Lucifers Hero
-
Posts
13,679 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
108
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Lucifers Hero
-
-
I like Bernie's humour when talking about Hogan's contract: "He's contracted for next year still, so I think he'd be silly to sign now. He loves it around the place," Vince said...(He) might be able to squeeze a bit more money out of the club if he has another good year, so I can see why he's done it...Hopefully he doesn't take any money off me though. I haven't got much left at the moment." Typical Bernie!
I like this as well: Vince wasn't afraid to mention September action as a possibility for the Dees.
"We're not shying away from that (time for the Demons to get results). From last year to this year has been a massive step up," he said...If we can step up just as much as we did the year before – which I think we're in front of that – you only need to win a few more… and we'll be knocking on the finals door."
I haven't heard this talk around our club for ever so long. I'm no longer hearing the platitudes and half-hearted but unfounded optimism of prior years. From every player interviewed I'm hearing belief and intent. And its significance that this is coming from players rather than coaches or football department - it means the players are taking ownership of results. Reminds me of the wise words from Barassi: If it is to be, it is up to me!
2016 might be a bumpy ride due to our young group but it sure will be worthwhile!
-
6
-
-
29 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:
Good luck to Steven Febey.
But I'm a bit disappointed that while posters support Febey (as they should) through his battles with depression, so many others show no sympathy to other players who have explained they have depression but are disbelieved apparently because they did something that's considered to be either un-Melbourne or unmanly. Obviously Mitch Clark is one, but there have been others, too.
Fully agree LD-vC. I felt it was terribly sad how some posters reacted to the news that Garry Lyon is and for over 6 months has been in a very, very dark place.
There is no way to know what the 'trigger' is for each person. It could be a sudden event as Febey experienced or it can be a slow burn situation. We simply don't know the circumstances. So, I feel it is best to err on the side of compassion rather than the side of judgement.
-
1
-
-
The AFL continues to give EFC gifts!
It has now declared that Hooker will be an Unrestricted Free Agent! http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-03-02/hooker-set-to-be-named-a-free-agent?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News
This means that EFC cannot match an offer but it also means that EFC will get an FA Compensation pick. Most likely to be pick 2 or 3 - better than any trade they could do. Its hard not to be cynical and think that the AFL asked EFC whether they preferred FA or UFA. The best result for EFC is UFA which is what they have been given.
As the article points out MFC benefited from pick 3 for Frawley but part of me says that was in lieu of a priority pick. Also, we weren't at the bottom of the ladder by having 12 of our best players uspended for drug offenses so part of me begrudges the AFL giving EFC another helping hand/gift.
This is when the other clubs should 'vehemently' complain as they did recently for top-up players, as they did against priority picks for us. Won't happen of course.
-
5
-
-
10 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:
If it's true that Prismall is still working at the Bulldogs with the AFL's permission then it's not only regrettable but a clear indicator of the AFL's arrogance and its contempt for the WADA Code. The rules simply don't allow it.
You would think it would also seriously rile the feathers of the other 16 no longer playing at AFL clubs. They are the 'forgotten ones' in this whole mess.
If the AFL get an exemption for Prismall surely the 16 must get the same as they are no longer on big AFL type $ and are simply trying to carve out a living for their families. All the attention is on the 17 still at AFL clubs but the plight of the others is just as important.
For mine, they should all stick to the rules and serve the suspension. But if one gets an exemption so should the other 16!
-
1
-
-
Have the AFL's chickens come home to roost!!
It seems Eddie is on a collision course with the AFL!
AFL season 2016: Magpies feud with league threatening to boil over
There are some valid points in Caro's article. The AFL, specifically Gil may be out of his depth...maybe his suave, urbane, softly, softly approach is just not enough any more.
Caro's closing line: "The strong message drifting out of the Westpac Centre right now is that, as the AFL seeks backing from its clubs while seeking to restructure a competition which boasts only eight profitable teams, it cannot bank on Collingwood's support".
But Eddie being Eddie will find a way to get a good deal for Collingwood, in return for their 'backing'. Damn the rest!
-
5 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:
I feel the rule has merit for clubs like mfc. Before it we had to pay 100% of the cap meaning players were paid more than their value (I think Mahoney recently said the 'over' payment was 26%, now down to 4%).
But the other big downside was we couldn't build a war chest to go after FA's or trade in players and fit them into the salary cap.
