Dr. Gonzo

I would love him to just be a stay at home forward who owns the 50 and kicks bags of goals every other week, but having him roam CHF/wing and drop back towards the goals allows him so much more freedom to attack the game and just be a presence to impose himself. He was great yesterday, dropped one sitter on the flank and missed the snap in the last after I'd already jumped up to celebrate thinking it was a monty, but other than that couldn't fault him.

Today is ripe for him to turn it on. He had a stinker last year Queens bday when Frost towelled him up but redeemed it in the return game where he was one of our key players. If he can play like he did in the 2nd quarter last week for the whole game he'll be in for a big one.

Because he's likely to have a personal relationship with either Worsfold or another former player who is a mutual friend whereas it is unlikely he knows anyone in Hogan's circle of friends/family. He may be going off what someone at Freo/WCE has told him but people at footy clubs talk [censored] (or what they believe to be true that turns out to be rubbish) all the time.

Worsfold- as in his former captain? Bit of a different situation.

Interestingly an article in the paper the other day talked about the Crows targeting Hurley and speaking to him last week when he was over there visiting his mate, Josh Jenkins. It mentioned he also went to the Showdown while over there.

Heard he had similar issues at North. But also heard he worked nights at Bunnings while on their rookie list to make ends meet for his family so you can't judge someone on hearsay alone I guess.

How will we pay the mandatory 95% of the cap if we don't bump up player salaries in line with the increase? NBA salary doesn't have a floor does it?

$1.1m seems correct. If the salary rises by 30% then salaries across the board should rise by that much. We have to pay a minimum of the cap and have to have ~38 players on the senior list. Do you think we'll keep Hogan at $800k and bump up a couple of others like Watts and TMac to $800k too? So they get a pay rise but Hogan doesn't? It makes no sense.

If you make a decision that he is worth X under salary cap Y then if salary cap Y rises by 5% for example then his salary would too. The number of players on the list aren't changing so any rise in the salary cap is going to be commensurate to the rise in player salaries. Do you think if we offered him X and the salary cap increased by 5% his manager wouldn't come back with X+5% anyway? Or are we going to lowball them and say, nup X is our offer?

Surely they could build in a clause where his salary is a % of the cap regardless of what it turns out be

Yeah that made me roll my eyes too. We've improved, sure, but that's a hell of a long way from being "elite"

I'm talking about from Hogan's side - why open negotiations knowing there was a CBA around the corner then use that as an excuse to delay?

So then why did they open negotiations in the first place? The point of my post was to respond to those who thought it was "mutual" and the club wouldn't be upset with putting talks on hold. The club would sign him up now for life if they could.

They've also got Pav & Sandliands to retire (Johnson & Mundy too?)

I agree and I'd love to but it's the 10 tonne elephant in the room. It will keep popping up whether we like it or not.

I'm in the same boat as most others I think - I'll enjoy watching Hogan (the first legit superstar I've seen at the club since I've been following) as a Demon until he's not because the alternative is just too sickening/depressing to contemplate.

And it's not based on "potential" as in the past (although we haven't seen Petracca yet I am confident he'll "hit the ground running" once he gets senior games too).

Yep, there was a bit of consternation around picking a bolter who didn't play in the nationals but I'm happy to say the recruiting team have got this one right. They haven't done much wrong since Taylor came on board and I think it's an area of our club that definitely deserves some praise, especially turning around from where they came. Well done for backing themselves and not getting caught up in the hype of Parish, a player who we definitely would've picked a few years ago. Targeting these big bodied, aggressive players has been a real focus and will see us be one of the more hard-nosed teams in the coming years.

It's not a media beat-up when negotiations have stalled. Regardless how long was left on the contract, negotiations for an extension started and then were put on hold. That's a story especially with the best promising key forward in the comp.

IF he leaves (and I'm not saying I think he will) and we continue to become a successful side it will hurt but the supporters will get over it. If he leaves and we continue to struggle on field it will be devastating for the MFC.

It's not a media beat up when the club has made it clear we want to lock him in on an extension and there is opportunities that will open up for him in WA. The club advertised that we were opening negotiations on an extension now he has delayed talks of course the media will pick it up. He is going to be one of the best players of his generation, this is a story.

You're living in lala land. So the club, who has been trying to extend his contract for the last 6-9 months and who were eager to open negotiations for an extension at the end of last season, has all of a sudden decided that we're ok with postponing negotiations with this generational player for another season when every man and his dog will be in his/his managers ear with an offer to leave including at least one club from his home state. Why the hell would they do that? They've been pretty clear this is the guy we'll be building our team around for the next 10 years so if we could lock him in you don't think we'd do so? I'm not saying he's going to leave but to think the club wouldn't have preferred to keep negotiations open and get something locked in sooner rather than later is delusional. Also if the club has only offered 3/5 year deals they are idiots. Give this guy the keys to the castle, offer him 10 years and we'll rise or fall with him. Lynch was given 10 years from the Bears and that worked out pretty well despite the initial setbacks.

No. Even if it were, it would backfire spectacularly.

If he does go it will be the biggest Hogan heel turn since Bash at the Beach 96

True - but he did already agree to sit and discuss - why then the need to close shop and so Nah, don't wanna discus until the end of the season now. We'll see, if he tries the same thing after the CBA has been signed then he's gone. I'm just jaded now after going through the Scully and Clark debacles. If Hogan does leave it will be such a giant kick in the nuts for this club it would set back the work that's been done since 2014.