News Mid-season Trade/Draft period on the cards EPL style

[ferrisb]

You still haven't put up one valid reason, that would negatively impact the concept of a mid season trade

I'll tell you a negative, A.

We'd now have TWO periods a year where we'd spend the trading period losing our s**t and bemoaning the lack of action.

Only for SOS to pull off some ripper deals in the last five minutes of the window.....

 

[Arr0w]

I'll tell you a negative, A.

We'd now have TWO periods a year where we'd spend the trading period losing our s**t and bemoaning the lack of action.

Only for SOS to pull off some ripper deals in the last five minutes of the window.....

A 2nd rounder to the Hawks, ending up at the Saints (Clavarino) for Kerr, Macreadie and Willo.

Yeah i can live with that

 

[Big_Luch]

Nobody would loan serious talent. We would loan players that would benefit from game time to fast track their development for us.

Say in a year or two sydney needed a ruck. We could get Dekonning 10 to 15 games without an investment from our own playing minutes.. win win.

 

[katmanblue]

If Cripps is touch and go with an injury the Crows wouldn't exactly be invested in playing it safe either.

Another factor is that as soon as we lend Cripps out we are declaring our hand to supporters that we've given up on the season - how does that impact attendance/membership next year etc. What if Cripps then decides he actually enjoys playing for that club.

I really can't see many benefits to lower clubs, but plenty of unintended problems that could arise.

I doubt anyone would loan any stars unless an extremely good deal was worked out.

I reckon it would be someone like Macreadie that would get loaned out. Too good for vfl but has too many on front of him. He gets games in and doesn't languish is the seconds. So there is upside in the loan for both clubs.



On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[The Smoking Gun]

Tell me how?

What you forget smokie is clubs don't have to trade players out, unlike UFA, walking out the door

Unforeseen Consequences. Let me give you an analogy. Your wife & her best friend decide to do a hubby swap for 2 months. You find you like her best friend....a lot!!! She's better in the cot, a better cook, cleans up after you, sends you off on a fishing charter once a fortnight and plays golf with you on the other weekend. Best of all she doesn't nag!!! At the end of 2 months there's no way anyone's getting you to go back where you've come from. Your wife's best friend is also much happier with you than her husband. On the other hand, her husband and your wife hate each others guts. The problem is where there were once two happy couples now there is only one. Enter the players managers, who just like lawyers, issue divorce papers.

To some extent, ignorance is bliss. A player can't miss what he hasn't experienced or been exposed to, but open up a player's eyes to a new environment and they may not want to come back. The devil is in the detail and they'll be guaranteed to * that up, I promise you.

IMO players already have more than enough avenues to move from one club to another....even while contracted. Gibbs & Ablett are proof of that.........and where did they go??? That's right, from weak clubs to strong clubs.

 

[GapInIkonPark]

What are some possible trade scenarios should a mid-season draft be introduced in 2018?

Sydney is short of rucks with Naismith down. Perhaps Phillips to Sydney as a backup? What does Carlton get? Upgrade our 4th round pick to Sydney’s third round pick at the end-of-season draft?

Collingwood needs a tall forward. We loan Casboult for the balance of 2018? We get Aish for the balance of 2018?

Do we take the injured GWS player mid-season? Say Setterfield. We give up a second-round Pick at the end-of-season draft (instead of a first) and get a fourth round Pick back. We loan Polson for the balance of 2018.

I see it as something to keep strong clubs in contention and weaker clubs bargaining for either better draft picks or a player who is not best-22 at his original club.

 

[BlueRenaissance]

Totally agree with the gun. A md-year trade/loan period will see the rise of the Henderson types, Players who spit their dummy and want out immediately without trying to work through it first. Oh, I'm not in the first team right now aren't I - well iwant out then or ill be a pain in the arse.

Leaving it to the one 12 month trade period brings a little bit of order and planning to that.

Don't mind clubs having a trade period for VFL/WAFL/SANFL players though.

The AFL faces a tough ask. Allow players movement while knowing that the supporter faithful underpin their loyalty on a single club and a group of loyal players. Fans have to accept player movement so there is a switch going on that we support the clubs over players but it brings with it confusion on allegiance. After Gibbs first attempt to get to Adelaide, a bit of my support died with that attempt. Not great and not what I want, or other fan want.

Camporeale lost my support. Waite lost my support. I understand they are allowed to leave, I'm just saying from a fan point, we don't like it but accept it. So why would we support more supporter carnage of this nature with a mid year trade period.

 

[BIGGUS 64]

Nup, don't like either idea.
I like it that each club has it's list set up for the start of each season and that's what they go with, for better or worse. Stick with the personnel you started the year with, and if they're just not cutting it, tough T**ty.
The protracted circus that is the trade period has it's place at the end of the season when there's nothing else happening except (yawn) horse racing. But why anyone would want all that distraction and speculation when there's a season in progress is beyond me.