All clubs have to work to the sal cap rules but the 'power' clubs have facilities, success, marquis games, big crowds etc to entice players but mfc can't (at least not yet) so we need the flexibility to have some chance of getting players we want. Also, we (as other clubs) can now stash some cap space away for when a good young player is coming out of contract and reward them. Hard to do if it has been 'spent'.
So generally I am ok with the rule.
Sorry to quote my own post. But here is a really good article explaining the advantages to the affected clubs of the extra sal cap from suspended players. Written by none other than the outstanding journalist Emma Quayle http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/silver-lining-emerges-for-clubs-with-suspended-exessendon-recruits-20160301-gn7ne6.html
On a side note: Eddie is so so hypocritical at being incensed if the AFL give the sal cap relief? I bet they are getting the sal cap benefit from not paying their 2 players serving ASADA suspensions - for 2 years. Eddie - what is good for the goose is good for the gander!!
-
2
-
-
12 minutes ago, Dalrot said:
Not bad, now just have to work out how to get it from my phone to my TV.
Check out this recent DL thread for iphone and android options
-
1 hour ago, Chris said:
Thanks for the clarification, seems an odd rule given the intent of the cap itself. The club could easily front end contracts, you just do a simple variation with the player to pay them more this year and less next year. Puts cash in the players pockets faster so not many would object.
I feel the rule has merit for clubs like mfc. Before it we had to pay 100% of the cap meaning players were paid more than their value (I think Mahoney recently said the 'over' payment was 26%, now down to 4%).
But the other big downside was we couldn't build a war chest to go after FA's or trade in players and fit them into the salary cap.
All clubs have to work to the sal cap rules but the 'power' clubs have facilities, success, marquis games, big crowds etc to entice players but mfc can't (at least not yet) so we need the flexibility to have some chance of getting players we want. Also, we (as other clubs) can now stash some cap space away for when a good young player is coming out of contract and reward them. Hard to do if it has been 'spent'.
So generally I am ok with the rule.
-
The AFL players' top 50: 50 to 41
No idea who wrote it but great that Bernie and Nathan get this recognition. Bernie ranked 48 and Nathan 42. (With a countdown there may be others but unlikely). Very well deserved by the guys.
It is another public acknowledgement that we are improving. I even saw mfc and 'destination club' in the same sentence in The Age recently!
Bit by bit we are earning back respect!
-
6
-
-
1 hour ago, Chris said:
1. Can unused be carried over/ I have never heard that one before.
2. My understanding of the benefit was that it allowed the clubs to front end some contract this year to a greater extent which opened up salary cap space over the next few years depending on how the structure the contracts. The end result is the same where clubs have more money to spend but carrying it over seems illogical and against the whole idea of the cap (this is the AFL though).
1. "The new rule allows clubs who have spent under 100 per cent of the cap in the past two seasons to spend up to a maximum of five per cent over it in 2016". http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-08-07/clubs-set-to-spend-up-big-under-new-tpp-system
2. I don't see any practical way clubs could 'front-end' contracts this year as the CAS decision was only made in Jan and the AFL is yet to determine what salary cap relief is given to the 4 affected clubs. Also, All contracts for this year will have already been signed before the start of the year.
If the AFL doesn't incl the suspended plalyer's salary in each clubs cap the benefit is in future years, hence why the power clubs are 'incensed' about it being used for recruiting.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, SaberFang said:
How on earth does it help recruitment when their salaries go straight back into the cap come November?!
18 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:There's a lot about this whole saga I don't understand, but how exactly would such an opportunity arise? The suspensions, and therefore presumably the ban on salary payments, ends before the next round of recruitments begin. I confess to not understanding this argument at all.
Its to do with unused sal cap being carried over to the next year or two as clubs do not have to pay 100% of cap each and every year.
Edits: I think there are limits to how far a club can go (maybe 95%) and over how many years a club can miss the 100%, to avoid clubs building great war chests in their sal caps.
As I understand it suspended efc player salaries are in their cap but salaries of top-up players are not.
-
1
-
-
Quotes:
"Leading AFL clubs are incensed that the salaries of five suspended former Essendon players are likely to sit outside the salary caps of their new homes".
Sydney, Richmond, Hawthorn and Collingwood are among the clubs concerned that this salary cap exemption would create an opportunity for those four clubs to use the space for recruiting"
"...The league has indicated that more than half the players’ salaries will fall outside the cap — an outcome that has riled rival clubs, which are hoping to overturn the AFL’s initial ruling".
The AFL's initial ruling is based on the fact that the 5 clubs will not be paying the salary so should not be in the cap. Sound logic to me.
