44 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

LDU is already close to brownlow material if he can stay on the park. Simpkin is very good. Taryn Thomas is a hell of a talent and impacts games. Sheezel just won the rising star and is already at the point of being tagged some weeks. Wardlaws already shown he’s capable at worst, and future AA if he continues rapidly building his body up. That’s 5 potential AA level mids under the age of 25, with three of them already impacting games at a high level. 

That’s it you’ve convinced me. Stuff their 76 losses from past 88 games and 17th placed finish this year. I’m putting money in them for a flag in the next three years. 

3 hours ago, greenwaves said:

Would it be accurate to say that we won't bring in any experienced players other than McAdam and we'll use the rest of our picks in the draft?

McAdam plus … I think (in my view) we will need a backup ruck/forward !! At least as a plan B in case Maxy gets injured or needs a rest!! 
Otherwise yes 4 new draftees plus Kynan Brown would be handy. 

Edited September 23, 20231 yr by spirit of norm smith
P

6 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

No. We need a backup ruck/forward !! At least as a plan B in case Maxy gets injured or needs a rest!! 

 

19 minutes ago, old55 said:

 

Yes I vote no to Chol. He’s not the answer. 

19 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Yes I vote no to Chol. He’s not the answer. 

You have spoken

This is the way

Amazing the short memories of some posters on D'Land.

Melbourne have been the recipients of VFL/AFL handouts on multiple occasions in the last 50 years. A strong argument can be put forth that we do not win in '21 without the most recent handouts.

Furthermore, it's the raison d'etre of the AFL - to protect the clubs from their own ineptitude. Unarguably, it's one of the main functions of the AFL, to ensure the welfare of all participating clubs.

Edited September 23, 20231 yr by Queanbeyan Demon
Typo

11 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Yes I vote no to Chol. He’s not the answer. 

How about some explanation instead of the over the top gif.

And how about a realistic alternative and the reasons they are better.

26 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

Amazing the short memories of some posters on D'Land.

Melbourne have been the recipients of VFL/AFL handouts on multiple occasions in the last 50 years. A strong argument can be put forth that we do not win in '21 without the most recent handouts.

Furthermore, it's one of the main functions of the AFL, to ensure the welfare of all participating clubs.

What’s your point though? Because we’ve had help in the past, North should get whatever they ask for whenever they go back to the well? There has to be a limit.

My point is this @Mach5 . . . it's the raison d'etre of the AFL to protect the clubs from their own ineptitude. Unarguably, it's one of the main functions of the AFL, to ensure the welfare of all participating clubs.

Edited September 23, 20231 yr by Queanbeyan Demon

13 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

My point is this @Mach5 . . . it's the raison d'etre of the AFL to protect the clubs from their own ineptitude. Unarguably, it's one of the main functions of the AFL, to ensure the welfare of all participating clubs.

Obviously we can’t question that, but I think we can question if enough is enough? Our own “handouts” weren’t without limit and I’d think their existing handouts are not held back by ineptitude, but by not allowing time for the potential to be realised.

17 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Also doesn't make any economic sense to give North a leg up. They're a low drawing financially unsuccessful club with one of the weakest balance sheets in the competition. (Take out their leasehold improvement value on Arden Street and they would be in deep trouble. Want to buy some change rooms and a gym.)

You've answered all the reasons why North are considered eligible for this compensation.

Bit like saying Melb can't be given it ( previously) as we have had the MCG and it guarantees us bigger crowds ( not necessarily profits ) as 25,000 is about cut off point for match day profits. 

 

22 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

My point is this @Mach5 . . . it's the raison d'etre of the AFL to protect the clubs from their own ineptitude. Unarguably, it's one of the main functions of the AFL, to ensure the welfare of all participating clubs.

So why then would the AFL say no help to us over a few seasons, where they said we had good players and prospects, when both proved absolutely incorrect and we remained at the bottom of the ladder?

I acknowledge the Frawley pick and the Trengove pick, but that was about it as fas as I recall.

