Little Goffy

If Dangerfield was keen to leave Adelaide but didn't get the megaphone out demanding a trade and nominating clubs, then he deserves a huge round of respect from everyone. I was previously ambivalent about getting Dangerfield, worried that the hype about such an elite and spectacular player would push his 'price' even beyond where it should be. But, that nod to good character and the 'new loyalty' of discretion and respect in your dealings, that's got me genuinely keen to recruit him now.

Fat wads of salary cap space, and a collection of young guns coming through. A good 2015 season and we'll be right into the bumper crop of Free Agents that year. We'll be looking to show off our confidence in Simon Goodwin, too.

If Clark comes good, obviously Geelong are massive winners out of this. To the point of moving back into solid top-4 confidence. Despite Collingwood getting Pick 5 and a whole pile of extras, they wont be happy with this. Beams is a top-ten midfielder in the AFL and Lumumba would have been even more important to them next year, with their rebounding paths now very, very limited. Melbourne got a useful player, solid AFL quality, in a role we really need filled. While it is irritating to see Clark go, I'm going to focus on the fact we got something in a situation that six weeks ago was nothing.

Ideally Petracca then Brayshaw for two and three. Keen to get a complete midfield operating I'd still be keen on getting involved in the mid and late first round, even at cost of one of those two top picks. But that's another thread.

Well, marketing and web content at Hawthorn knew about (and published an interview with) Frawley before that happened.

2 and 3 to Sydney, joining Heeney and their other academy selections, is basically handing Sydney top-4 finishes for the next five years. Solves their salary cap issues and gives them a great stock of young talent to develop in a thriving, generally mature list. I hope we all enjoyed the Hawthorn v Sydney grand final., because we'll be seeing a few more. Would it count as ironic if the two overwhelming dominant clubs of the next few years got there by exploiting the desperation and vulnerability of the bottom club? Or just... you know... symbolic of the new era.

I'm thinking this whole thread was started as an experiment to see which football 'journalist' runs with the story, based on reading it here.

Sigh. I'd let this slip past if there was any greater substance to the post. But seriously? Nevermind that today's players put in more hours and effort than any other generation ever has, by a huge margin. Nevermind that every one of them currently even getting sporadic games at AFL level would be as fit as the most fanatical over-trainer of the 80s or earlier. Noooo...... that Gen Y, so sooky and weak. Seriously, does this cheapshot cr4p ever end? Just... grow up.

Trengove and 23 for 12? Rubbish trade. If Richmond had Trengove in this exact scenario, we'd be seeking him out ourselves. Really unhappy about this prospect.

Getting him basically for free is certainly acceptable. Looks a lot more intelligent in red, too.

Haiku time! Another knee jerks The rule of law has faded Crisis simmers on

On the one hand, Melbourne supporters really are (according to the market research) more likely to be educated, more like to prefer wine to beer, more likely to have a mid-range to high-mid-range income, all that stuff. Also more likely to have other major interests as well as football, and more likely to have other commitments on weekends. But then, after all that, Melbourne supporters are also the most likely to actually turn up to a game or to take up a membership, including in the most miserable years. We're a funny mob. Pretty sure we're the best.

What a fascinating web of intrigue the NRL revenue and ownership tangles are. http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/moneyball-how-is-your-club-placed-20130830-2swhv.html Just thought I'd share, because NRL is such a bizarre, mashed up world. Full of hate and rage and boredom. So much boredom. Stupid, stupid game.

You're suggesting that GWS not bidding a top-three pick for Viney (the only scenario where Viney would not have been available through our second pick) is related in some way to two clubs conspiring to rort the system by manipulating the contract status of players to fabricate 'free' draft picks? Pull your head in. The anxiety about GWS bidding for Viney for was purely a collective case of MFCSS. This... this is rorting. Plain and simple rorting. What do you expect from organisations run by amoral moneygrubbers like David Koch and Paul Little?

So cruel.

