Macca

No I don't believe he has any strengths at AFL level. And we've never seen it either (at our club at least) Schache wasn't picked before Grundy in terms of capabilities - in my view

There are some that are buying it

It all started once Grundy was dropped ... chances are that he was told why and what chances he had of being recalled I reckon that part of it is true and then the rest of it is speculation & opinions The bit about forward craft so late in the season at Casey (for a veteran player) is highly questionable as well (in terms of arriving at a successful outcome) So if told that his chances were limited then it's time to move on and if he had checked out (at least mentally) then there was little chance of a recall So I'm not blaming Grundy or the club for the falling out. It takes 2 to tango These things happen in pro sports But I'm not buying Schache over Grundy on form or overall ability

Grundy played well as a ruckman and dominated the hitouts (for Casey) And it's called an opinion ... we've all got them. The fact that Grundy wasn't picked promotes discussion Schache is a player without any strengths at AFL level ... at least we know that Grundy can ruck Having our only key forward (T-Mac) as the back-up ruckman in the SF was also highly questionable But no big deal, going out in straight sets is par for the course these days. The club can do no wrong. All good Grundy should have been the sub in the SF but I believe the reason why he wasn't picked is because he was already packing his bags ... and that's not a problem if he has been told that his chances were limited

As for the trade value we received for Grundy, assuming the Swans are thereabouts next season, somewhere between 28 & 38 when considering academy players and the like Pick 46 for points value or for upgrades Not great but to be expected for many here. He's worth more than what we received but he was surplus to our needs and when trading, that is a factor So is the fact that the Swans really needed him but ... 4 more years at $700k per year might be a year too long And we won't be paying any of his salary. He's off the books So ends a rather strange relationship

And if Schache was first ruck in those early games in the season proper? Early in the season I believe we went 5 & 1 with Grundy at the helm Now, I believe the relationship was beyond repair and that's why I believe he wasn't picked But we can agree to disagree

@old55 Schache was supposedly the back up ruckman to Gawn (in the SF) but Grundy was doing all the ruck work for Casey Whichever way you slice it the selection of Schache over Grundy was questionable

It's highly questionable that the selection committee could ever believe that Schache was ever a better option than Grundy in a final Schache lead up form for Casey was bog average whilst Grundy was doing quite well Simply saying that they simply didn't pick Grundy is quintessential fence sitting You're allowed to question club decisions you know? Rhetoric and the company line is boring and uninteresting

More extended highlights (more so for the winners!) Dallas @ 49ers Eagles @ Rams

I doubt whether he was ever under consideration As to why? We may never find out the exact reasons although we can take an educated guess that the relationship was fractured (at least)

Happens in world sports all the time (especially soccer) ... and people are the same all over Once the player lays down the tools (or threatens to or is perceived to) then it's time to part company. Other clubs make an offer and they're off (but in the AFL's case the move happens once the season is over) We haven't seen it much in footy as the bigger money and longer contracts is a more recent thing. And breaking contracts is now becoming more prevalent Welcome to pro sports, footy My take on the Grundy move is that he was almost certainly told that his opportunities were limited (to learn forward craft (at Casey) in a short space of time for a veteran is a pipe dream) ... so that was the end of the relationship there and then So he and his manager shop around in the season proper until the destination club emerges (Sydney) ... so they bide their time knowing that he won't be recalled to the senior side. Why? Because the relationship was already over

Past pick 15-20 it's more about the recruitment team rather than the draft pick number ... and often picks are overvalued or undervalued

And what are we worried about anyway? Our guru recruiter (Taylor) turns picks in the 30's into Gold (Fritsch, BBB, Rivers et al) Let's not sweat the small stuff

I would have played Grundy at the tailend of the season but if he had an early 'exit' meeting then that might explain why Schache was preferred (in a final?) Grundy is a miles better player than Schache but we've inadvertently devalued Grundy by ruling a line through him We showed our hand and that's why the opening gambit was pick 46 (in my view)

If you want someone that badly do you offer pick 46? They know we want to offload

Yeah but they are playing hard ball and we probably won't get what we want

Well Sydney don't rank him too highly as they've only offered pick 46 The question is ... do Sydney want him that badly?

Grundy turns 30 early next year and is on a combined $4Million deal for 4 years ($300k covered by the Pies) If we were in need of a first choice ruckman would we be prepared to pay that amount of money plus give away a pick in 20's? For a 30yo ruckman with limitations? Can't play back or forward? A pick in the 30's is probably going to happen

Yes but equally, do we value Grundy? If so, how on earth does Schache get preferred to Grundy?

Of course the Pies are still liable I'm talking about paying a percentage of $700k if we want a better placed draft pick (in theory) My reading of the deal is that the Swans need Grundy but we need him off the books ... so a compromised solution could be reached

The Swans opening offer of 46 and us having Schache as the sub before Grundy was quire pointed If we somehow get a pick in the 20's we might be liable to pay some of Grundy's salary (as the Pies did)

I think you'll find we are (or were) Pies $300k

@layzie @Gorgoroth @JV7 @DeeSpencer @Go the Biff @titan_uranus @BDA @Dr. Gonzo @Clintosaurus @DemonDave @Dee Zephyr @Dappa Dan 1 point on offer this week (the bonus point on offer as well) Leaderboard Tipping Comp 3 - Dr. Gonzo, Clintosaurus, DeeSpencer*, Macca* 2 - DemonDave, Go the Biff, layzie 1 - Gorgoroth 0 - Everyone else 🤔 * Denotes 1 bonus point awarded The Eagles & 49ers look to be the standout road chances but it's not an easy week for road winners Not many great match-ups either ... perhaps Seattle @ Cinci or Colts @ Jags. Lions @ Bucs looks alright and MNF could be close

Game 2 vs South Africa on Thursday around 7pm on 9Gem and then the main channel (Ch9) later in the evening A must win otherwise we'll be 0 & 2 with 7 games to play South Africa smashed Sri Lanka in their first game with 3 of their players making a century!

Time will tell but the salary is relevant as it's for another 4 years ... so close enough to $3Million. It's a big commitment for Sydney and we won't be wanting to be paying a percentage of Brodie's salary as the Pies are My view is we'll get a pick somewhere in the 30's and that will be the end of it