaving because of the way he was treated, that doesn't send a positive message to the rest of the list. 

    The irony is Nth didn't want to give a 28yo a 4 year deal coming off a knee injury that played in a position of need last season but now have given a 30yo a 3 year deal coming off a knee injury that plays in a position of surplus.

    Edited by Grimes Times

  • Quote
    • Like 6

    A well orchestrated money dump by GC, they have no process in maintaining players and cap structure whatsoever.

    Clearing the decks to make room for Lukosius, King and Ranking but are they going to stay?

    Is there enough incentive to play in front of a Roaring Gold Coast Dj manufacturering the crowd atmosphere?

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    36 minutes ago, Grimes Times said:

    Correct but Melbourne and all clubs have done it before. Usually player is re-drafted onto the rookie list.

    Have we de-listed 'in-contract' players like North (Polec redraft as a rookie) and GCS (Greenwood to redraft senior list).

    Usually the delist-rookie strategy is to give a player a lifeline.  

    In this day of Delisted Free Agents delist-redraft is a risky strategy as GCS just discovered.

    imv if a club deists an in-contract player they should pay them out and take the hit in their sal cap.  Then redraft them.  That will quickly stop these types of list manoeuvres.

    Edited by Lucifers Hero

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    50 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

    Have we de-listed 'in-contract' players like North (Polec redraft as a rookie) and GCS (Greenwood to redraft senior list).

    Usually the delist-rookie strategy is to give a player a lifeline.  

    In this day of Delisted Free Agents delist-redraft is a risky strategy as GCS just discovered.

    imv if a club deists an in-contract player they should pay them out and take the hit in their sal cap.  Then redraft them.  That will quickly stop these types of list manoeuvres.

    Or (1) just get rid of the rookie list altogether, or (2) make it a true "rookie list" and only allow players onto it who have not previously been drafted.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    1 hour ago, Lucifers Hero said:

    Have we de-listed 'in-contract' players like North (Polec redraft as a rookie) and GCS (Greenwood to redraft senior list).

    Usually the delist-rookie strategy is to give a player a lifeline.  

    In this day of Delisted Free Agents delist-redraft is a risky strategy as GCS just discovered.

    imv if a club deists an in-contract player they should pay them out and take the hit in their sal cap.  Then redraft them.  That will quickly stop these types of list manoeuvres.

    Yeah fair point, Id have to go back and have a look but it may be the key difference, however the principle is the same.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    19 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

    Gold Coast are the worst run team by a country mile they just should pack it in.

    Rather have a Tassy team in the comp than GC Suns.

  • Quote
    46 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

    Rather have a Tassy team in the comp than GC Suns.

    I'd rather have a Tassie team than Collingwood, Carlton or Essendon in the comp!

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    9 hours ago, Chelly said:

    Hmmm …

    8CE4859A-53F6-4515-9B3B-37B0726294D2.jpeg

    Reported that kangars offered 500k/yr for 2 years with a trigger.

    Greenwood aint worth 500k. he's a tackling machine who plays AFL like rugby. Little skill but leaves everything on the park.

    Yawn.

  • Quote
    • Author
    2 hours ago, Mono said:

    Reported that kangars offered 500k/yr for 2 years with a trigger.

    Greenwood aint worth 500k. he's a tackling machine who plays AFL like rugby. Little skill but leaves everything on the park.

    Yawn.

    he will help 'protect' north's next generation of midfield talent, and gives them added depth

    what's the bet gc17 will lose at least two of the three key players ooc at the end of 2022 - king, lukosious, and rankine

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    3 hours ago, grazman said:

    I'd rather have a Tassie team than Collingwood, Carlton or Essendon in the comp!

    Nicely minimised and fully agree. In the chase for brevity, did you omit/leave out Geelong?

  • Quote
    • Haha 1

    This is a classic case of "accidentally on purpose". No way were GC blindsided, Mark Evans is overseeing this and he is as shrewd as anyone going around. This is externally saying "we will delist you to re-list you", while internally hoping "(please, please, please, someone take him!!!!". 

    I'm glad he is happy and I actually rate him fairly high, but I personally hate this kind of reading period BS.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    19 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    I know it looks like a mistake made by the GC...but is it? Freeing up salary cap space by losing a 29/30 year old who's not going to be there when GC is challenging for a flag doesn't seem like much of a "mistake" to me. On the other hand, player relationship management is also important and if Greenwood is leaving because of the way he was treated, that doesn't send a positive message to the rest of the list. 

    As I see it by the time GCS Challenge for the flag we would have terrafirmers colonising Mars! Wont happen in my great great great grandchildrens lifetime! Or anytime soon. Would have rather the AFL invest in Tasmania! Hell even New Zealand could put together a better team of Rugby players than what GCS have dished up year after year!

  • Quote
    •  
    On 11/16/2021 at 7:13 AM, Chelly said:

    Hmmm …

    8CE4859A-53F6-4515-9B3B-37B0726294D2.jpeg

    And Touk Miller just announces a 5 year contract extension... 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    22 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

    Have we de-listed 'in-contract' players like North (Polec redraft as a rookie) and GCS (Greenwood to redraft senior list).

    Usually the delist-rookie strategy is to give a player a lifeline.  

    In this day of Delisted Free Agents delist-redraft is a risky strategy as GCS just discovered.

    imv if a club deists an in-contract player they should pay them out and take the hit in their sal cap.  Then redraft them.  That will quickly stop these types of list manoeuvres.

    We de-listed Nev Jetta and redrafted him

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • NON-MFC: Round 13

      Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • 133 replies
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Collingwood

      Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Sydney

      The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • REPORT: St. Kilda

      Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
      This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

        • Like
      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Collingwood

      After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

        • Thumb Down
      • 385 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: St. Kilda

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
      Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 47 replies
      Demonland
    View All