1 hour ago, Colm said:

Perfect timing for the AFL to change the rules on Father son draftees just as the Dees have a few coming through over the next few years. 
Does it mean they will leave all the NSW, Queensland and Tassie clubs to still have the same access to the academy players?

Where is there mention of changing the father son rule??

1 hour ago, Lucifers Hero said:

If the AFL close the loophole again clubs will have to 'pay' more for F/S and Academy players.

Presume someone raised that we have players coming in the next three years.

MFCSS!

2 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

It looks like 'club led' trading contracted players is on the agenda.

clubs-pushing-for-ways-to-lead-trades-of-contracted-players

Currently happening with OOC players eg Hunt😢 last year.  Trading in-contract players takes it to another level,

has to happen

the players will still earn their contract and simply 'ply their trade' at a different club / location

suck it up, boys

3 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

has to happen

the players will still earn their contract and simply 'ply their trade' at a different club / location

suck it up, boys

I am not sure it will.

Seems rather dishonest.

A player signs to play somewhere and is then shipped off without his consent.

Open to manipulation too, as deals could be done to force a player to a club, by dealing with a club to sign him and then ship him out.

Can’t see the player’s agreeing to this change.

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

I am not sure it will.

Seems rather dishonest.

A player signs to play somewhere and is then shipped off without his consent.

Open to manipulation too, as deals could be done to force a player to a club, by dealing with a club to sign him and then ship him out.

Can’t see the player’s agreeing to this change.

well then they should forego free agency, and bigger $$s in the salary cap, and so on and so forth

technically they are already signed as players to the competition not to a club, if you look at the cba, so having the ability to say 'no' to a contract elsewhere is absurd

42 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

well then they should forego free agency, and bigger $$s in the salary cap, and so on and so forth

technically they are already signed as players to the competition not to a club, if you look at the cba, so having the ability to say 'no' to a contract elsewhere is absurd

Players agree to go to wherever drafted for the initial period, and that is to make the draft workable.

Then a few years later on, the player commits to a club, buys a house, puts his kids in school or whatever and can then be told a little while later, you are playing across the other side of the country, without friends and family support and lump it or leave it. There are other people involved in these deals, not just the player, but often family as well.

Won't happen.

 

20 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Players agree to go to wherever drafted for the initial period, and that is to make the draft workable.

Then a few years later on, the player commits to a club, buys a house, puts his kids in school or whatever and can then be told a little while later, you are playing across the other side of the country, without friends and family support and lump it or leave it. There are other people involved in these deals, not just the player, but often family as well.

Won't happen.

 

It happens in other sports. The difference being in those sports, players are paid so well that they can literally flip & burn houses (through agents) and pay it no mind.

To that end, if the AFLPA were to ever agree with this, I would expect it would be a tradeoff to get players a larger slice of the pie & elevate their earnings significantly.  

15 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Players agree to go to wherever drafted for the initial period, and that is to make the draft workable.

Then a few years later on, the player commits to a club, buys a house, puts his kids in school or whatever and can then be told a little while later, you are playing across the other side of the country, without friends and family support and lump it or leave it. There are other people involved in these deals, not just the player, but often family as well.

Won't happen.

 

I think there is an in-between. Right now when a player is in contract they demand a trade and specify a club. Why can't they tweak the rules to say that when is a player is in contract and either agree to be traded or ask out, they can specify a state, they can even nominate a preferred club but the club can trade them to any team in that same state that gives them the best package. It is then up to the receiving club, if the player says they don't want to go there, to choose to go for it or pull out. 

The traded player can decide to not play for that new club, receive no salary and forgo the following year for 'tampering'. Clubs are looking for equalisation rules as players have too much power in the movement landscape. If they are breaking contract then clubs should have another option other than retention of a player who wants to leave or taking a lesser deal. 

In an example, GWS should have been able to trade Hopper and Taranto to any team in Victoria last year instead of the Tigers if they so chose. Mind you, the future first has turned out to be a massive win for GWS, they could have theoretically received a much better deal. 

