Lucifers Hero

From beginning to end the Hawks 'manipulated' the draft. It started on day 1 when they got Vickery as an FA. Initially reported on their website as a 3yr contract. It was hurriedly changed to 2yr. but at the same dollars making it seem a bigger contract. The 2 year deal quallified Richmond to get a round 2 AFL compensation pick, the 3 year deal, with the same dollars did not. Otherwise Richmond could have matched the offer and forced Hawks to trade for Vickery which clearly they did not want to do. That is blatant draft manipulation by both Richmond and Hawthorn. Apparently the AFL 'looked into' it but no known outcome as yet. They did a dodgy deal with Carlton to get the O'Meara deal over the line. Carlton the big losers on the deal - there was chat that Bolton was trying to help his old boss. Wonder when that favour will get called in by Carlton! It ended on the last day when Hawks traded their 2017 2nd rnd pick which as others have stated above, they were not entitled to do. And it looks like the AFL will turn a blind eye to it all, as always when it involves favoured clubs!! It backfired a bit on the Hawks when GCS stood their ground on O'meara and they gave StK a draft pick windfall for their 2016 pick 10 and the dodgy deal with Carlton meant their first pick this year is 88 and next year is around 25 to 30. The AFL should look very closely at all the Hawks draft activity because they have been fast and loose with the rules. And that little Vickery FA manoeuvre opens a hornets nest of dubious FA and trade transactions in the future.

The full 2017 AFL fixture comes out on Thursday. New opponents in NT for us: We play GCS as a twilight game in Alice in round 10 and Adelaide in round 17 in Darwin. http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-25/new-nt-foes-for-demons Given that our club has deemed that we play there, I don't mind those opponents. If the AFL change our opponents each year it gives us a better chance at a home ground advantage and having the majority of the people at the game supporting us on the night.

Looks like I was very close to the mark re Eddie being on thin ice: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/eddie-mcguire-gary-pert-looking-shaky-after-drugs-scandal-20161025-gsafga.html Every time I see other clubs in turmoil I thank God that PJ came to us. By him recruiting good capable people who have in turn recruited good capable people, we have become boringly stable. And, I love that our club is boringly stable!!

McClure's top 8 vs 2016 is essentially: North out Dees in. Looks right to me!! For mine, the following clubs are in a bit of a mess: Lions, Pies, Tigers, Port and likely to finish bottom 4-6. The others: North, Blues, Saints, Freo, Ess, GCS are a bit harder to predict but think they will miss the 8.

Collingwood may be looking for a lot of new senior people: Football Manager: Gubby Allen may find himself on an extended holiday courtesy of AFL/ASADA. President: Eddie must be on thin ice after: hiring Allen; his big mouth nearly lost them their sponsorship with Holden; upsetting the chief recruiter; and realising his 'love child' can't coach. The Board must be asking themselves big questions about Eddie and his judgement! Wouldn't be surprised to see an 'exit' plan for Eddie. But will he go quietly or will the sparks fly. Popcorn time again? Senior Coach: ... Collingwood is looking very poor in the management stakes - lots of off field turmoil happening. Some old Rooboy mates (Pert, Randell) are there but can't see Roos at a club that is all over the shop! He chose the Demons rather than the Lions because we were stable with the firm hand of PJ in control.

Not so off topic as he has been a major part of the post season - exudes calm, confidence and fairness! To answer your question - he joined the coaching team under Dean Bailey - they had been together at Port. When PJ arrived he was looking for an experienced Football Manager but when PJ got a very experienced coach in Roos, they decided to take a 'rookie' as Football Manager ie Roos didn't need a 'babysitter', and Mahoney cost a lot less. Then let him grow into the role, with PJ and Roos to learn from and guide him. Needless to say, Mahoney has been outstanding! My fear is that some wealthy club will come along and poach him. But I hope that finishing what he started (a premiership with the Dees) will be enough to keep him with us.

This is a continuation of that Wilson report http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/giant-lachie-whitfield-claims-drug-texts-a-ruse-as-afl-antidoping-charges-loom-20161024-gs9k94.html It seems the 3 culprits claim it was all a ruse to fool Whitfield's then girlfriend. I would have to say that they could have concocted something far more convincing. Key points from the article: Whitfield, Graeme Allan and Craig Lambert are all facing lengthy suspensions as it emerges that ASADA has formed the view that the trio breached the game's anti-doping code...which draws a maximum four-year penalty. The AFL remains determined that any outcome will be reached with ASADA's approval. While the AFL do not believe the incident warrants a four-year suspension for Whitfield, a former No. 1 draft pick, nor Allan and Lambert; Gillon McLachlan and his team remain highly tuned to the views of the national anti-doping authority. It looks like the AFL are taking this seriously and working with ASADA this time on deciding the penalties. The good thing is that support staff are now caught in the ASADA net and it is not just the player(s) penalised. Allen and Lambert will go down with Whitfield unlike all the wrongdoers at Essendon.