This particular piece of absurd botch-job is nothing more than a short-sighted bureaucratic SNAFU. It's almost as is if at the time Free Agency was being designed, the AFL was being led by a reactive, news-cycle driven, ill-informed and paranoid megalomaniac with a total dependence on favoured stakeholders who had equally limited perspectives. For quick reference, here's a flowchart of the Demetriou era; Lack of transparency and consultation -> ill-considered policy -> criticism and backlash -> reactive, sulking reductions to consultation and transparency -> repeat and accelerate

Melbourne Football Club announces plan, appoints first-rate people to deliver on plan, makes progress on schedule and according to plan. To top it all off, we had a successful trade and draft period last year. Fans are, understandably, anxious. It's a bit like your spouse suddenly making a special effort to bring home flowers, do their share of the cleaning, arrange time for doing something special on wednesday nights... Something is up.

IF we have pick 2 and 3, a shuffle with the bulldogs could work beautifully. Keep 2, we take Petracca, which pleases them because the talls they want will still be there. Get their pick, grab Brayshaw. Gain a steak knife or two - maybe advancing a later round pick into something a bit more useful. Of course, it all still hinges on the assumption that St Kilda want a tall with their pick 1.

I think we can close this thread now.

Anyway, here's the basic facts about Free Agency. 1. Because a club which gains a free agent does not have to give up any draft picks or list price, free agency is by far the most desirable way to acquire new players. Even to the point of it being worth paying extra just to gain that list bonus. 2. Players, when considering their free agency options, will give consideration to non-salary factors such as 'anticipated success' and the resources available to the football department. This means that an already successful club with extensive resources will pay less salary cap space to acquire free agents. 3. Retaining players costs the same, or more, than acquiring them from other clubs. Whenever a player becomes available through free agency, the current club must outbid the best rival bid from all other interested clubs. 4. Every time this bidding occurs, the adjustment for success and for football department resources is included. So even a club which does not lose a single player can take a significant hit to their salary cap space because of the efforts to retain players. 5. This cycle continuously repeats, accelerating as the impact of relative advantage/disadvantage compounds. Over time, minor disadvantage becomes major disadvantage, and finally, total dysfunction. I'd estimate that for Free Agency to entirely break the balance of the AFL competition would require a net loss from 'weak' clubs to 'strong' clubs of about one player per club every four years. That would create an entrenched 10% difference in available 'best 22' talent. At this point, almost every Free Agent movement has been to a club which was either in the top 8 that year or credibly looking at pushing into the top 8 in the next year. Similarly, almost every free agent move has been to a club with considerable wealth and football department resources.

Mate, you're a lot more budding than statistician at the moment. In fact, if you tried to publish that stuff as a statistician, you might actually be sued. "First, assume that all 18 teams begin from an equal position" "Then, assume that each iteration of a cycle will have no impact on subsequent iterations" "For balance, assume that any pattern apparent now will automatically dissipate over time" "Finally, ignore all nuance, evidence and confounding factors outside the scope of your original sweeping generalisation" While not a statisician, it is possible you're an economist.

As someone who believes that 'fun names to say or shout' should be at least half of all recruiting decisions, I am thrilled. And since everyone is dropping limericks... There once was a coach named Plapp Who's methods were causing a flap He told all the Scorps To unload a few torps Then went home to take a good nap.

I've got little time for bureaucratic systems set up to try to control the game. Interchange cap I have even less time for than the sub. Throw in the idiotic officiousness at the interchange gates, created as a knee-jerk reaction to one incident, and the bench bureaucracy is becoming one of the biggest parts of the game. Coaches and players and umpires all have much better things to be concentrating on than tapping on and tapping off their myki card.

Our list in 2014 was short about 5 'reliable AFL standard' players. I'm comfortable with the targets currently being looked at, but it is all far from exciting. It will help us be consistently competitive in 2015, and to give the young recruits a better space to develop their game in. Meanwhile, the 2015 free agency list is massive. We should definitely be stashing away fat wads of salary cap space, front-ending contracts, and getting ready to make the ultimate multiple-player grab. North in the 70s stuff. Exploit the free agency cracks so hard the AFL realise they need to reform it.

Ugh, the more I think about it, the more I'd be horrified if we picked up Varcoe for Clark. Seriously, brings nothing. How many players play every game for a season, as a midfielder/forward, but still cost barely $250k in supercoach? Would be behind multiple young guys, from day 1. Not worth the spot on the list. Picking up Varcoe would actually be worse than getting nothing.