Bluemour Discussion Thread III

[passmark]

I don't care if Fogarty is any good, but we need him. The CCR puns will be incredible.

You've ruined this thread, Shan.

 

[Coona Blues]

Not going to comment on the veracity of the rumour, as I have no idea, despite loving the prospect.

Am going to suggest we put together a deal that cannot be matched.
Forget massive front ended 5 or 6 year deals, need a 3 year deal to blow away the opposition and particularly
alleviate the chance of Freo matching. In round figures 5 mil 3 years first at 2m, then 1.5, 1.5.
We are going to have a young list, and will continue to get younger over the next three years. We have bankable
young talent, which will alleviate the need to keep multiple $250,000 to $400,000 "depth" players in their late 20's.
Who knows what makes Fyfe tick? Freo are behind us for a genuine rebuild. Take Fyfe and Sandilands out of their
side and you have ....... 2016. They have some decent young players developing, but no "superstars". No Cripps,
Weitering, C.Curnow, SPS, Marchbank, and possibly a couple of others who could conceivably dominate the bull sh1t
"top 50's" and the like.
The likes of Dangerfield, even Gawn and Rance are pulling massive dollars already through media and advertising.
Fyfe could augment his income enormously by being in Victoria. Three years down the track would be content, with
"average" coin. If he wasn't, would pull massive trade value.
Aside from on field, Fyfe would return us to the top echelon of clubs. Some promising efforts from the youngsters
followed by a Fyfe signing would conceivably double the membership.
Affect on young players? Fyfe is what they aspire to be, he would have their respect. Most would accept the dollars
as they will be on their first or second contracts during this period. Hell would Charlie, Weiters and co be happier
toiling as we climb over 3-5 years, or be contending almost immediately (yes, add Fyfe, another decent young trade
in and some more draft picks, and we are there)

Would Fyfe come to us.....smart enough to "smell what we are cooking".

If it is on the cards, I would support 100%.

 

[ShanDog]

You've ruined this thread, Shan.

No need to be a Suzie QQ about it

 

[AB_Blue]

We needs mids.....mids and more
Mids




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tarczonandjane]

I'm hoping the rumours of Fyfe are wide of the mark, and with the usual good mail from Barass70, I'm still reasonably confident that we won't land him.

Judd never worked. I don't care what anyone says. We ruined our chance to develop some balance to our list, we had a coach who didn't develop a sustainable game plan because he wanted everyone to get it to Judd, we had players who didn't develop as a result, and we ended up with a leader for whom the job didn't come naturally.

I don't blame Judd for that, but my worry with Fyfe is that the same temptations might arise:

- the list remains a work in progress. Getting Fyfe might mean lower concentration on drafting on ballers, when he would only be one leg break away from ruining his career
- the coach is young, he's likely to be under the pump given what is probably going to be a lean 2017. I hope he's smarter than Ratten, and will work on a sustainable game plan regardless. But if he's got one eye on his job, then the temptation to load it all up on Fyfe will be high
- player development. I'm a little more confident than in 2007, but we are coming from a long way back. Yes, the players might walk taller with Fyfe in the team, but they might also think he will do it all for them
- Fyfe is only leader at Freo this year. If he was a natural, it's likely to have come earlier in his career.

Overall, we are probably on more solid foundations than when Judd came, but not enough to be worth the investment in Fyfe imho. The trick should be to continue to look at blokes in the 19-22 year old age group who are looking to develop alongside our list.

 

[Dramoth]

As long as I can see the light I'm happy

Looking out my back door!

 

[Keyza]

I'll believe the Fyfe rumour when I see it.
Not sure we should be building our team around a singular superstar again any time soon.

I have a question. Why on earth would Fyfe want to come to Carlton? We are not a destination club and we have enough trouble holding onto our own players.

 

[Metalcrusher]

I don't want any vistas that look out your back door dram ......

