Roo Lives Again
Norm Smith Medallist
- Jun 22, 2012
- 6,349
- 6,065
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Norwood
- Banned
- #9,801
Yes but it's also hard to negotiate when they know if Paddy goes to the PSD we lose our compo.
No Oppo Supporters Re-signing Tex, Danger and Sloane *** Crows Only ***
- Thread starter Allefgib
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Yes but it's also hard to negotiate when they know if Paddy goes to the PSD we lose our compo.
Still around, just not spending as much time on BigFooty as I used to. Work is busy and I now have other life priorities that restrict the time I can spend on BigFooty.
Was there something you particularly wanted me to look at, or comment on?
- Jul 25, 2010
- 32,674
- 18,767
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Golden State Warriors NBA Champions
Nope, just have not read any of your comments for a long time.
Frawley was an unrestricted FA, so Melbourne never even had the option of matching the offer he received. That said, in receiving pick #2 they made out like bandits. Given the compensation, I doubt they would have even contemplated matching the offer (assuming the was restricted, which he wasn't).
Didn't realise that. You'd think Goddard would have been close to UFA as well then.
- Sep 11, 2009
- 5,136
- 3,977
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Still not sold on keeping Danger. He is amazing, no doubt about that. But after last year with his terrible disposal efficiency, poor goal accuracy, and trying to do everything on his own too often, I dont know if we would be better playing as a team of 22, or a team of 21 and a small one man army who can do amazing things, but lacks the icing on the cake - the goal accuracy and disposal efficiency.
I think Hawthorn looked to Buddy too often, maybe we look to Danger too much?
If Danger leaves, we would have a spot in the 22 for M Crouch, plus a reasonably high pick that could be used to trade / draft that tall defender we need.
I think Hawthorn looked to Buddy too often, maybe we look to Danger too much?
If Danger leaves, we would have a spot in the 22 for M Crouch, plus a reasonably high pick that could be used to trade / draft that tall defender we need.
Someone, might have been AFC979810, provided a list of all the players to have left as FA - and whether they were restricted or unrestricted.
There really weren't any valid comparisons to Dangerfield's situation. There were a few where the losing club were unable/unwilling to match the offer the player received (Goddard, Franklin). Most clubs received compensation that was reasonably close to fair. It's unlikely that Dangerfield will receive an offer that Adelaide can't/won't match - and he's worth considerably more than the Round 1 compensation pick we'd receive if we allowed him to walk as a FA.
Assuming he decides to leave (which is looking more likely by the day), I still think that the most likely scenario is as follows:
- Dangerfield receives offers from multiple clubs (probably Geelong & Collingwood) and decides which offer he prefers.
- Adelaide matches the offer.
- Adelaide trades with Dangerfield's preferred club, receiving better compensation than the FA system would have offered.
- Apr 12, 2012
- 4,266
- 7,036
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Ricciardo, Red Sox
Agreed. Providing he doesn't just sign with us midyear.
I'd throw Hawthorn in the mix as well considering some of their aging mids (Mitchell 32, Burgoyne 32, Hodge 30, Lewis 28).
- Apr 12, 2012
- 4,266
- 7,036
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Ricciardo, Red Sox
Just on those clubs (Hawks, Collingwood and Geelong). They would ALL take Danger in the PSD before the other had a chance. Even if not to stop their direct competitors from having him.
The publicity he brings is massive. List and marketing managers across Victoria will be furiously masturbating at the idea of picking him up with a rubbish PSD pick.
Matching is the only move for the AFC.
The publicity he brings is massive. List and marketing managers across Victoria will be furiously masturbating at the idea of picking him up with a rubbish PSD pick.
Matching is the only move for the AFC.
That was a stated assumption.
Possible. Depends on how many players they lose to retirement this year. Nothing would surprise me, given their penchant for signing FA and/or trading for players, when they should be having salary cap problems of their own.
Danoz
Dananananananana Statman (òÓ,)_\,,/
Sam Mitchell was on SEN last week. Explained how teams that have had a culture of not overpaying players to keep everyone around for the sake of the team can't bring in a new player at significantly more than what the best players have been paid at that club, without losing some of thopse players the next year (or even that year) due to the unfair pay scales.
Hawks have had to moneyball a lot of their players. All of Burgoyne, Gibson, Hale, Frawley, Lake etc are good-great players who could easily be paid within the pay-scales that already existed. Danger will not fit that mould. Magpies have shown they will pay over the odds to keep/get a big name, Cats appear to be changing the way they do things (whether that is a good or bad thing is still up in the air). But I still believe the Cats will offer a fair bit less than what we offer Danger, which is the other reason why we will almost certainly match should Danger accept the Cats offer.
Haha. Probably not far from the truth either. Could you really imagine Carlton passing him up? Or Collingwood etc? Big name teams known for splashing cash and looking for the quick fix with rubbish lists and not too much to spend their cap on.
Good point Danoz. Even if Hawthorn were to throw their hat into the ring, their culture of luring players with success and then paying less than market rates means that they're even less likely to make a Godfather offer that we can't match. They may well throw their hat into the ring, and they may well be Dangerfield's preferred destination, but the odds on them making an outlandish offer would have to be fairly remote.
There really is no other choice. If we can match the offer, we have to. Let the other teams decide if we are bluffing or not.
I would be happy to have a bet that, if Adelaide makes it known that we will be matching any reasonable offer, what ever team danger decides to go to, will make the trade happen. It may be less than what he's worth, but it will be more than the compo pick we would otherwise get.
Sloane announcement very soon.
- Jul 25, 2010
- 32,674
- 18,767
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Golden State Warriors NBA Champions
Can you give us some more information?
Like where did this come from. How credible are you or just you just trying to make a name for yourself.
- Oct 31, 2014
- 1,726
- 4,014
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Miami Heat
Source or guess...?
He's the Weeeeed. Don't argue.
- Jul 25, 2010
- 32,674
- 18,767
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Golden State Warriors NBA Champions
Excellent source. Sorry can't tell you who it is. Just have to take me on face value. And what an excellent face. Have been told its 4 years!
- Jul 25, 2010
- 32,674
- 18,767
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Golden State Warriors NBA Champions
Will give you 14 days and then call you an attention seeking whore if you are wrong.
- Oct 31, 2014
- 1,726
- 4,014
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Miami Heat
Is soon within a month or a week?
- Nov 5, 2009
- 10,065
- 9,272
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Did a quick background check through the search function. Only 100 posts - so easy to do.
3 weeks before the 2011 rookie draft (2010 draft) we would take rookie Lachlan Roach with our first rookie pick if Hawthorn didn't take him first. We took Roach with our 3rd pick.
50/50. Lets hope he is right.
- Oct 16, 2011
- 15,378
- 38,230
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Charlie has good info
- Oct 16, 2011
- 15,378
- 38,230
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Of course, when Sloaney is announced, watch the usual suspects ignore that and focus on "why hasn't Paddy signed?"
- Status
Similar threads