I am not against some help to perennially poor performers but it has to be measured not ridiculous.

12 minutes ago, Redleg said:

So why then would the AFL say no help to us over a few seasons, where they said we had good players and prospects, when both proved absolutely incorrect and we remained at the bottom of the ladder?

I acknowledge the Frawley pick and the Trengove pick, but that was about it as fas as I recall.

I am not against some help to perennially poor performers but it has to be measured not ridiculous.

Blind Freddie could tell you why we were treated differently Redleg. 

14 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

LDU is already close to brownlow material if he can stay on the park. Simpkin is very good. Taryn Thomas is a hell of a talent and impacts games. Sheezel just won the rising star and is already at the point of being tagged some weeks. Wardlaws already shown he’s capable at worst, and future AA if he continues rapidly building his body up. That’s 5 potential AA level mids under the age of 25, with three of them already impacting games at a high level. 

Adding Reid or Curtin and Duursma to that is madness. They’d have more top 10 mids on their list that we have mids full stop. 

They need time and mature players around them. More star youth won’t change anything in the short term.

Add in Larkey too. What he managed to do this year was pretty impressive.

North's biggest concern is that they lack key backs to build their defence around. Initially I thought Clarko's comments about losing McKay was purely about bumping up his value to ensure pick 3 (and I'm sure it is) but I seriously think they'll match the bid if it's not pick 3, they have nothing else!, Aidan Corr isn't a player you build your backline around, Griffin Logue out for most of the season with a knew, and most of the key backs in the market seem to be taken. Who else do they have?

3 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Blind Freddie could tell you why we were treated differently Redleg. 

What the tanking/non tanking finding?

But Maynard was found not guilty of even careless conduct.

Therefore he is innocent and so were we, but I get your point.

13 minutes ago, Ouch! said:

Add in Larkey too. What he managed to do this year was pretty impressive.

North's biggest concern is that they lack key backs to build their defence around. Initially I thought Clarko's comments about losing McKay was purely about bumping up his value to ensure pick 3 (and I'm sure it is) but I seriously think they'll match the bid if it's not pick 3, they have nothing else!, Aidan Corr isn't a player you build your backline around, Griffin Logue out for most of the season with a knew, and most of the key backs in the market seem to be taken. Who else do they have?

Don't be surprised if they take a key back if they get pick 3 compensation. There list looks ok  a few holes but  plenty of upside, still 2 years away from being anywhere near a top 8 side but will have enough talent in before all the Tassie hand outs happen.

22 minutes ago, Redleg said:

So why then would the AFL say no help to us over a few seasons, where they said we had good players and prospects, when both proved absolutely incorrect and we remained at the bottom of the ladder?

I acknowledge the Frawley pick and the Trengove pick, but that was about it as fas as I recall.

I am not against some help to perennially poor performers but it has to be measured not ridiculous.

Good responses @Redleg. As I understand it, we also received a concession pick in 2008 that we spent on Sam Blease. We also received millions in financial assistance from the AFL to transition out of the Neeld ara.

But I take your point.

If Ratugolea and McKay are worth first round compensation, then the system is rooted.

Anyway, bring on the rumours I say. 

28 minutes ago, drdrake said:

Don't be surprised if they take a key back if they get pick 3 compensation. There list looks ok  a few holes but  plenty of upside, still 2 years away from being anywhere near a top 8 side but will have enough talent in before all the Tassie hand outs happen.

I expect that they will, but taking a key back out of the draft... you are not going to be playing that player for a few years at least... It will still be a weakness for them for a few years yet.

29 minutes ago, Return to Glory said:

If Ratugolea and McKay are worth first round compensation, then the system is rooted.

Anyway, bring on the rumours I say. 

Perhaps the better statement is "If Essendon is prepared to pay McKay, a player who has averaged less than 10 games across 7 seasons $800k + a season, then they are fools."

