Jump to content

Finn Emile-Brennan


Nascent

Recommended Posts

On 11/18/2022 at 6:59 PM, xman97 said:

It's always been 3 x Cat B Rookies. It went to 2 only for the Covid years.

I've searched high and low for any reference or 'talk' that in 2023 list sizes and sal cap will revert to pre-covid levels.

Would very much appreciate seeing something more about it.  TIA.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Elwood 3184 said:

Does anyone know if it’s true that we have opted not to nominate Emilie-Brennan or whether we can’t pick him because we’re limited to 2 Category B rookies? 

Nothing official to say we have or haven't nominated him.  If we have, we can take him as a senior player rather than a B-rookie.

As I understand the list size rules a club can have up to 42 players comprised of Senior and A-rookie (36 to 38 senior players and up to 6 A-Rookies.  In 2022 our combo was 36 senior players and 6 A-rookie players.  We can change this mix to take FE-B

We currently have 34 senior players and 3 A-rookies.  So 5 potential list spots to fill. 

It has been said we will use two draft picks + our last pick for Chandler promotion.

The other point is having draft picks.  We have 13, 37, 90 and 118 the latter two will come into the 60-70 range.  One will be used to promote Chandler the other could be used for FE-B if the bid to match is late enough in the draft.

Having said all that the pointers are that we won't be taking him.

11 minutes ago, alpha33 said:

So can we still nominate a FEB?

Nominations have closed.

But if we have nominated him we can get him - see comment above.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didnt realise you can have 3 Catagory B rookies so that gives Emile-Brennan a chance.  The AFL will surely produce a list of nominated players soon because Cooper Vickery (Hawthorn) Nathan Barkla (Port Adelaide), Jasper Scaife (Fremantle) and Yuyu Ashwin ( Collingwood) would be certain to be wanted as rookies at least by their clubs and theres been no mention of them being nominated.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, IvanBartul13 said:

I didnt realise you can have 3 Catagory B rookies so that gives Emile-Brennan a chance.  The AFL will surely produce a list of nominated players soon because Cooper Vickery (Hawthorn) Nathan Barkla (Port Adelaide), Jasper Scaife (Fremantle) and Yuyu Ashwin ( Collingwood) would be certain to be wanted as rookies at least by their clubs and theres been no mention of them being nominated.

It is yet to be confirmed whether it is 2 or 3 B rookies.

This article talks about list sizes.  how-your-club-is-placed-ahead-of-the-list-lodgement-deadline-and-upcoming-afl-draft  The underlying assumption is the status quo remains ie  Seniors + A-rookies should not exceed 42 and the max B rookies is 2.

According to that article, the clubs you've listed currently have zero or one B-rookie.

As mentioned in an earlier post we can take FE-B as a senior player if we nominated him or even if we didn't, if he gets to the end of the draft with no takers.

Hopefully, the AFL produces a list.  And that list sizes are confirmed.

Edited by Lucifers Hero
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was something I heard that it's going back to normal, but as there's no official word yet, it makes it very frustrating and I'm now starting to think that clubs can go to max allowed list size as pre Covid, but the minimum can stay at the Covid years level. I'd be shocked if the list sizes don't go back to normal as the salary cap surely goes up due to the following points below. Surely you can't have the salary cap go up and the list sizes stay at Covid year levels.

 

-Players currently having access to 28 per cent of forecast defined AFL revenue. The broadcast deal's price is $643 million per season, up on the current $473 million per season. 

 

-The Soft Cap limit will increase by an additional $500,000 in 2023 and a further $250,000 in 2024. 

 

-Total Player Payments/Average wage for the following seasons (Covid years didn't go up as planned below):

2016: $10.37m / $309,000

2017: $12.45m / $371,000

2018: $12.6m / $375,000

2019: $12.76m / $380,000

2020: $13.02m / $388,000

2021: $13.28m / $396,000

2022: $13.54m / $403,000

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, xman97 said:

There was something I heard that it's going back to normal, but as there's no official word yet, it makes it very frustrating and I'm now starting to think that clubs can go to max allowed list size as pre Covid, but the minimum can stay at the Covid years level. I'd be shocked if the list sizes don't go back to normal as the salary cap surely goes up due to the following points below. Surely you can't have the salary cap go up and the list sizes stay at Covid year levels.

 

-Players currently having access to 28 per cent of forecast defined AFL revenue. The broadcast deal's price is $643 million per season, up on the current $473 million per season. 

 

-The Soft Cap limit will increase by an additional $500,000 in 2023 and a further $250,000 in 2024. 

 

-Total Player Payments/Average wage for the following seasons (Covid years didn't go up as planned below):

2016: $10.37m / $309,000

2017: $12.45m / $371,000

2018: $12.6m / $375,000

2019: $12.76m / $380,000

2020: $13.02m / $388,000

2021: $13.28m / $396,000

2022: $13.54m / $403,000

Maybe no announcement on list size is because the new CBA that has just expired has not been finalised.  Theoretically, increase in sal cap means more players.

