Apparently the Dees have knocked back Swans opening offer for Grundy.

Harmes form dropped off last 2 seasons 

FC did the right thing letting him look elsewhere 

4 minutes ago, ChaserJ said:

Apparently the Dees have knocked back Swans opening offer for Grundy.

Any mention of what that was?

4 minutes ago, ChaserJ said:

Apparently the Dees have knocked back Swans opening offer for Grundy.

At the end of the day, despite what Lamby says day 1 of the trade period, we're not going to hold on to Grundy.  Even though we can, it's just not going to happen.  I reckon Sydney will call our bluff and we'll get him for a later pick than last year.

4 minutes ago, deelusions from afar said:

At the end of the day, despite what Lamby says day 1 of the trade period, we're not going to hold on to Grundy.  Even though we can, it's just not going to happen.  I reckon Sydney will call our bluff and we'll get him for a later pick than last year.

But if the deal is not going well, other clubs can still come in and try and lure Grundy away from Sydney. That will create a bidding war.

We can't just bend over.

I wish we'd played Grundy in the finals, could then say he's a required best 22 player and keep swans in the cooker and get pick 11 with 30 seconds of trade period to go, like freo did when getting pick 2 for Weller 

5 minutes ago, deelusions from afar said:

At the end of the day, despite what Lamby says day 1 of the trade period, we're not going to hold on to Grundy.  Even though we can, it's just not going to happen.  I reckon Sydney will call our bluff and we'll get him for a later pick than last year.

Agree. It’s just a bluff. Grundy will get to Sydney. It’s just at what number and how much of his contract is paid by Pies, Dees and Swans. AFL Sudoku at work.  
Grundys recruitment and departure after one year will be remembered as one of the biggest “head scratcher” trade deals done by the Dees. 

14 minutes ago, Nascent said:

Any mention of what that was?

Not from the media. Someone on social media speculated that the Swans offered up pick 46 flat. That’d be borderline offensive as an opening offer. Wonder if they’d put the same pick on the table for Taylor Adams?

Lot of [censored] on here about Norf.

• By and large, they have been a good corporate citizen compared to most other clubs in the comp for the last 50 years
• They dragged the game kicking and screaming into the 20th Century in the 1970's via imaginative recruiting, terrific what we would now call 'list management', invented VFL grand final breakfasts; and then again in the 1980's with Friday Night Footy
• In the 2000's pioneered 'selling' games to raise revenue - something the Deez have emulated
• They did their best in the 2000 and teens to not bottom out (i.e. tank) and ended up finishing mid-ladder most years. This meant they did not have access to top end talent. Between 2010 and 2017, they had one top 10 pick (McDonald who ended up captaining the club). Their next best was pick number 12 in 2016

Let's not loose sight of the fact that Norf are victims of their desire to stay competitive and not cheat like half a dozen other joints we all could mention. Norf are NOT the baddies here. I suggest some posters direct their vitriol elsewhere (we should all know where).

4 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

Lot of [censored] on here about Norf.

• By and large, they have been a good corporate citizen compared to most other clubs in the comp for the last 50 years
• They dragged the game kicking and screaming into the 20th Century in the 1970's via imaginative recruiting, terrific what we would now call 'list management', invented VFL grand final breakfasts; and then again in the 1980's with Friday Night Footy
• In the 2000's pioneered 'selling' games to raise revenue - something the Deez have emulated
• They did their best in the 2000 and teens to not bottom out (i.e. tank) and ended up finishing mid-ladder most years. This meant they did not have access to top end talent. Between 2010 and 2017, they had one top 10 pick (McDonald who ended up captaining the club). Their next best was pick number 12 in 2016

Let's not loose sight of the fact that Norf are victims of their desire to stay competitive and not cheat like half a dozen other joints we all could mention. Norf are NOT the baddies here. I suggest some posters direct their vitriol elsewhere (we should all know where).

Well said 

31 minutes ago, deelusions from afar said:

At the end of the day, despite what Lamby says day 1 of the trade period, we're not going to hold on to Grundy.  Even though we can, it's just not going to happen.  I reckon Sydney will call our bluff and we'll get him for a later pick than last year.