We played the Saints in rnd 1 2014 @ the dreaded Etihad. We lost by 3 points but that was after we kicked ourselves out of the game with 6 goals and 15 points and Tom Mc playing injured letting Reiwoldt off the leash! in 2015 we handed them the game with a few seconds to go! 2016 didn't go so well vs Saints but we were experimenting with our structures. We have been very close to beating them so there is no reason why we should fear this game. From now on every game is winnable. Go Dees! Lets get off to a winning start and make a statement to the competition!

Updated for delisting of Dawes, Newton, Mitchie (Rookie) and King (Rookie) The only changes before the draft will be which of the Rookies are re-contracted and which are to be promoted to the main list (which would happen after draft night). Only 2/3 names to add after the drafts and our 2017 list will be complete!

We are in great shape Dee Dee! The earliest read I have is 19,026 on Oct 26, 2015, so at least 3,000 up on this time last year! For those wanting to track how we are going vs prior years this thread might be useful: Beating the Hawks and Hogan re-signing would be a huge part of that additional 3,000. Now that Lewis chose us and is on board it should give the numbers another boost. PJ had a goal of 50,000 for 2017. Doubt we will get there but would expect that we will get at least 45,000. We are nearly half way there! Exciting times

I think you are right re Hawks 2017 2nd rnd pick. Message to self: do not rely on newspaper reports - check AFL website! Given that, your reasoning is more balanced than mine. I will put an edit in my earlier post to reference yours. The GWS one is interesting - what is the point of the AFL rule picks = vacancies (to stop Academy clubs downgrading picks)? It does seem that Hawks and Cats are throwing the dice a bit of not recruiting young player and leaving themselves exposed on 1st round picks. They may end up where Tigers and Roos are with that strategy!

Penalty: face restrictions from trading any further first-round draft picks. Not sure how much of a deterrent that is if the ban is only a year or two. Yes they are banking on trading in a pick, which really can only be for players.

Interesting. The AFL seem to have now given us extra games at Etihad vs North, StK to offset the games vs Ess & Carlt we don't play there. Win for Ess Carlt and a loss for MFC! A big problem for MFC is we never get the 'home club' gate revenue for the MCG games - vs clubs with high memberships. Ditto Hawks. Carlton and Essendon have been bleating for years for more home games at the MCG and that has stealthily happened. AFL politics and power broking will make it very hard for us to get a fair go on fixtures be it venue, time slot, FTA, etc. Our cash flow is considerably compromised from backroom maneuverings. Only winning will give PJ the negotiating power to claw back some beneficial scheduling from the AFL.

Agreed. Would be surprised if some clubs don't raise it with the AFL. A bit late tho'. On drafting of future picks: Its interesting that Hawks and Cats have taken out a big mortgage on their future. Hawks first pick this year is #88 and next year #50 approx leaving a big gap in their young player stocks for several years. If they want to get back into the 2017 early rounds or an age group they must trade out players (or 2018 picks which just puts out the day of reckoning, like the Cats now) Cats have to find an extra 1st round draft pick in 2017/2018. The only way they can do this is to trade out players. For both clubs they will need to trade out quite good players as other clubs will know Hawks/Cats must get the required picks and can't expect 1st round picks for throwaways. They are both playing at the 'don't worry about drafting and developing' we will just get players as FA's, when OOC or when the 'go home' thing kicks in. GCS and Carlton showed that won't be so easy in future.

What I really liked is our trading strategy has been thought out well in advance and we stick to it. I particularly like the players we traded in are players we targeted during the year (Bugg, Melksham, Hibberd) or players we liked during their draft year (Kennedy, McKenna) and now went for them. It means our research is really solid. The only exception I can think of is Lewis but its a no brainer to take a windfall like that! I also liked that we got in there and got our deals done rather than some clubs which waited till the end to get 'bargains' (Ess, Coll, Carlt) or got caught up in the 'buying frenzy before the sales end' of yesterday. Good players were being given away for peanuts in the end!!