And the loan scheme? No. F***ing. Way. Just... NO. Can't be stuffed arguing why (it's late), I just hate the idea.

 

[Jabba73]

How will SANFL and other competitions react? Clubs set themselves up with the best talent they can get, sell memberships and sponsorship based on certain expectations.

Come mid year, their best few players get ripped out and a club can go from premiership favourite to 10 goal losers in a week.

 

[AndyWalkersGirl]

It makes me nervous that we will lose good prosorcts

 

[AndyWalkersGirl]

*prospects

 

[djw1952]

So we're in the bottom 4 with nothing to play for. So we decide to play it smart. We trade for 6 months Cripps to Richmond for their first rounder, Marc to Adelaide for a second, and Liam Jones to GWS for their first. Then we finish botttom and go into the draft with a super strong hand, and all our players back ready for next year.

Great for us. But how is that good for the comp? Its a terrible idea

Agree totally because how would you like one of your own players helping another team to beat you in a game, or worse what if the player then decided that he wants to leave your club. It works in English soccer because usually the player concerned goes to a lower division team or a team in another country and does not end up playing against his own side unless it is in a rare match up for an F.A. cup game or something like that. Why does the AFL have to keep reinventing the game each season, do they have an inferiority complex or what??? Next thing they will want to be playing a game for points on Mars............but never ever want a team out of Tassie in the comp..........Gil is a political opportunist but does he really care about grass roots footy.........bloody w***er!!!

 

[Weiterbot23]

I'm not against a mid season trade period, where the players are traded for good, but not crazy about it.

But this loan stuff is rubbish.

Trading a player is like breaking up with your girlfriend, sad but you only do it if you think it's for the best.

Loans are like renting out your girlfriend on the street corner, gross!

 

[Arr0w]

Unforeseen Consequences. Let me give you an analogy. Your wife & her best friend decide to do a hubby swap for 2 months. You find you like her best friend....a lot!!! She's better in the cot, a better cook, cleans up after you, sends you off on a fishing charter once a fortnight and plays golf with you on the other weekend. Best of all she doesn't nag!!! At the end of 2 months there's no way anyone's getting you to go back where you've come from. Your wife's best friend is also much happier with you than her husband. On the other hand, her husband and your wife hate each others guts. The problem is where there were once two happy couples now there is only one. Enter the players managers, who just like lawyers, issue divorce papers.

To some extent, ignorance is bliss. A player can't miss what he hasn't experienced or been exposed to, but open up a player's eyes to a new environment and they may not want to come back. The devil is in the detail and they'll be guaranteed to **** that up, I promise you.

IMO players already have more than enough avenues to move from one club to another....even while contracted. Gibbs & Ablett are proof of that.........and where did they go??? That's right, from weak clubs to strong clubs.

Interesting analogy!

Just one little problem, at no stage have i advocated or even mentioned "loan", like you and many others here, i believe the concept is flawed

I am advocating the mid season trade.

I get the feeling, that many, if not all, on this board, fear change.

Wondering, does it really matter when a trade period is? End of season, middle or start, the concept is always the same.

SOS is in control of how each deal transpires

 

[Arr0w]

Totally agree with the gun. A md-year trade/loan period will see the rise of the Henderson types, Players who spit their dummy and want out immediately without trying to work through it first. Oh, I'm not in the first team right now aren't I - well iwant out then or ill be a pain in the arse.

Leaving it to the one 12 month trade period brings a little bit of order and planning to that.

Don't mind clubs having a trade period for VFL/WAFL/SANFL players though.

The AFL faces a tough ask. Allow players movement while knowing that the supporter faithful underpin their loyalty on a single club and a group of loyal players. Fans have to accept player movement so there is a switch going on that we support the clubs over players but it brings with it confusion on allegiance. After Gibbs first attempt to get to Adelaide, a bit of my support died with that attempt. Not great and not what I want, or other fan want.

Camporeale lost my support. Waite lost my support. I understand they are allowed to leave, I'm just saying from a fan point, we don't like it but accept it. So why would we support more supporter carnage of this nature with a mid year trade period.

I admire your passion Blue, but players have been changing club for decades and clubs are happy for it to continue

 

[Arr0w]

How will SANFL and other competitions react? Clubs set themselves up with the best talent they can get, sell memberships and sponsorship based on certain expectations.

Come mid year, their best few players get ripped out and a club can go from premiership favourite to 10 goal losers in a week.

What a great opportunity for a kid that just missed out being drafted, but gets a second chance

 

[Weiterbot23]

Interesting analogy!

Just one little problem, at no stage have i advocated or even mentioned "loan", like you and many others here, i believe the concept is flawed

I am advocating the mid season trade.

I get the feeling, that many, if not all, on this board, fear change.

Wondering, does it really matter when a trade period is? End of season, middle or start, the concept is always the same.

