Opinion If all the cards fall our way…. what will be the real cost?

[dazbroncos]

All the talk of every FA player coming to GFC got me thinking - or perhaps dreaming - about something…

IF we keep Mots, get PD, Henderson and Scooter and only lose say Stokes, Rivers, Hmac, Hartman, Toohey, Blease, Cowan to rookie, and one of Bartel, SJ, Kelly, Enright to retirement….

That leaves a fairly reasonable list.

After being investigated by the AFL for SC breaches etc, as you know they will, what sanctions or measure do you think the AFL will either bring into effect or change to restrict us from being successful again…
The Swans got a trade ban over 350k and lost COLA.

What will ours be…?

Loss of more home games?
Trade ban like the Swans got?
And increase in the comp to the AFC after they don't match the RFA offer?
Equalisation find % increase?

Or will it just be accepted that the GFC have acted within the guidelines that the AFL have laid out and we are left on our merry way?

Tin foil hats are located just inside the door to the left for those feeling the need….

GO Catters

 

[Daniel McL]

Perhaps the AFL forced us to re-sign Smedts as punishment

 

[Munich]

All the talk of every FA player coming to GFC got me thinking - or perhaps dreaming - about something…

IF we keep Mots, get PD, Henderson and Scooter and only lose say Stokes, Rivers, Hmac, Hartman, Toohey, Blease, Cowan to rookie, and one of Bartel, SJ, Kelly, Enright to retirement….

That leaves a fairly reasonable list.

After being investigated by the AFL for SC breaches etc, as you know they will, what sanctions or measure do you think the AFL will either bring into effect or change to restrict us from being successful again…
The Swans got a trade ban over 350k and lost COLA.

What will ours be…?

Loss of more home games?
Trade ban like the Swans got?
And increase in the comp to the AFC after they don't match the RFA offer?
Equalisation find % increase?

Or will it just be accepted that the GFC have acted within the guidelines that the AFL have laid out and we are left on our merry way?

Tin foil hats are located just inside the door to the left for those feeling the need….

GO Catters

If we even get looked at Hawthorn should go directly to jail.

 

[CatTricks]

We will probably be required to continue to recruit injury prone ruckmen, just for the equalization of the competition.

 

[Munich]

We will probably be required to continue to recruit injury prone ruckmen, just for the equalization of the competition.

LOL.

Stanley is our saviour, I can feel it in my waters.

 

[sauron256]

Destruction of the highway between Moggs Creek and Geelong

 

[Teriyakicat]

LOL.

Stanley is our saviour, I can feel it in my waters.

I think the baby is coming, Munich! Better get to a maternity ward, fast!!

 

[iameviljez]

I think the major reason why the AFL pinged Sydney is because (in part) of the existing hubbub over COLA, and also because the Swans stole Franklin from under GWS' nose. This isn't the case here.

 

[zb14]

we will be banned from "lurk liking" on the whole internetz, that's my tip

 

[Biggy_Boy]

The Swans lost COLA because they have been consistently successful and were able to still afford the biggest free agent on the market despite winning a flag a year earlier. They got trade bans because the AFL set them a target to phase out the COLA by, which would require meticulous management of their contracts. Despite this, Sydney still sought to go after high-price targets in the off-season, which may have compromised the goal of abolishing the amount allocated under the old COLA system.

We don't have to worry about this because Geelong doesn't have COLA and there are no agreements in place between the AFL and the GFC to reduce spending to a certain amount. All that matters is that the salary cap isn't breached. We're also not targeting anyone who the AFL has earmarked to be a marquee player for one of their pet franchises, which is what really upset the AFL about the Swans/Buddy situation.

I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that, if Geelong does manage to land the players it's after (and that's a big if), the AFL will still hand us a pretty tough draw despite finishing either outside or just inside the eight, even if this goes against their tier system policy. I mean, we were the worst of the top 6 last year, yet the club was given the hardest draw. But otherwise, if Hawthorn can get away with their stellar use of the FA/trade systems, landing big names year after year, I don't see why Geelong should garner any additional scrutiny, provided nothing dodgy occurs. Any free agent or trade acquisitions aren't necessarily going to make Geelong a much better team anyway, given that there are still many old players to move on.

Still, we're speaking in hypotheticals. There are a lot of "ifs" in these discussions, and the Frawley and Christensen dealings should have taught us that you can never be sure of what will transpire come trade time in August.

 

[Teriyakicat]

I think the major reason why the AFL pinged Sydney is because (in part) of the existing hubbub over COLA, and also because the Swans stole Franklin from under GWS' nose- AND AGAINST AFL PLANS!!. This isn't the case here.

bolded was the most important part of what happened, I think, iameviljez A few feathers were ruffled at the time, weren't they?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...-franklin-to-gws/story-fnca0u4y-1227471673437

 

[you pick one]

Razor was that the siren Ray to be a permanent umpire for Geelong games,

 

[AlcoaCat]

Destruction of the highway between Moggs Creek and Geelong

Compulsory wearing of the GPS upper topper flopper stoppers in public by players at all times. Tattooing of handbag on knob.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Razor was that the siren Ray to be a permanent umpire for Geelong games,

meh at least it's not Mollison.....

