Mega Thread AFL: No Trades (READ OP)

[MARK In TIME]

AFL bans Sydney for 2 trade periods, Swans win premiership 2 seasons later, hilarity ensues.

On the back of winning the Premiership in 2012 during the Giants first season.

We're a resilient club - it's one of the things I'm most proud of.

 

[doona]

Unless the Mitchell delay is based around our plan being to cut one player on above average wage in order to slide under the cap.

Or it could be a Treloar instance where he was offered ~500k at the Giants, but would get 200K more at another club. If Prestia is getting 700k+ from Richmond, Titch would be offered at least that for moving which obviously we could not pay.

 

[Lakeside Swan]

Still annoyed the media didn't kick up a stink about this more.

Robbo last week on 360 says to Longmire that the trade ban was wrong and unfair. Didn't hear much two years ago when it was announced!

Healy and to a lesser extent Quayle and Caro were the only ones who pointed out its unfairness.

 

[bungwahl]

Or it could be a Treloar instance where he was offered ~500k at the Giants, but would get 200K more at another club. If Prestia is getting 700k+ from Richmond, Titch would be offered at least that for moving which obviously we could not pay.

Yeah agree that's the likely scenario for Mitchell. Was talking purely about COLA removal.

 

[RW]

We've known about the COLA phase out for a few years now so you'd expect our TPP schedule would already be factoring this in. Unless the Mitchell delay is based around our plan being to cut one player on above average wage in order to slide under the cap.

The thing is I'm not sure we need to cut anyone significant even if Mitchell stays, he is literally the only player on above average wage left that hasn't already re-signed, so you are probably correct in saying that our TPP schedule should have factored in the COLA phase out already if our list managers have done their job.

 

[doona]

The thing is I'm not sure we need to cut anyone significant even if Mitchell stays, he is literally the only player on above average wage left that hasn't already re-signed, so you are probably correct in saying that our TPP schedule should have factored in the COLA phase out already if our list managers have done their job.

I don't know if significant in terms of moving forward, but S. Reid/B. McGlynn would be looking at seriously reduced contracts or in McGlynn's case not offered at all.

If you look at our team, and the youngsters that will play in the qualifying final Heeney, Mills, X. Richards, Papley, Cunningham, Lloyd, Hewett, Naismith, Aliir etc..... a lot of our bottom 6 even bottom 12 are really young on lower contracts and youngsters.

In the period where we have had the COLA phased out, we have lost a lot more stars/higher paid players and replaced them with youngsters. We have been lucky that our top end talent is relatively young and from 2012, we have replaced players like Mumford/Goodes/Shaw/Bolton/Mattner/Malceski/LRT/etc... with youngsters for another crack at the premiership.

So in essence we have our stars on high contracts like buddy/parker/hanners/etc.... and replaced the high paid stars that have left since 2012 with rookies to account for "no cola"

 

[RW]

Reid has one more year to run on his contract.

I'm curious to see what we do with Xavier, do we offer him another contract as a reward for his improvement? A lot will depend on how the young players go in the finals though!

 

[doona]

Reid has one more year to run on his contract.

For some reason I thought he was out this year. My bad.

I'm curious to see what we do with Xavier, do we offer him another contract as a reward for his improvement?

If we loose Mitchell, I would prefer us to get draft picks for this year/next year and use the cash to sure up our young players like X. Richards and even extend some contracts. I would prefer that then re-signing McGlynn to be honest.

 

[Tuco]

So this post I made around the time the trade ban was announced turned out to be pretty close to the mark in the end.

Last year I was concerned about how we would replace our aging and retiring players as the cupboard looked a little bare depth wise, but we have found improvement from within this year and in doing so have addressed most of our needs.

We might have even been better off leaving the trade ban in place last year, it would have stopped us from recruiting Sinclair for one, but then miggs would have nothing much to talk about.

While the trade ban was still a ridiculous decision, it now looks like a bump in the road. We still have to deal with the COLA removal at the end of the season but it appears we should be able to cope with that too.

I agree we handled it as well as we could have.

But I suspect it cost us in the finals as we lost depth and couldn't cope with the injuries.