However, players may want to 'catch up' what they lost during the covid years cut backs so the list size may not go up in 2023.  patrick-dangerfield-reveals-covid-reward-clause-he-wants-written-into-the-next-afl-cba

Also, given that clubs have managed fine with the current list size (42 + 2 B-rookies) and a Tassie team, the AFL may not increase list sizes at all...

I would be surprised if list sizes weren't as per 2022, next year.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Maybe no announcement on list size is because the new CBA that has just expired has not been finalised.  Theoretically, increase in sal cap means more players.

However, players may want to 'catch up' what they lost during the covid years cut backs so the list size may not go up in 2023.  patrick-dangerfield-reveals-covid-reward-clause-he-wants-written-into-the-next-afl-cba

Also, given that clubs have managed fine with the current list size (42 + 2 B-rookies) and a Tassie team, the AFL may not increase list sizes at all...

I would be surprised if list sizes weren't as per 2022, next year.

You make very good points. I don’t think West Coast did so well with the list size last year though 😂

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Serious question, would we have any interest whatsoever in Emile-Brennan if he wasn't in our NGA?

As with Moniz-Wakefield and Mac Andrew, people are putting on their rose-coloured glasses regarding players who really don't fit our needs, if indeed they are even an outside chance to make it as AFL players. 

I get that a NGA player can be a free hit, but Emile-Brennan is going to chew up a heap of development resources to get him even remotely close to AFL standard.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to this article we have nominated him  afl-draft-2022.

Interestingly it shows the latter rounds of the drafted truncated to a few teams.  Not sure the logic behind it.  But anyway, it shows our picks as 13, 37, 78 (round 5) and 83 (round 6).

While it was reported we would take two players at the draft (and promote Chandler with our last pick) there is scope to take F-EB with pick 78.

 

Edit:  I have reservations about the accuracy of the listed NGA nominations as it lists Keeler as Adelaide's nominee and they have chosen to not nominate him albeit he was eligible. 

Also, they have shown Kyah Farris-White as an NGA nominee but he joined us as a B-rookie.

So NGA nominations are still bit of a mystery.

Edited by Lucifers Hero
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, poita said:

Serious question, would we have any interest whatsoever in Emile-Brennan if he wasn't in our NGA?

As with Moniz-Wakefield and Mac Andrew, people are putting on their rose-coloured glasses regarding players who really don't fit our needs, if indeed they are even an outside chance to make it as AFL players. 

I get that a NGA player can be a free hit, but Emile-Brennan is going to chew up a heap of development resources to get him even remotely close to AFL standard.

Based on what assumption?

Didn't realise you could already come to the conclusion that EB is going to chew up a heap of development with zero facts to back this up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, poita said:

Serious question, would we have any interest whatsoever in Emile-Brennan if he wasn't in our NGA?

As with Moniz-Wakefield and Mac Andrew, people are putting on their rose-coloured glasses regarding players who really don't fit our needs, if indeed they are even an outside chance to make it as AFL players. 

I get that a NGA player can be a free hit, but Emile-Brennan is going to chew up a heap of development resources to get him even remotely close to AFL standard.

Sometimes players who look like they need lots of development only need a professional environment to become the player we hope they will become.

At one stage Finn look like he was going to be a top 40 player why the drop off?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

According to this article we have nominated him  afl-draft-2022.

Interestingly it shows the latter rounds of the drafted truncated to a few teams.  Not sure the logic behind it.  But anyway, it shows our picks as 13, 37, 78 (round 5) and 83 (round 6).

While it was reported we would take two players at the draft (and promote Chandler with our last pick) there is scope to take F-EB with pick 78.

 

Edit:  I have reservations about the accuracy of the listed NGA nominations as it lists Keeler as Adelaide's nominee and they have chosen to not nominate him albeit he was eligible. 

Also, they have shown Kyah Farris-White as an NGA nominee but he joined us as a B-rookie.

So NGA nominations are still bit of a mystery.

No offence to Fox News but I would rather see confirmation of this on the AFL site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

According to this article we have nominated him  afl-draft-2022.

Interestingly it shows the latter rounds of the drafted truncated to a few teams.  Not sure the logic behind it.  But anyway, it shows our picks as 13, 37, 78 (round 5) and 83 (round 6).

While it was reported we would take two players at the draft (and promote Chandler with our last pick) there is scope to take F-EB with pick 78.

 

Edit:  I have reservations about the accuracy of the listed NGA nominations as it lists Keeler as Adelaide's nominee and they have chosen to not nominate him albeit he was eligible. 

Also, they have shown Kyah Farris-White as an NGA nominee but he joined us as a B-rookie.

So NGA nominations are still bit of a mystery.

