Jump to content

Featured Replies

1 minute ago, layzie said:

The NBA occasionally steps in and vetoes lopsided trades like this one. Wish the AFL could do that. 

They can, but they deliberately said they would be less likely to do it this year. Almost like they knew this was coming 

 
11 minutes ago, old dee said:

Sounds like you have been using the same people as the MFC Bbo!

Then he will never get a training base.

More chance of getting Dom Perignon or Grange Hermitage out of his winecasks.

Edited by Redleg

Why the heck are the Suns giving away pick 7!   You don't see the Pies giving us their first pick along with Grundy

Madness!

 
4 minutes ago, Redleg said:

You mean the Romsey Recreational Reserve is unavailable.

Then what about the Macedon Maulers? Surely you could use Hanging Rock for the training base.

i'm sure uncle's croquet court at the manor would be suitable for an mcg sized ground

7 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

They can, but they deliberately said they would be less likely to do it this year. Almost like they knew this was coming 

Pretty convenient hey. 


29 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

How can the Cats afford to accomodate such a high salary AND bring in more talented youngsters in Bruhn and Henry when they just won the flag? The entire point of the draft and salary caps is equalisation, yet it seems it's creating an environment that's anything but equal. How are the struggling clubs like North and GC ever meant to become competitive when their top young kids are walking out the door or they can't afford to keep them without paying absurd amounts?

The competition is in a terrible spot at the moment!

Because they've got 14 players who'll be over 30 next season (assuming no one else leaves or retires) and of those only Cameron and Stewart (the youngest as well) are likely to be on longer more expensive deals. Some of the others have been extremely highly paid during their careers and in order to stay on a list they would have accepted a lower contract - exactly why I think guys like Hibberd and Melksham can be useful. 

They managed to get the flag, and good on them for that, but it could have gone the other way and they could have gone the way of North a few years back.

4 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Why the heck are the Suns giving away pick 7!   You don't see the Pies giving us their first pick along with Grundy

Madness!

It’s a lot to accomodate. What’s a bet, Geelong will convince him to take a 200K pay cut. 

This trade stinks to high heavens. The suns are a joke and the cats are taking the pizz. The AFL had to take a look at the books at the cattery. Very suspect 

 

Pretty handy that the Cats CEO use to be Head of Football at AFL and has all the inside workings of all these trade quirks and ways to manipulate the system.

How this is allow to happen has got me plucked.

This wouldn't happen in american sports.

Good thing the Sun's got that draft assistance a few years ago.


3 hours ago, BDA said:

This trade stinks to high heavens. The suns are a joke and the cats are taking the pizz. The AFL had to take a look at the books at the cattery. Very suspect 

It would have to be the most embarrassing trade in history. The Suns should be ashamed of themselves. It shows a high level of incompetence by everyone involved. The AFL should again investigate the Suns mismanagement starting with Evans. If I was a supporter I would be disgusted. 

4 hours ago, Redleg said:

You mean our ex List Manager.

Yes - ex

4 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

They can, but they deliberately said they would be less likely to do it this year. Almost like they knew this was coming 

 

1 hour ago, YesitwasaWin4theAges said:

Pretty handy that the Cats CEO use to be Head of Football at AFL and has all the inside workings of all these trade quirks and ways to manipulate the system.

How this is allow to happen has got me plucked.

This wouldn't happen in american sports.

And some of us thought that AFL corruption was limited to the MRP / tribunal / appeals board, but ….. ??

addendum : and schedule, sometimes amusingly referred to as “the draw”. 

Edited by monoccular

16 hours ago, DubDee said:

Why the heck are the Suns giving away pick 7!   You don't see the Pies giving us their first pick along with Grundy

Madness!

The fact that they have to throw that sweatener in is really pathetic. AFL needs to review their lovechild again to see what's going on up there. 

Shame there isn't an independent panel that audits clubs SCs. 

Has Bowes been promised a free hobby farm near Geelong as well? Or something similar for family back in Cairns?