I think they only relaxed tbe ban in the second year because the AFLPA were screaming about the impact on player trades.

My sense was that the ban would have stayed if it wasn't for Jetta trying to get to West Coast. The only way that could happen was via a trade - hence Sinkers.

Pretty sure the AFL were delighted to help us offload premiership talent.

 

[Olian]

Trade ban has benefitted us in the sense we have had to regenerate our list and develop players rather than trade them in and resulted in backing in our youth.

 

[momentbymoment]

Trade ban has benefitted us in the sense we have had to regenerate our list and develop players rather than trade them in and resulted in backing in our youth.

Yeah but from another perspective, we would now have Patful contributing instead of Talia making a fool of himself.

 

[Olian]

Yeah but from another perspective, we would now have Patful contributing instead of Talia making a fool of himself.

Patful could retire at seasons end and then what. We may not have known if Aliir could play.

 

[momentbymoment]

Patful could retire at seasons end and then what. We may not have known if Aliir could play.

I agree with that.
If we let AA through our fingers it would have been very unfortunate. He will be AA in a few years.

 

[Gongswan]

I agree with that.
If we let AA through our fingers it would have been very unfortunate. He will be AA in a few years.

HA

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Reid has one more year to run on his contract.

I'm curious to see what we do with Xavier, do we offer him another contract as a reward for his improvement? A lot will depend on how the young players go in the finals though!

Read where he was recently offered a 2 year contract extension, but not heard whether was accepted. That was 2-3 weeks ago I recall

 

[SwansFaninUSA]

Assuming this mega thread covers everything BUT trades, could someone explain something to a dumb American who doesn't understand something?

It has to do with situation with Essendon, and the doping bans. I get the fact the particulars of the case, but one thing confounds me.

The league is based in Australia. All the teams play in Australia. The game was invented by an Australian.

Why is this case being decided by a bunch of twits from Switzerland? I would really appreciate it if someone could explain the sanity of that.

Apologies in advance if asking this results in someone breaking things.

 

[MickyG]

Assuming this mega thread covers everything BUT trades, could someone explain something to a dumb American who doesn't understand something?

It has to do with situation with Essendon, and the doping bans. I get the fact the particulars of the case, but one thing confounds me.

The league is based in Australia. All the teams play in Australia. The game was invented by an Australian.

Why is this case being decided by a bunch of twits from Switzerland? I would really appreciate it if someone could explain the sanity of that.

Apologies in advance if asking this results in someone breaking things.

AFL has signed up to the international code administered by WADA. Local administration by ASADA. ASADA ran the original case here in Australia and the judgement was made by 3 people appointed by the AFL that let the players off. ASADA appealed to WADA who handed down the bans. Under WADA the only appeal was through the Swiss Court.

 

[SwansFaninUSA]

AFL has signed up to the international code administered by WADA. Local administration by ASADA. ASADA ran the original case here in Australia and the judgement was made by 3 people appointed by the AFL that let the players off. ASADA appealed to WADA who handed down the bans. Under WADA the only appeal was through the Swiss Court.

OK, I guess that makes sense. I missed the part where ASADA called them in. Up here, we get mad enough when our own politicians stick their noses into sports issues. But to take it outside the US? Kinda like dogs and cats living together, total anarchy!

 

[Membling]

OK, I guess that makes sense. I missed the part where ASADA called them in. Up here, we get mad enough when our own politicians stick their noses into sports issues. But to take it outside the US? Kinda like dogs and cats living together, total anarchy!

Well, when your internal system is obviously terrible and you have a higher power, why not ask them

 

[GotTheGoodes]

Well, when your internal system is obviously terrible and you have a higher power, why not ask them

It also has a bit to do with government funding/grants, sponsors etc etc. The AFL has agreed to be part of the international code as a matter of transparency to it's stakeholders as much as having someone else administer the rules/punishment etc.

 

[SwansFaninUSA]

It also has a bit to do with government funding/grants, sponsors etc etc. The AFL has agreed to be part of the international code as a matter of transparency to it's stakeholders as much as having someone else administer the rules/punishment etc.

I get that, but I can see where, eventually, it could become a two edged sword.