 

[Metalcrusher]

I have a question. Why on earth would Fyfe want to come to Carlton? We are not a destination club and we have enough trouble holding onto our own players.

CUZ WE HAZ DA CASHESSESESES. Welcome to the days of free agency. We just need to be smarter contractually. So, for arguments sake we lock in a front ended contract worth $$$$ and dribble out severance pay towards the end, we need to hold them to account period. Not this bullshit take the money and request a trade three years into a contract after you have taken the BIG dollars.

 

[ParapMarkets]

I'm hoping the rumours of Fyfe are wide of the mark, and with the usual good mail from Barass70, I'm still reasonably confident that we won't land him.

Judd never worked. I don't care what anyone says. We ruined our chance to develop some balance to our list, we had a coach who didn't develop a sustainable game plan because he wanted everyone to get it to Judd, we had players who didn't develop as a result, and we ended up with a leader for whom the job didn't come naturally.

I don't blame Judd for that, but my worry with Fyfe is that the same temptations might arise:

- the list remains a work in progress. Getting Fyfe might mean lower concentration on drafting on ballers, when he would only be one leg break away from ruining his career
- the coach is young, he's likely to be under the pump given what is probably going to be a lean 2017. I hope he's smarter than Ratten, and will work on a sustainable game plan regardless. But if he's got one eye on his job, then the temptation to load it all up on Fyfe will be high
- player development. I'm a little more confident than in 2007, but we are coming from a long way back. Yes, the players might walk taller with Fyfe in the team, but they might also think he will do it all for them
- Fyfe is only leader at Freo this year. If he was a natural, it's likely to have come earlier in his career.

Overall, we are probably on more solid foundations than when Judd came, but not enough to be worth the investment in Fyfe imho. The trick should be to continue to look at blokes in the 19-22 year old age group who are looking to develop alongside our list.

Fyfe for free would be a no-brainer IF we can get him for free. Front loading the contract would mean his contract wouldn't affect retaining our young guns when their value goes up. We can't afford to trade for him, I think we all agree on that.

People have to remember that our salary cap situation is very different to that of Geelong when they recruited Dangerfield, their cap was already full to the brim. We treat it as pure free agency, tell him we are offering him a crapload of cash but won't be trading for him. If Freo match, then he gets himself a very nice pay rise, this is what fa was brought in for. Refuse to trade with Freo and if they match the offer for a player that has stated he wants to play elsewhere (hypothetically) then so be it.

Not saying it will happen, but it is a possibility. I would far rather spend the money on a guy like Fyfe than spend $450K p.a. on multiple Kobe Stevens'.

 

[tarczonandjane]

Fyfe for free would be a no-brainer IF we can get him for free. Front loading the contract would mean his contract wouldn't affect retaining our young guns when their value goes up. We can't afford to trade for him, I think we all agree on that.

People have to remember that our salary cap situation is very different to that of Geelong when they recruited Dangerfield, their cap was already full to the brim. We treat it as pure free agency, tell him we are offering him a crapload of cash but won't be trading for him. If Freo match, then he gets himself a very nice pay rise, this is what fa was brought in for. Refuse to trade with Freo and if they match the offer for a player that has stated he wants to play elsewhere (hypothetically) then so be it.

Not saying it will happen, but it is a possibility. I would far rather spend the money on a guy like Fyfe than spend $450K p.a. on multiple Kobe Stevens'.

There's no such thing as free though Parap. Yes you might trade for a free agent, but it's their effect on the list that counts. My view is that Judd hindered our list. We had a coach that built a game plan around him, development of the support cast was limited, and no one stepped up to the plate. They left it all to Judd. Fyfe might look free... we might not have to give up a draft pick for him (we probably won't, unless the AFL change the rules), but there is a cost. It's that hidden cost that I worry about.

 

[ParapMarkets]

There's no such thing as free though Parap. Yes you might trade for a free agent, but it's their effect on the list that counts. My view is that Judd hindered our list. We had a coach that built a game plan around him, development of the support cast was limited, and no one stepped up to the plate. They left it all to Judd.