6 minutes ago, Stiff Arm said:

Shame there isn't an independent panel that audits clubs SCs. 

Has Bowes been promised a free hobby farm near Geelong as well? Or something similar for family back in Cairns?

I'm sure there is a friendly Geelong travel agent that will 'organise' the airfares and accommodation for family. 

Oh, you need a car Jack?  Right O, go and see Blogs and he will set you up.  Your partner needs a job?  xxx are looking for staff they might help. 

Repeat those attractions for any service/product a player coming to Geelong may want and their salary package stretches much much further and it is all tax free to the player!!  No cash to player so never appears anywhere near Geelong's books or anyone else's.


1 hour ago, Lucifers Hero said:

I'm sure there is a friendly Geelong travel agent that will 'organise' the airfares and accommodation for family. 

Definitely.

 

Capture 2.JPG

Edited by layzie

Geelong are spreading the 2 x $850k over 4 years apparently

Why would Bowes agree...play 2 years at $850k and back yourself to command a minimum of say$400k for another 2 years and he's $800k in front

7 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Geelong are spreading the 2 x $850k over 4 years apparently

Why would Bowes agree...play 2 years at $850k and back yourself to command a minimum of say$400k for another 2 years and he's $800k in front

If so I hope they told Bowes that before he nominated them.

I would guess it is 4 years at say $550-$600.

Geelong get pick 7, get the player but spread the $$ for little sal cap hit.  Not what was implied in GCS  offer.

Edited by Lucifers Hero


13 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Geelong are spreading the 2 x $850k over 4 years apparently

Why would Bowes agree...play 2 years at $850k and back yourself to command a minimum of say$400k for another 2 years and he's $800k in front

He’d probably have to go to Essendon for that, where he’d get poor coaching and fitness advice and be out of the league in 2 years.

This way he gets the Geelong special home cooking that sees all of their players add 5kg of bulk instantly and he’ll probably get a deal with Cotton On to sell undies. Plus he’ll play until he’s 33 rather than 26.

11 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

If so I hope they told Bowes that before he nominated them.

I would guess it is 4 years at say $550-$600.

Geelong get pick 7, get the player but spread the $$ for little sal cap hit.  Not what was implied in GCS  offer.

Suspect you're right but as you say it would need to be 4x $550k minimum which puts the year 3 and 4 at only $250k pa.

Bowes is selling himself short perhaps ..maybe there's an upward kicker for success

 
On 10/5/2022 at 7:07 PM, BAMF said:

Good thing the Sun's got that draft assistance a few years ago.

This is very much at the heart of the problem. The AFL have stuffed the equalisation economy with all of the assistance GC received over multiple years (I’ll call it ‘pick-flation’).

Theyve had so much draft pick stimulus pumped in, the value of a high pick has just diminished and created a salary cap squeeze in order to retain these highly rated players. Because they’ve taken on too much of that water, so they’re unloading and it’s the well run and well off clubs catching all of the overflow. Even when helping lift the poorer clubs up, the stronger clubs end up benefitting. It’s why equalisation measures are cooked.

In order to maintain some integrity of the cap, AFL should have limited the capacity of contract smoothing for clubs taking on salary dump contracts. E.g. Geelong should take on the full 850 for a two year period, but permitted to negotiate a friendlier extension that only triggers when the original contract has been fulfilled. The measure of when a trade constitutes a ‘dump’ could  be measured by the other incentives involved in the trade (I.e. an objectively one sided deal). Funny that Ned Guy is in the role that l’d see assessing this function at the AFL. No wonder dumps were waved through this year.

Allowing clubs inheriting the dumped contract and smooth straight away feels like a rort.

Edited by ChaserJ

It'll be fascinating to see what Geelong send back.


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...

Featured Content

  • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

      • Haha
    • 719 replies
  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

    • 4 replies
  • 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.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 216 replies
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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? 

    • 4 replies