The issues with the above is it would be unfair to Victorian clubs who have 9 other teams to compete with in packages as opposed to interstate teams...

2 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

well then they should forego free agency, and bigger $$s in the salary cap, and so on and so forth

technically they are already signed as players to the competition not to a club, if you look at the cba, so having the ability to say 'no' to a contract elsewhere is absurd

They should forego free agency. Free agency sucks and the game is worse for it. It's essentially just widened the gaps between the strong clubs and the weak clubs. It's not worked as intended and has hindered the league. Everyone except the rich players and rich clubs would benefit from getting rid of free agency and rolling back to trade rules from the early 2000s. We've already got overly complex [censored] like point ratings of picks and trading future picks etc. It's convoluted unfair rubbish and more and more people are turning on what the "sport" is becoming.

Being traded against their will would suck too. Imagine signing a contract to work for company X in Victoria, only to be told sorry pack up your life and move your family to WA to work for competing company Z. [censored] off the relationships you have with your colleagues and leaders, start over against your will and do it quickly. Players would rightly just say [censored] off and sit out instead.

If clubs were able to trade players against their will and had a mid season trade period, I'd probably stop following AFL and stop supporting Melbourne after investing decades and $10,000s towards the club. Clubs would essentially just buy premierships. Imagine trading in stars like Curnow or Toby Greene from teams not in finals contention. It might be unpredictable and exciting, but it would be ****house and destroy any integrity of the competition. If a club did that and won the premiership, you'd look at that flag and put an asterisk next to it that they just bought it and it's illegitimate. If that became the status quo, then people would stop following clubs and start following players instead. 

Just because other sports in other countries have different trading rules, doesn't mean we should. Our game is better than theirs for a number of reasons, and the salary cap and restrictive trade rules are key positive differentiators to pathetic trash sports and leagues like the EPL.

Edited June 30, 20232 yr by Lord Travis

The club is flirting with Mitch Georgiades

3 minutes ago, Grand New Flag said:

The club is flirting with Mitch Georgiades

Is he looking cute in a knee brace?

Targets? Currently … Anyone that can hit (kick) to a target over 20-30 metres !!! 

I need to inject some @goodwindees into my veins.

Edited June 30, 20232 yr by dazzledavey36

31 minutes ago, Grand New Flag said:

The club is flirting with Mitch Georgiades

Interesting. If there was ever a time to go at him it's now. It's a risk obviously given his knee but it shouldn't cost the earth the earth either with that in mind. 

Wonder what pick it would cost if we took the bulk of Whitfields contract....

1 hour ago, Grand New Flag said:

The club is flirting with Mitch Georgiades

And where's the bird flying this year? 

42 minutes ago, adonski said:

Wonder what pick it would cost if we took the bulk of Whitfields contract....

I'd be paying $600k - maybe a future second?

1 hour ago, Grand New Flag said:

The club is flirting with Mitch Georgiades

Flirting with him directly or flirting with the idea of it ? 😂

Realistically, what tall forward options are there available?

Himmelberg & Georgiades?

Neither are really a big key forward and play more the 2nd or third tall, maybe less so Himmelberg.

1 hour ago, Grand New Flag said:

The club is flirting with Mitch Georgiades

I'd take him in a heartbeat

Is it possible to trade for Sebit Kuek from Freo as our bigger forward target? He was from the 2022 mid-season draft, 199cm, super athletic and kicking multiple goals in the WAFL. Freo forwardline are incredibly young - Jackson, Treacy and Amiss. Kuek is 22, and older than the three in the team...not sure how he breaks in as is. 

8 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

If the AFL close the loophole again clubs will have to 'pay' more for F/S and Academy players.

Of course they wouldn't have dared to do it before the Daicos Bros time came up.    [MFCSS]

We need midfielders

Just look at Casey's preferred midfield, to understand why.

And if your still in doubt, look beyond our top 3 (Oliver, Trac, Viney) and it drops away quick.

5 hours ago, Grand New Flag said:

The club is flirting with Mitch Georgiades

and has been since he was drafted

5 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I need to inject some @goodwindees into my veins.

And maybe some @Nudgefor dessert??