rpfc

I agree, but I was talking about Casey Fields in that last post. As for an exclusive access to players - I don't agree. But I would say that a scholarship program (similar to NSW/ACT) available to all clubs should be initiated for players starting at the age of 15.

I am really sorry, but this thread has gone off on a tangent that is full of factless almost baseless assertions about the future of the AFL and this club. It's your right to keep looking over your shoulder at what is about to happen, but I think we should be looking forward to what we can do to affect the situation. Jake Niall wrote yesterday: If this is true and comes to something than it will be another turning of a weakness - low gate games against Freo, GWS, GC, WCE, BL, Adel, or PA into a $500k of pure profit a game. I hope they exhaust all avenues.

She is asking because this thread is about Darwin games, not the broadcast deal.

Where are you getting that date from? We have no scope to automatically nominate rookies but we would surely be able to elevate rookies at any time for LTIs.

Hollywood? Altered trade went back to you: Hartlett and Smith for Mumford and Murdoch.

If he isn't elevated before Rd 1 then I expect what you say to be true. I still think he will be elevated however.

You are dead right. I forgot about the move to a 40 man primary list but as you say. LTIs can be used to elevate and we have one at the moment. The delay may have less to do with Magner and more to do with whether there will be another injury in the meantime that leads to a longer layoff than Gawn - and Magner would take that spot. I do expect Magner to be made available at some point over the next week. Otherwise, I question how the club sees Magner.

Again, there are TWO ROOKIE SPOTS OPEN FOR ELEVATION. Gawn LTI listing isn't tied to his fitness - they have to apply to get him off the LTI. There is plenty of time to elevate Magner before Rd 1. If he is in the 25 - he will be on the Primary List. If he isn't then he will most likely be delisted at the end of the year. EDIT: This is wrong. We have one spot open with an LTI. I forgot about the movement to a 40 man squad last year instead of 38 plus max 2 vets. As we had one last year, it meant we could elevate a rookie straight away. We can elevate a rookie 11 rounds into the season or in the event of a LTI.

I was just making a joke, OD.

Casey might not get a 20k stadium due to lack public transport but it would be great for the South East to have some stadia in that area. Would be ideal for us to play a few games there a season and make some money. I would keep looking into how we can do that, but stay realistic in the meantime.

And a fun size twix is a third the size of a normal twix. Your point? The key is making money. We make money at the G - the AFL knows this and tries not to schedule home games there (or even away games). We are selling these games because it is unsustainable not to, and it will not lead to your paranoid conclusions.

lol What nonsense. When the AFL finally get Etihad, the Dogs, the Roos the Saints, the Bombers, the Blues, and even the cats will play some home games there as they are making money from it. It's not going to mean more Melbourne home games at Docklands - it will mean less - as in zero.

Really? They are rarely consolate...

There is a week to elevate him. Gawn is on the LTI and we are allowed to nominate a rookie straght away anyway. He may not play but he certainly can play.

The projected totals have me beating him this week... Does our season start this week, I forget how it works...

We don't win the week after because WE ARE A BAD F___ING TEAM! And I mentioned Perth because we don't give ourselves an easy out when they play over there and come back drained. Not to mention (but I will) that WCE go anywhere and win when they are good - as OD said. You don't have to like Schwab but don't expect me to take an accusation that he is "whoring out" the club. You CGAGF if you truly believe that. We will get approx. $1.3m+ from having 2 games in Darwin incl. their sponsorship. That is in place of an Etihad game (or games) that COST us money. Dwell on that fact for a moment. We whinge and moan and we handwring about the Hawks and the proverbial gun that they have to Tassie and the money they squeeze out of them, but when an opportunity comes along to have a similar deal we baulk. And for nothing more than a desire to keep an unsustainable 11 home games at the G (especially when one is always at Etihad), and faux reasons about heat and humidity that are not oppressive and that WCE, Freo, BL, and GC play with all season. We are doing this. Change the CEO and the new one will do this deal. Poach Brian Cook and he will do this deal. Get used to it.

If this come to anything I will be monumentally surprised. He will spend most of his time in NZ and I am just glad we are looking around for talent like all the other clubs. And olisik - lol! lol-isik!

NAB Cup form means nothing. Now that doesn't mean that we will smash PA because I think they will be decent this season. I want us to play 4 qtrs of good footy on regular occasions. I don't care about periphery issues like skills out of the backline, speed in the midfield, and cohesiveness in the forward line - I want us to put in effort, without fall or failure, for 120 minutes every week. That is the first step to being relevant.

So it's too hot, it's too far, and we will lose games because of it? Not good enough. As HG said - it doesn't have to be played in oppressive heat, interstate teams travel 10 times a season across the country, and decent fixturing will give the players plenty of time to recover. It's like going to Perth - except for the fact that it's our home game, we don't have to lose money at Etihad, and we get $500k for our trouble.

I think that is all talk to get the owners of Etihad to take a better deal and give over ownership to the AFL. Punt Rd is the only the MFC would be happy with (outside of a boutique Stadium at Casey) and that is going to cost alot of money and is complicated by space issues and Richmond's growing facilities.

Good stuff 19. Get around it guys. And Stephen Powell! One of my favorites. Glad he considers himself a Demon!

This is such an easy decision. Remove two 'lose money games' against PA and NM (one of which is usually played atr Etihad) - TICK. Turn them into $1m of pure profit - TICK Maintain a solid sponsor that will be shovelling in $300k+ every year we are up there - TICK Ability to market 2 game sponsorships for $60 that should deliver a bump of 3K+ - TICK What do you people want? Do you go to the Etihad games? Do you go to the PA games at the G even (we had 14k there a few years ago)? Do you want to whinge about Tassie, or do you want to 'own' the next Tassie or leave it for PA to realise what they are missing out on in a couple years time? This is proactive, it is lucrative, and it will turn a weight around our ankles (2 home games against PA, or GWS, or GC, or NM, or Freo et al) into a massive windfall for a club that doesn't say those two words often. If you are worried about heat, well, I have absolutley nothing to say to you - what a weak effing reason not to do something.

I always thoguht he was a FA - I do my own Contracts thread - oddly enough the AFL do half arsed jobs constantly on things like this... And FA itself isn't the end for 'smaller' clubs - it can help smaller clubs if they are smart. It aides smart clubs, regardless of size.

Don't have time at the minute to have a think about it. (he says while typing on a forum...)

Well my tick is the only one that matters...