List Mgmt. AFC - 2014 Drafting and Trading

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Champ, maybe the new era of the AFC is about to begin. New CEO, new coach, some good trades and we start to have things in place to make an assault on the flag within 3 years.

Feels that way to me, seems like a long time since we've made any moves that would result in anything more that hopefully making us a little bit better in the following year. I'd love for us to be able to add a gun player to our list of announcements this off season. It's going to be an interesting summer thats for sure.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Feels that way to me, seems like a long time since we've made any moves that would result in anything more that hopefully making us a little bit better in the following year. I'd love for us to be able to add a gun player to our list of announcements this off season. It's going to be an interesting summer thats for sure.

I have always felt that the SA Clubs have it the most difficult in the AFL in terms of recruiting big stars to play here. Although Brisbane last year could take issue with that.

I cant recall a big "fish" coming to either Club from another Club unless it was for family.
 
i list a few

Thanks for the summary, numbering issues aside. Would it be fair to assume that the player mentioned in the first Point 4 would be defined as a "major trade"? And if so would this mean that Danger would have to be traded (point 5 - the second one) in order to get the necessary trade currency for a J. Cameron type?

With Sando's departure, there was some talk of his views of the playing list not matching up with the board: and I suppose we could assume he wanted to top up the team for a charge at the premiership at the expense of young players in Points 1 and 2. Would that mean those earlier points still stand?
 
Thanks for the summary, numbering issues aside. Would it be fair to assume that the player mentioned in the first Point 4 would be defined as a "major trade"? And if so would this mean that Danger would have to be traded (point 5 - the second one) in order to get the necessary trade currency for a J. Cameron type?


With Sando's departure, there was some talk of his views of the playing list not matching up with the board: and I suppose we could assume he wanted to top up the team for a charge at the premiership at the expense of young players in Points 1 and 2. Would that mean those earlier points still stand?

In all honesty I can only make my own opinions on the points and you may make a clearer view than me!
I can guarantee that sando did not look after the young players like he should of, Lyons grigg & m.crouch did not get the right direction/communication when not selected! He was directly focused on the boys on the park!

Your reply seems on the money!

My view is Top clubs keep and keep developing their young talent for long term success! Not every player should go on notice and not looked after or developed.. For us to rid young talent for assets for one star would be negitive for long term success in more ways then one. A star for a star, or a star for $$$$ to where u risk losing the cash flow to retain other key players that may combine a winning formulae. Short term success may be the number one goal but long term dominance is the holy grail. A coach is only a asset and if not inline to the clubs veiws and plans is replaced

Sorry if my reply is clunky
 
In all honesty I can only make my own opinions on the points and you may make a clearer view than me!
I can guarantee that sando did not look after the young players like he should of, Lyons grigg & m.crouch did not get the right direction/communication when not selected! He was directly focused on the boys on the park!

Your reply seems on the money!

My view is Top clubs keep and keep developing their young talent for long term success! Not every player should go on notice and not looked after or developed.. For us to rid young talent for assets for one star would be negitive for long term success in more ways then one. A star for a star, or a star for $$$$ to where u risk losing the cash flow to retain other key players that may combine a winning formulae. Short term success may be the number one goal but long term dominance is the holy grail. A coach is only a asset and if not inline to the clubs veiws and plans is replaced

Sorry if my reply is clunky

I am now 25% sure you are matt crouch
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Unfortunately it seems the AFL is considering granting Melbourne an ambassadors role payment, similar to what the Sydney teams have. Meaning they will have AFL money outside the cap to attract a genuine star. So unfortunately Melbourne aren't hardening up.
Let's trade danger and throw in mackay - they can pay his contract out.
 
Champ, maybe the new era of the AFC is about to begin. New CEO, new coach, some good trades and we start to have things in place to make an assault on the flag within 3 years.

Maybe we have worked out how to pay players outside the salary cap without getting caught?
 
Maybe we have worked out how to pay players outside the salary cap without getting caught?
Pretty simple really. We just take this off when paying players.
salary_cap_medium.gif


...or at least that's how Triggy wanted it done.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top