I would have thought as a Senator Jacqui would be too busy to be involved in trading Grundy to Sydney.

Edited October 10, 20232 yr by binman

26 minutes ago, RedBlueandTrue said:

I wish we'd played Grundy in the finals, could then say he's a required best 22 player and keep swans in the cooker and get pick 11 with 30 seconds of trade period to go, like freo did when getting pick 2 for Weller 

Yep - very badly managed by us IN HINDSIGHT.

28 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

But if the deal is not going well, other clubs can still come in and try and lure Grundy away from Sydney. That will create a bidding war.

We can't just bend over.

It never happens that way. A deal with Sydney will get done.

30 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Agree. It’s just a bluff. Grundy will get to Sydney. It’s just at what number and how much of his contract is paid by Pies, Dees and Swans. AFL Sudoku at work.  
Grundys recruitment and departure after one year will be remembered as one of the biggest “head scratcher” trade deals done by the Dees. 

Up there with Brayden Preuss & Luke Dunstan for 'why on earth would you choose there?'

We must give a mean PowerPoint presentation.

14 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

Let's not loose sight of the fact that Norf are victims of their desire to stay competitive and not cheat like half a dozen other joints we all could mention. Norf are NOT the baddies here. I suggest some posters direct their vitriol elsewhere (we should all know where).

They’ve made horrific list management decisions and coaching hires the last few years and now are in a position to get themselves out with a quality young list. They could take pick 2, pick 3 and trade their natural future picks for more picks and have an incredible draft hand.

They could also trade some picks for some mature players - which by all reports they are with Fisher and Stephens.

Why then are they are getting 3 extra first round picks? That is the reason everyone is upset.

The only difference between Melb 2014 and North 2023 is they have far more talent than we did at that stage. 

We had Hogan, Viney, Salem, Tyson and not much else. They have Larkey, Thomas, LDU, Simpkin, Sheezel, Wardlaw and more.

Yet we were told to dig out on our own and we did. North have been given not one, not two but 3 extra end of first round picks. The AFL did nothing for them when they needed it when they started to struggle post Scott. Yet now they’re actually ready to improve quickly they get all these bonus picks? It’s disgusting.

And it’s hurting our ability to move up in the draft and bring in top end talent. Which as a small club without a recruiting advantage opens us up to fall flat on our face too. 

It only takes a few more Bailey Laurie, Jefferson style flops and we are right back rebuilding ourselves.

5 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

They’ve made horrific list management decisions and coaching hires the last few years and now are in a position to get themselves out with a quality young list. They could take pick 2, pick 3 and trade their natural future picks for more picks and have an incredible draft hand.

They could also trade some picks for some mature players - which by all reports they are with Fisher and Stephens.

Why then are they are getting 3 extra first round picks? That is the reason everyone is upset.

The only difference between Melb 2014 and North 2023 is they have far more talent than we did at that stage. 

We had Hogan, Viney, Salem, Tyson and not much else. They have Larkey, Thomas, LDU, Simpkin, Sheezel, Wardlaw and more.

Yet we were told to dig out on our own and we did. North have been given not one, not two but 3 extra end of first round picks. The AFL did nothing for them when they needed it when they started to struggle post Scott. Yet now they’re actually ready to improve quickly they get all these bonus picks? It’s disgusting.

And it’s hurting our ability to move up in the draft and bring in top end talent. Which as a small club without a recruiting advantage opens us up to fall flat on our face too. 

It only takes a few more Bailey Laurie, Jefferson style flops and we are right back rebuilding ourselves.

You ask "why then are they are getting 3 extra first round picks"?

You could also ask why the AFL bailed Melbourne out of its self-imposed [censored] in 2013 to the tune of miliions of dollars.

The one response will answer both questions.

Edited October 10, 20232 yr by Queanbeyan Demon

5 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

They’ve made horrific list management decisions and coaching hires the last few years and now are in a position to get themselves out with a quality young list. They could take pick 2, pick 3 and trade their natural future picks for more picks and have an incredible draft hand.