 

[Stan The Caddy]

Daz, I have full faith in the club and I am so certain in this belief. In other words, we would not be chasing anybody that we couldn't afford and will be retaining everybody that we intend to. We're not some amatuer club that does things on the fly. We are well operated and I have no doubt that Cook and co. will have planned for what we are attempting to achieve. Happy days are ahead of us. You better believe it Daz! Get your party hat on mate and start celebrating!!!

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Daz, I have full faith in the club and I am so certain in this belief. In other words, we would not be chasing anybody that we couldn't afford and will be retaining everybody that we intend to. We're not some amatuer club that does things on the fly. We are well operated and I have no doubt that Cook and co. will have planned for what we are attempting to achieve. Happy days are ahead of us. You better believe it Daz! Get your party hat on mate and start celebrating!!!

Evidence provided by last year's trade period doesn't really support that.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

Evidence provided by last year's trade period doesn't really support that.

How so? I eagerly await your reply.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

How so? I eagerly await your reply.

Losing Christensen for pick 21, getting in a guy with severe mental and physical health issues, using pick 21 for Stanley, and getting in a list clogger in Sam Blease were all pretty questionable list management moves.

 

[Teriyakicat]

Losing Christensen for pick 21, getting in a guy with severe mental and physical health issues, using pick 21 for Stanley, and getting in a list clogger in Sam Blease were all pretty questionable list management moves.

1. we didn't "lose" christensen. The club knew exactly where he was, where he was going and where he didn't want to be.
2. Using pick #21 on Stanley was a stroke of genius. 17 other clubs were watching on jealously, as he and Blitz combined to rip oppo midfields into shreds...until he was injured.
3. Blease might be a 'list clogger' as you've so eloquently put it but he's OUR list clogger and depth as a runner- thankfully Gregson was able to be drafted and to have an impact straight away but this wasn't known at the time the decision would've been made to grab Blease.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

Losing Christensen for pick 21, getting in a guy with severe mental and physical health issues, using pick 21 for Stanley, and getting in a list clogger in Sam Blease were all pretty questionable list management moves.

Are you going to quote my reply from last night or are you going to let that conveniently go?

Anyway, back on topic shall we?

If Bundy wanted to go, under the C/stances it was the best that we could get. Not so dissimilar to his C/stances I guess.

I'm prepared to wait on Stanley, I reckon that he is going to be worth what we paid and more by the time that he retires. Time will tell though.

Sam Blease? Yeah what a terrible mistake. A 1 year contract on minimum wage without giving up a draft pick at all. Man, has that really killed the club! I'm walking to my microwave as we speak.

Anything else?

 

[worldlylizard19]

If we reach all our targets there will be a lack of trade activity in the next few years as we battle to retain players coming on to new contracts who get offers. We also are assuming we will rise up the ladder for a couple of years so expect depth players to be poached or leave of their own accord and the continuance of a lack of top draft picks. Then when this new window shuts expect a collapse down to the bottom because there will be most likely no mid 20s players as good as Selwood, Hawkins and Taylor.

 

[Munich]

1. we didn't "lose" christensen. The club knew exactly where he was, where he was going and where he didn't want to be.
2. Using pick #21 on Stanley was a stroke of genius. 17 other clubs were watching on jealously, as he and Blitz combined to rip oppo midfields into shreds...until he was injured.
3. Blease might be a 'list clogger' as you've so eloquently put it but he's OUR list clogger and depth as a runner- thankfully Gregson was able to be drafted and to have an impact straight away but this wasn't known at the time the decision would've been made to grab Blease.

I've forgotten all about this guy! Is he injured? Or can't get a seniors game?

 

[manboob]

There will be a run-on on melted cheese and the price will skyrocket!

 

[Biggy_Boy]

1. we didn't "lose" christensen. The club knew exactly where he was, where he was going and where he didn't want to be.
2. Using pick #21 on Stanley was a stroke of genius. 17 other clubs were watching on jealously, as he and Blitz combined to rip oppo midfields into shreds...until he was injured.
3. Blease might be a 'list clogger' as you've so eloquently put it but he's OUR list clogger and depth as a runner- thankfully Gregson was able to be drafted and to have an impact straight away but this wasn't known at the time the decision would've been made to grab Blease.

Are you going to quote my reply from last night or are you going to let that conveniently go?

Anyway, back on topic shall we?

If Bundy wanted to go, under the C/stances it was the best that we could get. Not so dissimilar to his C/stances I guess.

I'm prepared to wait on Stanley, I reckon that he is going to be worth what we paid and more by the time that he retires. Time will tell though.

Sam Blease? Yeah what a terrible mistake. A 1 year contract on minimum wage without giving up a draft pick at all. Man, has that really killed the club! I'm walking to my microwave as we speak.

Anything else?

I do notice there's a player absent from both of your assessments.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I do notice there's a player absent from both of your assessments.

Time will tell on that front too. we removed an inconsistent and highly paid footballer to get Clark and on lowish money too....

You could say given we're chasing Henderson, Selwood, Dangerfield and trying to retain Mots and Blicavs amongst others who have re-signed already that getting Trav's contract off the books could be quite useful and it should be noted if we were to see Travis leave this year it'd have been as a Free Agent which given we're trying to get two players in that regard would mean we get no compo for him. This way we got a player and not on a lot of $$$ either.