While the salary cap concession doesn't benefit mfc much, in principle I feel it is poor sportsmanship by those clubs to take this heavy handed stand. This is especially so after (by all accounts vehement) opposition to allowing 'top up' players like EFC.
It would be good to for the AFL to be decisive, show some leadership and not buckle to the pressure from powerful clubs.
-
I re read the articles re the injury on our web site and scans were not mentioned. In fact Goodwin said: "It's just a minor medial, so we'll just assess him as the week goes on,"
The scan seems something assumed by the media or fans. Also the quote from The Australian does not say scans will be cancelled it says they 'will not be required'.
The club took him off the ground on Saturday to not risk Gus. They will not risk him now and will give him whatever treatment and rehab is required.
Lets wait the next installment from the club.
-
30 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:
Even if they do t think he needs them I'd still send him for them just to be 100% sure.
23 minutes ago, Demonland said:I agree. I wouldn't want this to bite us in the bum down the track.
2 minutes ago, Fork 'em said:Considering the Trengove debacle this decision is just staggering.
You know, if you were a player contemplating changing clubs you'd want to go somewhere they weren't too tight to send you for a forken scan.All very sage comments and lets hope the club does everything to look after young Gus. (...and the club still needs to confirm the report in the Australian).
On the positive side it means the injury is on the minor side, as reported by Goodwin and in all likelihood Gus will line up in round 1 rather than miss the first part of the season.
-
From The Australian: "However, in more promising news, Melbourne general manager of football operations Josh Mahoney said yesterday Brayshaw would not require scans scheduled for today".
Hooray!!
-
13
-
-
Finally got to watch a replay. Four big things I noticed about our game plan/ball movement
1. We almost never went backwards! Our players didn't even look like going sideways let alone back. Eyes nearly always forward.
2. We didn't hug the boundary line nor did we play thru the middle. Our forward play was between the two - attacking but conservative.
3. When we went forward there were players running alongside the ball carrier.
4. We played with Intent!
We relied on defensive aggression rather than defensive ball movement. It worked! It looked like we were practicing our new game plan as I would think during the real season we will revert to some defensive ball movement. Can't attack all day against the really good sides. Will be interesting to see the balance between attacking/defensive ball movement next week against the fast moving Bulldogs.
To me those 4 things showed not only will we be a 'contested ball side' (Goodwin's words) we will be a much more attacking side. If we continue we will have a lot more i50's, many scoring shots and hopefully a lot more goals (and wins).
We will also be infinitely more enjoyable to watch...a good way to get supporters come to games!
-
6
-
-
36 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:
I'm usually accused of being in the positive camp so this is a nice change!
In my view Goodwin is our coach, Roos, Jackson and the Board were aware of all the issues when they appointed him and from all reports he has a terrific relationship with the players and an excellent understanding of the game. He's had time under Roos. What's not to like. I don't give a stuff that he was at Essendon but there are those that want all things Essendon purged from the AFL (probably along with the AFL as well).
This is a discussion forum and we are discussing Goodwin. I'm interested in their views and how they reconcile there position. I don't think that's negative actually, I think it's interesting. Or at least it's interesting to me. But TBH I doubt I'll hear a lot from them.
Ok I'll take the bait!
- Many DL posters are pleased players found guilty of drug use are out of the game for a year, regardless who they play for. A victory for clean sport.
- Many DL posters are unhappy with the AFL's kid gloves handling of EFC in the aftermath of the CAS decision. Its like rewarding cheats.
- Very, very few DL posters are critical of the mfc decision to hire Goodwin.
Those positions are not mutually exclusive. Nothing to reconcile.
If is interesting to you there are other threads where you can read the discussion about Goodwin and EFC saga. Post your issues over there.
Therefore, I'm signing out of the EFC/Godwin discussion on this thread.
-
1
-
-
Not sure where to put this article so here will have to do http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-season-2016-development-programs-becoming-the-best-route-to-an-afl-premiership-20160226-gn4x7c.html
I think we all know that FA's and players look at facilities and development programs before moving clubs or going to so called 'destination clubs'. I doubt any of us think we are such a club (yet). So I take with a grain of salt this comment by the writer, Jon Pierik: The Demons, for instance, are a "destination" club again, due in part to their development system.
Top 4 clubs will generally be the most attractive.
Nonetheless, it is good that mfc is starting to be linked to the words 'destination club'. If our development is top notch it will help player retention as well as attract players. We are slowly getting off the bottom rungs of the ladder, in more ways than one!