They could also trade some picks for some mature players - which by all reports they are with Fisher and Stephens.

Why then are they are getting 3 extra first round picks? That is the reason everyone is upset.

The only difference between Melb 2014 and North 2023 is they have far more talent than we did at that stage. 

We had Hogan, Viney, Salem, Tyson and not much else. They have Larkey, Thomas, LDU, Simpkin, Sheezel, Wardlaw and more.

Yet we were told to dig out on our own and we did. North have been given not one, not two but 3 extra end of first round picks. The AFL did nothing for them when they needed it when they started to struggle post Scott. Yet now they’re actually ready to improve quickly they get all these bonus picks? It’s disgusting.

And it’s hurting our ability to move up in the draft and bring in top end talent. Which as a small club without a recruiting advantage opens us up to fall flat on our face too. 

It only takes a few more Bailey Laurie, Jefferson style flops and we are right back rebuilding ourselves.

Is Jefferson considered a flop? I hadnt quite come to that. 

5 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

It only takes a few more Bailey Laurie, Jefferson style flops and we are right back rebuilding ourselves.

Might be a bit of premature speculation there DS

2 minutes ago, Sydee said:

Might be a bit of premature speculation there DS

At least it's only premature speculation :-).

Could be a lot worse.

25 minutes ago, ChaserJ said:

Not from the media. Someone on social media speculated that the Swans offered up pick 46 flat. That’d be borderline offensive as an opening offer. Wonder if they’d put the same pick on the table for Taylor Adams?

Just can’t see how Taylor Adams could be worth more than Grundy.

12 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

They’ve made horrific list management decisions and coaching hires the last few years and now are in a position to get themselves out with a quality young list. They could take pick 2, pick 3 and trade their natural future picks for more picks and have an incredible draft hand.

They could also trade some picks for some mature players - which by all reports they are with Fisher and Stephens.

Why then are they are getting 3 extra first round picks? That is the reason everyone is upset.

The only difference between Melb 2014 and North 2023 is they have far more talent than we did at that stage. 

We had Hogan, Viney, Salem, Tyson and not much else. They have Larkey, Thomas, LDU, Simpkin, Sheezel, Wardlaw and more.

Yet we were told to dig out on our own and we did. North have been given not one, not two but 3 extra end of first round picks. The AFL did nothing for them when they needed it when they started to struggle post Scott. Yet now they’re actually ready to improve quickly they get all these bonus picks? It’s disgusting.

And it’s hurting our ability to move up in the draft and bring in top end talent. Which as a small club without a recruiting advantage opens us up to fall flat on our face too. 

It only takes a few more Bailey Laurie, Jefferson style flops and we are right back rebuilding ourselves.

Love the optimism!

Harmes to Dogs for F3rd, done deal.

Best of luck James for rest of AFL career.

23 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

You ask "why then are they are getting 3 extra first round picks"?

You could also ask why the AFL bailed Melbourne out of its self-imposed [censored] in 2013 to the tune of miliions of dollars.

The one response will answer both questions.

Almost every club has had financial assistance. Ours was far less than some. 

North don’t need 3 x first round picks for financial survival. They don’t need them to sell memberships. That’s what picks 2 and 3 as well as Larkey, Sheezel and Wardlaw will do.

There’s no need for them. The only reason they’re getting them is because Clarko had a meltdown. 

6 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Harmes to Dogs for F3rd, done deal.

Best of luck James for rest of AFL career.

That pick probably gets the Fullarton deal done (Lions likely happy to accrue picks for the next Aschroft).

25 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

Is Jefferson considered a flop? I hadnt quite come to that. 

You come in with question marks on your competitiveness and put up a 0 touch game you’re now a dud pick until proven otherwise. I hope he can turn it around but the very early call is not good.

If you keep taking picks in the teens to build your list you run the risk of a string of misses. That’s how North ended up with such a gap in their list to begin with. The Durdin and Garners of the world.