We will have to agree to disagree on this, I can't believe anybody could think that Judd hindered our list. The support cast Fyfe would have at Carlton would be vastly different to what Judd had. Yes, he would be our best player but we would have some serious talent around him and I would like to think Bolton could create a game plan that isn't built around an individual player.

There seem to be a few people with the same opinion as you and it is a difficult one for me to understand. Opposed to recruiting gun players through fear we will become reliant on them. What if Weitering becomes the best CHF in the history of the game? Should we trade him out because he is too good? We wouldn't want to become reliant on him either.

By your line of thinking we should already be looking to trade Cripps because our midfield is very reliant on him. We should have nothing but slightly above average players. We need talent, not mediocrity. If Fyfe's contract in the latter years is not affecting our ability to retain our other talent it is a no-brainer.

 

[Iamcarlton]

Big difference now if fyfe was to come to our club than when juddy arrived at that is we already have a Judd in Patrick Cripps and an array of impressive youngsters now that we didnt have then . As long as its totally as a FA and not giving up plenty as in Judd im all for it .What a combination Cripps and fyfe would make . However pointless getting excited about the prospect until if or when fyfe makes his intentions re his contract known . But if he was available would be madness not to go after him as a FA .

 

[Magruder]

Not this bullshit take the money and request a trade three years into a contract after you have taken the BIG dollars.

Don't think it quite works that way in terms of "loading" a contract.

Hypothetical for illustration only:

Player signs a 2 year deal at $500k a year, that's his salary - what he physically receives, what he declares to the taxman etc

The AFL allow you to notionally structure for cap purposes, so fr cap purposes it could be $300k year 1 $700k year 2.

But the player receives $500k a year.

 

[tarczonandjane]

We will have to agree to disagree on this, I can't believe anybody could think that Judd hindered our list. The support cast Fyfe would have at Carlton would be vastly different to what Judd had. Yes, he would be our best player but we would have some serious talent around him and I would like to think Bolton could create a game plan that isn't built around an individual player.

There seem to be a few people with the same opinion as you and it is a difficult one for me to understand. Opposed to recruiting gun players through fear we will become reliant on them. What if Weitering becomes the best CHF in the history of the game? Should we trade him out because he is too good? We wouldn't want to become reliant on him either.

By your line of thinking we should already be looking to trade Cripps because our midfield is very reliant on him. We should have nothing but slightly above average players. We need talent, not mediocrity. If Fyfe's contract in the latter years is not affecting our ability to retain our other talent it is a no-brainer.

Nice markets by the way Parap. A lovely way to spend a balmy Darwin evening.

The difference between Cripps, Weiterimg, et al and Fyfe / Judd is that the former are coming through together. They're learning and developing as a team. Where I believe Judd hindered us is that his arrival interrupted this development in the players we had at the time. They weren't used to winning, and they took the easy way by leaving it up to Judd.

The reality is that guys like McKay, Weitering, Curnow, and Silvagni will likely be heading into 2018 on the back of two seasons of losses. Our 2016 draftees will have the same experience in 2017. The worry is that a guy like Fyfe comes in and they think he has all the answers. Get the ball to Fyfe becomes the mantra, and the risk is we go down the same road. Safer to leave Fyfe alone, and build on what we've got.

 

[Malifice]

Not going to comment on the veracity of the rumour, as I have no idea, despite loving the prospect.