The list is definitely not definitive, it's more of a list of NGA players that are possibly draftable prospects.  As well as Keeler, there are other discrepancies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Red and Blue realist said:

I know father sons retain their status,  do academy kids? As in,  if he had a good year next year would we have the same access or is it just a 1 off? 

yes, angus mclennan was a 19yo mature ager who was nga listed by the saints this year, and the dogs did a similar thing with cody raak last year after initially passing on them in their 18th year, i'm not sure if theres certain rules about whether they have to still be playing nab league as an overager or whatever in order to still qualify as i imagine a 26yo playing state league who was once nga tied cant be taken but not sure

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


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...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Demonland Forums  

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles  

    REDEEM by Meggs

    How will Mick Stinear and his dwindling list of fit and available Demons respond to last week’s 65-point capitulation to the Bombers, the team’s biggest loss in history?   As a minimum he will expect genuine effort from all of his players when Melbourne takes on the GWS Giants at Ikon Park this Thursday.  Happily, the ground remains a favourite Melbourne venue of players and spectators alike and will provide an opportunity for the Demons to redeem themselves. Injuries to star play

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    EASYBEATS by Meggs

    A beautiful sunny Friday afternoon, with a light breeze and a strong Windy Hill crowd set the scene, inviting one team to seize the day and take the important four points on offer. For the Demons it was not a good Friday, easily beaten by an all-time largest losing margin of 65 points.   Essendon threw themselves into action today, winning most of the contests and had three early goals with Daria Bannister on fire.  In contrast the Demons were dropping marks, hesitant in close and comm

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 9

    DEFUSE THE BOMBERS by Meggs

    Last Saturday’s crushing loss to Fremantle, after being three goals ahead at three quarter time, should be motivation enough to bounce back for this very winnable Round 5 clash at Windy Hill. A first-time venue for the Melbourne AFLW team, this should be a familiar suburban, windy, footy environment for the players.   Essendon were brave and competitive last week against ladder leader Adelaide at Sturt’s home ground. A familiar name, Maddison Gay, was the Bombers best player with

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 33

    BLOW THE SIREN by Meggs

    Fremantle hosted the Demons on a sunny 20-degree Saturdayafternoon winning the toss and electing to defend in the first quarter against the 3-goal breeze favouring the Parry Street end. There was method here, as this would give the comeback queens, the Dockers, last use of the breeze. The Melbourne Coach had promised an improved performance, and we did start better than previous weeks, winning the ball out of the middle, using the breeze advantage and connecting to the forwards. 

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    GETAWAY by Meggs

    Calling all fit players. Expect every available Melbourne player to board the Virgin cross-continent flight to Perth for this Round 4 clash on Saturday afternoon at Fremantle Oval. It promises to be keenly contested, though Fremantle is the bookies clear favourite.  If we lose, finals could be remoter than Rottnest Island especially following on from the Dees 50-point dismantlement by North Melbourne last Sunday.  There are 8 remaining matches, over the next 7 weeks.  To Meggs’

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    DRUBBING by Meggs

    With Casey Fields basking in sunshine, an enthusiastic throng of young Demons fans formed a guard of honour for the evergreen and much admired 75-gamer Paxy Paxman. As the home team ran out to play, Paxy’s banner promised that the Demons would bounce back from last week’s loss to Brisbane and reign supreme.   Disappointingly, the Kangaroos dominated the match to win by 50 points, but our Paxy certainly did her bit.  She was clearly our best player, sweeping well in defence.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 4

    GARNER STRENGTH by Meggs

    In keeping with our tough draw theme, Week 3 sees Melbourne take on flag favourites, North Melbourne, at Casey Fields this Sunday at 1:05pm.  The weather forecast looks dry, a coolish 14 degrees and will be characteristically gusty.  Remember when Casey Fields was considered our fortress?  The Demons have lost two of their past three matches at the Field of Dreams, so opposition teams commute down the Princes Highway with more optimism these days.  The Dees held the highe

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 1

    ALLY’S FIELDS by Meggs

    It was a sunny morning at Casey Fields, as Demon supporters young and old formed a guard of honour for fan favourite and 50-gamer Alyssa Bannan.  Banno’s banner stated the speedster was the ‘fastest 50 games’ by an AFLW player ever.   For Dees supporters, today was not our day and unfortunately not for Banno either. A couple of opportunities emerged for our number 6 but alas there was no sizzle.   Brisbane atoned for last week’s record loss to North Melbourne, comprehensively out

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 1

    GOOD MORNING by Meggs

    If you are driving or training it to Cranbourne on Saturday, don’t forget to set your alarm clock. The Melbourne Demons play the reigning premiers Brisbane Lions at Casey Fields this Saturday, with the bounce of the ball at 11:05am.  Yes, that’s AM.   The AFLW fixture shows deference to the AFL men’s finals games.  So, for the men it’s good afternoon and good evening and for the women it’s good morning.     The Lions were wounded last week by 44 points, their highest ever los

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 3
  • Tell a friend

    Love Demonland? Tell a friend!

×
×
  • Create New...