SOS is in control of how each deal transpires

I'm 100% against the loan idea

I'm 99% against the mid season trade idea. Reason being it will cheapen the campaign, you think players are going to go all out for the jumper if they or their mates could be traded at any point.

I'm a big NBA fan but don't like the over commercialization, short attention span of GMs etc.

Gil wants it as it will generate more clicks, discussion points, but it will overall take away from the game.

 

[Arr0w]

I'm 100% against the loan idea

I'm 99% against the mid season trade idea. Reason being it will cheapen the campaign, you think players are going to go all out for the jumper if they or their mates could be traded at any point.

I'm a big NBA fan but don't like the over commercialization, short attention span of GMs etc.

Gil wants it as it will generate more clicks, discussion points, but it will overall take away from the game.

A trade period is still a trade period. Recruiters/Clubs have the control to trade or abstain from taking part

 

[cookie monster]

Football isn't a game for mercenaries, and anybody acting as such gets treated very poorly by the football public (ie. Carlisle).

No to loans, from the point of view that I would never want to see a Patrick Cripps on the premiership dais in anything other than Carlton Colours.

I do like the idea of a trade window though, with a one player out, one player in basis. Imagine if we could have off loaded Henderson or Yarran when they were stinking it up mid year

 

[Weiterbot23]

A trade period is still a trade period. Recruiters/Clubs have the control to trade or abstain from taking part

In theory - A constant fundraiser chocolate box in the office is just an option, I don't have to buy a Freddo frog every time I make a cup of tea, but it's nice to have incase.

In reality - I will have diabetes soon

 

[blue healer]

Plenty of posters talking about someone like Cripps winning a premiership with another team and I would have serious problems with that but the other thing that I could not countenance is a Buddy coming in for half a season and being part of our premiership. I would never consider him a Carlton Premiership player.

I'd go so far as to say if this loan thing goes through that might just about cook me as far as this sport goes. I'm already down to switching most non Carlton games off by half time.

 

[blue healer]

A trade period is still a trade period. Recruiters/Clubs have the control to trade or abstain from taking part

We already have a 3 week Trade Week when recruiters have had all season to formulate a strategy.

Do we just put the Comp on hold while they twiddle their thumbs mid year as well?

 

[Blue Pulse]

Loan- No Way, Trade-maybe.
But let's get realistic about this. This is the AFL, it would be great if they sat down and planned it out for a good 18 months and thought about all the scenarios and the pros and cons to all affected, VFL, SANFL, WAFL or whoever. Who receives compensation who doesn't. But this is the AFL, so you can expect a half baked, rushed in idea that would probably be chopped and changed as they see fit with different rules for different clubs and rules changed on the fly.

Scenario: Richmond who had a dream year last year, played good football, stuff all injuries come into the final against Adelaide who have replaced Brodie Smith with some gun and say a forward with ticker because Tex was injured and end up beating the Tiges. (Yeah not a bad thing) but, why should the Tigers be punished as they picked their list at the start of the year and kept them healthy, yet the opposition get to rebuild because of injuries.

Injuries are part of the game unfortunately. Will clubs then start to push players to hard because they know they can replace them if they break down?

 

[Jabba73]

What a great opportunity for a kid that just missed out being drafted, but gets a second chance

Yep, not in dispute.

Talking about the club that has a signed contract with said player for their services for the season. They can be removed mid season which a club might cover if it is only one player. What if it is the best 2-3 players from the club?

Do you honestly believe there is a club in the next level down competition that will be happy to go from premiership favourite to uncompetitive, just so a couple of their best players can break their contract for a temporary spot on an AFL list?

 

[cookie monster]

Loan- No Way, Trade-maybe.
But let's get realistic about this. This is the AFL, it would be great if they sat down and planned it out for a good 18 months and thought about all the scenarios and the pros and cons to all affected, VFL, SANFL, WAFL or whoever. Who receives compensation who doesn't. But this is the AFL, so you can expect a half baked, rushed in idea that would probably be chopped and changed as they see fit with different rules for different clubs and rules changed on the fly.

Scenario: Richmond who had a dream year last year, played good football, stuff all injuries come into the final against Adelaide who have replaced Brodie Smith with some gun and say a forward with ticker because Tex was injured and end up beating the Tiges. (Yeah not a bad thing) but, why should the Tigers be punished as they picked their list at the start of the year and kept them healthy, yet the opposition get to rebuild because of injuries.

Injuries are part of the game unfortunately. Will clubs then start to push players to hard because they know they can replace them if they break down?

Injuries are a source of inequality in the game, for sure. If Carlton had a key player go down mid year, and we were chasing a flag, I'd love the opportunity to go and replace that player and continue our tilt. If anything, it will even up the comp further, which is a good thing.

That is, for clubs that know how to list manage (ie. not St Kilda or more specifically, Norf)