Am going to suggest we put together a deal that cannot be matched.
Forget massive front ended 5 or 6 year deals, need a 3 year deal to blow away the opposition and particularly
alleviate the chance of Freo matching. In round figures 5 mil 3 years first at 2m, then 1.5, 1.5.
We are going to have a young list, and will continue to get younger over the next three years. We have bankable
young talent, which will alleviate the need to keep multiple $250,000 to $400,000 "depth" players in their late 20's.
Who knows what makes Fyfe tick? Freo are behind us for a genuine rebuild. Take Fyfe and Sandilands out of their
side and you have ....... 2016. They have some decent young players developing, but no "superstars". No Cripps,
Weitering, C.Curnow, SPS, Marchbank, and possibly a couple of others who could conceivably dominate the bull sh1t
"top 50's" and the like.
The likes of Dangerfield, even Gawn and Rance are pulling massive dollars already through media and advertising.
Fyfe could augment his income enormously by being in Victoria. Three years down the track would be content, with
"average" coin. If he wasn't, would pull massive trade value.
Aside from on field, Fyfe would return us to the top echelon of clubs. Some promising efforts from the youngsters
followed by a Fyfe signing would conceivably double the membership.
Affect on young players? Fyfe is what they aspire to be, he would have their respect. Most would accept the dollars
as they will be on their first or second contracts during this period. Hell would Charlie, Weiters and co be happier
toiling as we climb over 3-5 years, or be contending almost immediately (yes, add Fyfe, another decent young trade
in and some more draft picks, and we are there)

Would Fyfe come to us.....smart enough to "smell what we are cooking".

If it is on the cards, I would support 100%.

Screw Fyfe, hes too old and too FIGJAM.

Dylan Shiel is the one I want. 4.2 million over 5 years would get it done. Front load the crap out of it (Huge hole in the salary cap for next year already plus the salary cap increases by 20% in 2018).

 

[Mister Carlton]

SOS will target two big names in the coming years. Won't be Fyfe.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

I have a question. Why on earth would Fyfe want to come to Carlton? We are not a destination club and we have enough trouble holding onto our own players.

You're asking the wrong gal.

 

[barass70]

SOS will target two big names in the coming years. Won't be Fyfe.

Spot on

 

[SafeAsMilk]

Our problem is having too much cap space and no currency to trade for players to fill it.

 

[Sector 7G]

There's no such thing as free though Parap. Yes you might trade for a free agent, but it's their effect on the list that counts. My view is that Judd hindered our list. We had a coach that built a game plan around him, development of the support cast was limited, and no one stepped up to the plate. They left it all to Judd. Fyfe might look free... we might not have to give up a draft pick for him (we probably won't, unless the AFL change the rules), but there is a cost. It's that hidden cost that I worry about.

Judd didn't hinder anyones development, he only enhanced it. The problem was that our drafting was crap. Russell, Hampson, Grigg, Edwards, Austin, Hartlett, Bower, etc. didn't become players because they weren't up to it. We had the picks just used them badly.

 

[JustaBattler]

Counting down the days top see just how irrelevant to the future Murphy and Gibbs will show they are this year - we'll be carrying a few for a year or more - Thomas/Kerridge/Wright/Plamer/Gorringe/Smedts types ok enough and experienced enough to help teh side to an honourable loss on a good day.

 

[thylacine60]

we have made drafting blunders in the past - can we never mention them again please? thank-you........

 

[Malifice]

Our problem is having too much cap space and no currency to trade for players to fill it.

Presuming Ben Silvagni is likely to go in the top 5 next year we have a first round draft pick to trade in 2018.

There is zero risk in trading that future first rounder this year as long as Ben goes high in 2018. We would be spending it on him anyway, so we might as well spend a bunch of second round picks on him (effectively buying back into the first round with a bunch of later picks).

We trade our future first round pick (1-4) for Dylan Shiel and the Giants future second round pick (35-40). Then in 2018 we use our second round pick, the Giants second round pick and possibly a priority pick to pick up Ben (using the points to match any bids).

If he goes later than the top 10 we will still have one of those second round picks left.

 

[Sector 7G]

we have made drafting blunders in the past - can we never mention them again please? thank-you........

Only did it when someone besmirched Juddy's fine name, with ridiculous claims that he held back others development. Not something I would normally reflect on.