What happened to the draft pick rules! Hawks trade out 2017 1st and 2nd round picks - rules say if you trade out future round 1, a club cannot trade out the 2nd round. GWS have 2016 draft picks: 2, 15, 37, 39, 45, 52, 55, 57, 58, 59, 60, 77, 109 but the rules say you cannot have more picks than list spots (with some exceptions on future picks from prior year). That is 11 picks that carry draft points!! And a number of clubs traded future 3rd, 4th and 5th round picks - are they allowed? I thought it was only round 1 and 2? A week into the trade period the AFL gave Geelong a correct interpretation of the 'two 1st round picks in 4 years' rule that allowed them to trade out their 2017 1st pick. The AFL hadn't thought it through before the draft started so had given the wrong advice on which clubs could trade their 2017 1st pick My point is the rules should be set before the trade period and not rejigged on the run. I know this is the AFL but changing the rules on the run is unfair to the clubs that don't know the rules have been 'reinterpreted'. The AFL certainly did not issue any bulletins (that I could find) clarifying any of the above. Edit: refer to Fifty-5's post #3896 below for clarification of these points.

What about this line in the op article: "However, the League's general manager of clubs and operations Travis Auld is set to examine other potential fixture formats, including the 17-5 model and potential to introduce finals wildcards". Each team plays once then the ladder splits into groups of 6 to play off for positions on the ladder. The top 6 definitely play finals, the next 6 play for the last 2 spots in the 8 and the last 6 play for/tank for...the #1 draft pick. The intention is to make the fixture more even. In practice I think it means a round of finals for the first 6 before the actual finals. I think the finals before the finals will disadvantage the younger, less experienced teams in the top 6 as they will potentially have 5 tough games to end the season before they play (the same group of teams) in a tough finals series. I can also see all sorts of opportunities for teams to manipulate the outcomes in each group of 6 depending on their win/loss ratio after round 17. It also means the last 5 games will be pretty boring for the fans of the bottom 6 just playing other poor/mediocre teams. As for 'wildcards', hope that is not another way for the AFL to 'use their discretion' and control over the game!! I don't know if, on balance 17/5 will be good or bad but personally I prefer they leave it alone. And, no wildcards!

I would be very surprised if he is being looked at as a starting 22. Nor should we on Demonland. I think he is coming in on the same basis as Newton, Kennedy, Bugg etc:. "Son, here is a 2 year contract and a second chance for an AFL career, show us what you can do". He is a no risk prospect. And, maybe GWS would have done the pick upgrade anyway. But because they need to reduce their list size they thru McKenna in as well.

There is talk going around that GWS might lose draft picks over this. He who giveth, taketh away!! AFL works in strange ways - it helps that they up the top of the ladder, so any penalties won't sting so much. If so, there is a bit of poetic justice in it all.

Thanks...maybe some other version of 2016 for 2017 picks...

Talk around that GWS may be stripped of draft picks over the Whitfield episode!! Now wouldn't that make a lot of people happy! A bit of poetic justice one would think. Back to the draft: they might do a last minute deal to get 2017 early picks. I don't usually hypothesise about picks but this would be nice: GWS: a 2016 1st and 2nd round for MFC: 2017 1st round and 2016 #69 which has draft points value and 2017 3rd round. We could always trade into 2017 later rounds next year. Why do it: might get us the ruck/forward with their 2016 2nd round and give us a 1st round pick. Of course we would only do it if we had a target in the 1st round. Doable?

SEN reported that we were interested in him in his draft year. Looks like he plays as a forward, so good to keep competition on the small/medium forwards/onballers for spots. Good to get him and get a slight pick upgrade at the same time. Great time to join MFC, Patty. Welcome aboard!!

I share the nostalgia around Dunn, Grimes et al and how deserving they would be of playing in our resurgent team. But lets not forget they were the players and the leaders in those years of massive, demoralising losses - they must take some considerable share of responsibility for that on-field performance, notwithstanding they worked their butts off. And, if they were still in our team we would not be the resurgent team that we are becoming. The club is gave them every opportunity to make it in the new regime and is giving them every opportunity to find a new club without asking anything in return. There is not more the club can do. I wish those that leaving well but it is time to move on.

It seems the rose coloured glasses of Dunn have come out. I can't see how Dunn had a critical role in the development of Wagner, O.Mac, Frost, White. They rarely played with Dunn and I suspect the coaches would have teamed them up with other senior players at training etc. to learn from players who showed the behaviours the coaches wanted; Dunn wasn't one of them. I hope he enjoys it at the pies and that it is a good move for him.

This is what his manager said yesterday: Pask said there was a lot of interest in Prestia, up to 12 months ago. " If anything, you can applaud Richmond," he said. "They targeted him ... they got him." I suspect Richmond were the only ones still interested this year. It would explains why Dion looked a little glum came up with lame comments as to why 'he chose' Richmond.