Not sure why it's worth blaming the compensation system, blame the clubs stupid enough to pay FAs ridiculous money. How has it worked out for Essendon with Stringer, Shiel and Devon Smith. Now they are looking to pay overs to land McKay, Gresham and possibly Goldstein.

They obviously enjoy mediocrity.

Edited September 24, 20231 yr by Ouch!

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

So why then would the AFL say no help to us over a few seasons, where they said we had good players and prospects, when both proved absolutely incorrect and we remained at the bottom of the ladder?

I acknowledge the Frawley pick and the Trengove pick, but that was about it as fas as I recall.

I am not against some help to perennially poor performers but it has to be measured not ridiculous.

They lined up Peter Jackson and Paul Roos for us as well.

I do not mind compensation at pick 3 if McKay gets huge $$ but i will be cranky if they are given a priority pick. This draft is compromised to the ridiculous as it is. Give North 1st access to State league players even if it means creating a spot or 2 on their list to accommodate that.

I think we will go very hard to move up from our pick 13 which after Academy/FS will likely be around pick 16/17.

Our 1st pick i would be hoping for either Sanders, O'Sullivan or Caddy. Evidently the Dogs are desperate for Watson and will throw the kitchen sink at GC for pick 4, Given Dogs are getting FS Croft in the top 15 it makes sense.

I was hoping we would get the GC pick.

 

35 minutes ago, BDA said:

They lined up Peter Jackson and Paul Roos for us as well.

I understand they very much suggested Jackson but I find the idea they had an experienced club CEO working a lesser job and got him over to a job he could do is some amazing handout a bit confusing. No one ever says the AFL lines up SHocking to be Geelong’s CEO. 

I’ve never seen any evidence that they lined up Roos apart from that they guaranteed our debt loans which they do for all clubs. And of course they wanted an experienced premiership coach to take on the gig.

The thing I don’t understand is Roos came to us with a strategy not to rely on high picks and to add leadership, culture and then let the young talent develop. 

Clarkson’s come to North and has openly admitted he couldn’t coach a team of scrubbers and his desire to coach was reignited when he saw Wardlaw play. Now, instead of building a side with 8-10 great young players and some veterans and role players he’s gone to the AFL and wants a handout to get 2, 3, 4, 5???? more elite kids? 

3 hours ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

Amazing the short memories of some posters on D'Land.

Melbourne have been the recipients of VFL/AFL handouts on multiple occasions in the last 50 years. A strong argument can be put forth that we do not win in '21 without the most recent handouts.

Furthermore, it's the raison d'etre of the AFL - to protect the clubs from their own ineptitude. Unarguably, it's one of the main functions of the AFL, to ensure the welfare of all participating clubs.

We didn't get draft capital like north are getting, we got $$$ and a hand selected board and coaching staff that transitioned into a premiership winning coaching staff.

I'm happy with our compo package.

1 hour ago, Ouch! said:

Perhaps the better statement is "If Essendon is prepared to pay McKay, a player who has averaged less than 10 games across 7 seasons $800k + a season, then they are fools."

Not sure why it's worth blaming the compensation system, blame the clubs stupid enough to pay FAs ridiculous money. How has it worked out for Essendon with Stringer, Shiel and Devon Smith. Now they are looking to pay overs to land McKay, Gresham and possibly Goldstein.

They obviously enjoy mediocrity.

Putting Essendon’s odd list building to the side, McKay is a rare talent who can produce so much more. And he’s free. He’s always going to get a 25% + bump for being free! 

In terms of free agents netting first rounders he’s less suspect that Joe Daniher leaving Essendon having barely played for a few years. And maybe even Gresham. Not to mention the Motlop end of first rounder.

It’s a completely stuffed system that needs to be changed with far more free agents and more restricted free agents that see teams match and trade if they don’t want to lose someone. 

Do that and list decisions get made based on best use of cap space and the salary cap evens the comp out. Then you can say goodbye to compo. The compo is the cap space.

In this situation North either match and tell Essendon to come up with a top 10 pick or they let him walk and spend 700k on players they rate higher.