Dr. Mubutu

Of COURSE we have had to play at that dungheap the most of any other club

To be fair, at the time, they were. As players. 'Best 25' and 'realistic best decision for the list after trade period' are two very different things.

As did the club, and most of us on here.......

My outlandish prediction is that the AFL commission will make no rule changes between now and round 1, 2027.

I just hope we keep him in the #64

Can almost guarantee that this is to get N. Daicos under the umpires' noses at the top of the stat sheet, instead of true game impact.

Definitely framemogging him

Especially galling since it's round 1, which is AFL round 2 (opening round notwithstanding), and there are 4 byes????

You're correct, rpfc, it SHOULD be. However, given we're coming from so far back, it is probably a good idea for someone to have two hands on the wheel for now, as it were. I am assuming that this position is outside of the soft cap and is seen as administration, though. If it's in the cap, my thoughts are almost diametrically opposite.

"Sure, we could have you play each other once, but how about this: BYES"

Yeah, but how does the AFL make MONEY out of this - NOW? Who cares about the future product? That's not linked to anyone's bonus this year.

Thanks, Demoncat. They really do love to half bake things

I might be mistaken, but given the 1st rounder we have next year is FROM Gold Coast, I was of the understanding that we couldn't then trade it back to them? I seem to recall some bogus AFL shenanigans around that......

They're taking their contractually agreed leave?

We can grab them now, if we (and they) really want to - they're currently DFAs