Undeeterred

Bye bye Chippa. I think that is the tipping point for me, and I'm sure for a few others. I just give up.

True, but we're really down to only 5 or 6 genuine hacks on the out of contract list, plus Clark and Byrnes, so I suppose 7 or 8 changes might be about right. I just thought Roos might leave open the possibility of that one extra spot, when nobody will be beating down the door to pick up Terlich and we can always give him a new contract after trade week or the draft. Just seems really odd timing.

I agree, although I guess what I was saying was that given the cleanout they seemingly want to make, I'm surprised they aren't keeping as many list spots open as possible. Seems odd to give Terlich a contract a few weeks before the end of the season, unless they know eg that Frawley is off so they've got one more opening than they possibly hoped for... Interesting anyway.

Gee if they're signing up players like Terlich now, you'd have to think they are pretty confident Frawley is gone...

Is it any wonder if he doesn't jump in when they're getting the cr@p kicked out of them??

A good way of thinking about it too is %, which is helpful in looking at a low scoring game. Yes, we only lost by 31, but at 55%. That's fairly illuminating in my view.

Not a lot of credibility here if you're suggesting we think about trading our current and most-recently former captain, but you'd keep Evans, Bail and McKenzie. Laughable.

Whilst expressly not wishing actual violence on anybody, it looks like someone at 5.10 on Sunday morning tipped over and did what a number of us probably want to do in our dreams. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/mitch-robinson-suffered-fractured-eye-socket-in-early-morning-altercation-20140807-101oto.html

This is just such guff. Neither Trengove nor Toumpas is going anywhere.

Sure thing, tough guy.

Fascinating but depressing OP C&B

We have plenty in front of them to get rid of who won't cost a years wage

Sure, except in 2004 when they were given a priority pick and picked up Franklin and Roughead. So except for then.

I agree.

Clarko for mine.

Oh of course, I'm not disputing that at all. All I am saying is that when we talk about what players are worth, we have absolutely no idea and are just pulling those opinions out of our bums. At least when we have opinions on something like a football game, we have some basis on which to have those opinions. Player value is completely different.

Sure you can take note, but how about this: How many players can you realistically name as knowing their contract value? Of those, how many are you sure about and how many are media speculation? and Have you adjusted for time, salary cap pressure at particular clubs, and various other list management strategies that were going on when those deals were signed? If you can say yes to all of this, then I applaud you. Otherwise, you're just making stuff up.

Yes, of course it does, but how would you or I or anybody else be able to attach that value sensibly?

As I was reading the last few pages of this thread this comment was brewing in my mind, but I'm glad you've made it for me. It is laughable that any of us can make any reasonable judgement about what Frawley is 'worth'. How the feck would any of us have the faintest, unless we are involved in player management in some capacity?

It isn't so much that we disagree with you Picket, it is just that you speak such a load of bollocks it is very hard not to give it to you mercilessly.

Does that make Franklin Band 2? That changes things somewhat... Funny, I thought Sylvia was Band 2! My bad.

We would be extremely, extremely stiff not to get Band 1 for Frawley. Wasn't Sylvia Band 2? Puh-leese.

dpositive - what's worse is that because we've been so rubbish for so long, with nobody to really pay but with a minimum spend we have to meet, we've frontloaded the bejeesus out of a lot of contracts in past years. Therefore, even a lot of our better players have been paid more than their actual salary in early years, leaving more cap space we have to find someone to pay now. That's part of the reason why Frawley is an unrestricted free agent, because he got a fair whack of moolah early and is now not in the top 'X' earning players (rpfc is much better on this stuff than me...)

Or maybe he is concentrating and your powers of mind reading are non-existent.

So instead of paying Frawley overs to keep him, are you suggesting we give Blease, Tapscott, Strauss and Clisby and extra $100k each? That's paying overs... And we can't spread spend into the non-AFL listed players (which in any case I think would be a waste of money too).