-
5
-
-
From the young man himself:
“We were down by five goals and then we really turned it on and then we just kept going,” he said.
“I just loved it. I loved going in for the ball. I hunted it and loved the contest. It was my sort of game. “It was awesome.”
Just have to love him, don't you.
-
25
-
-
Out today and didn't see the game so just caught up on 15 pages!
Going on the posts I wondered if Viney went to sleep after running out as Captain. Then I read the Age game review and saw this: Jack Viney (28 touches, 11 clearances)!! Well done Captain: 1 from 1!
The other thing I read is that we had 10 goal kickers. That will create a few headaches for opposition backs especially if our on-ballers continue to hustle in and around the stoppages. Keep Hogan down and others bob up! He won't mind that - he doesn't have to do all the heavy lifting!
Should be a good atmosphere at the Family Fun Day at Luna Park tomorrow!
-
4
-
-
19 minutes ago, goodoil said:
They are just in numerical order. Take no notice - Jetta and Harmes will be starting on the ground for sure.
Not quite numerical order...and I did qualify it with: "Given that they have the wrong coach listed I wonder about the rest of it"!
-
Port:
Starting
- 1Travis Boak
- 5Matthew Broadbent
- 3Jake Neade
- 9Robert Gray
- 7Brad Ebert
- 8Hamish Hartlett
- 11John Butcher
- 13Cameron O'Shea
- 12Jackson Trengove
- 15Karl Amon
- 18Jimmy Toumpas
- 16Oliver Wines
- 19Matt White
- 21Jared Polec
- 20Chad Wingard
- 23Matthew Lobbe
- 24Jarman Impey
- 27Alipate Carlile
Subs
- 39Justin Westhoff
- 28Jay Schulz
- 29Jasper Pittard
- 36Jack Hombsch
- 32Dougal Howard
- 37Jesse Palmer
- 33Darcy Byrne-Jones
- 46Sam Gray
- 41Brendon Ah Chee
- 42Thomas Jonas
- 40Aaron Young
Coach
- Ken Hinkley
Not a bad line up from Port.
Lookin forward to the Viney/Wines clash
-
Line up:
- 4Jack Watts
- 1Jesse Hogan
- 3Christian Salem
- 11Max Gawn
- 7Jack Viney
- 10Angus Brayshaw
- 12Dom Tyson
- 14Lynden Dunn
- 13Clayton Oliver
- 15Billy Stretch
- 17Sam Frost
- 16Dean Kent
- 20Colin Garland
- 22Viv Michie
- 21Cameron Pedersen
- 25Tom McDonald
- 28Oscar McDonald
- 29Jayden Hunt
Subs
- 30Alex Neal-Bullen
- 37Aaron vandenBerg
- 42Josh Wagner
- 31Jack Grimes
- 39Neville Jetta
- 32Tomas Bugg
- 35Ben Kennedy
- 45Matt Jones
- 46Dean Terlich
- 36Jefferey Garlett
- 43James Harmes
Coach
- Paul Roos
Source: http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/match?matchid=NAB20160203
Given that they have the wrong coach listed I wonder about the rest of it. Goodwin is coach today.
Good to see Oliver starting on the field. I assume some of the 'Subs' will be dropped from the final list.
-
1
-
Look forward to how we play with Goodwin in the chair and how he responds with tactics during the game.
He will be on show just as much as the players and am expecting a good performance from all.
The Incredible Hulk - Jesse Hogan
in Melbourne Demons
Posted · Edited by Lucifer's Hero
Everyone is assuming that Hogan put off the talks. But I heard the Ox say mfc offered Hogan 3 years and then 5 years (to 2020 and 2022 respectively). And tbh I think this is responsible by the club - who knows his back problems may recur big time. At the minimum he will require managing. Maybe Hogan wanted a longer term, risk free deal?
Also, who knows what else was on the table: Leadership role. B&F results. Performance criteria. Injury protection for the club. Marquis player payments (which have tax benefits), sponsorship opportunities.
And on the CBA. There are a lot of potential changes to player conditions and benefits - any delay by players isn't necessarily about $.
So tbh it is very simplistic to say delays with Hogan are about $ or making finals in 2 years. It ignores all the other factors that are part of contract negotiations.
I am really wary of 'journos' looking for a headline. While I am also besotted with Hogan I still want the club to manage all the risks and do the right thing by all.
So perhaps the delay was mutual, as reported.