Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
No. If we re-draft them as a rookie then they just resume their previous contract - and there's no payout to be considered.Vader if we delist a player tomorrow, pay them out and then fail to draft a replacement and re-rookie the player we delist on the same salary - do we have to pay them double the wage effectively?
You mentioned if someone else paid their wage in a future year we wouldn't have to pay it?
The only reason that we have to pay them anything is through breach of contract.Vader if we delist a player tomorrow, pay them out and then fail to draft a replacement and re-rookie the player we delist on the same salary - do we have to pay them double the wage effectively?
You mentioned if someone else paid their wage in a future year we wouldn't have to pay it?
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
We have different definitions of the word 'Sadly'Sadly, it would appear so
No. If we re-draft them as a rookie then they just resume their previous contract - and there's no payout to be considered.
Players don't get "paid out" immediately, though any "pay out" money needs to be included in our 2024 salary cap.
One of the big failings of the year.Absolutely bonkas that we don’t have flexibility of another list spot heading into the draft
It’s ****ed. It’s a short sighted approach to keep as much experience on the list because that’s what they are using an excuse for our shit season.Absolutely bonkas that we don’t have flexibility of another list spot heading into the draft
Smith was the one , we have a plethora of half backs and he’s doneIt’s ****ed. It’s a short sighted approach to keep as much experience on the list because that’s what they are using an excuse for our shit season.
Schoenberg should be cut, how he fits in with the mids we have is questionable and I’ve liked him.
Smith gone is a no brainer. Make it clear he would be playing SANFL with zero chance of a game. Come to a settlement, put him on the SANFL list.
Burgess delist. He’s no good, I don’t care about using him as depth, go smaller in the forward line if you have to.
I think personally we really didn't think Peatling was a serious chance of selecting the Crows until it was too late. I know I thought we were no chance until Cumming nominated us?Absolutely bonkas that we don’t have flexibility of another list spot heading into the draft
Yeah I get that but it shows you need to plan better and be flexibleI think personally we really didn't think Peatling was a serious chance of selecting the Crows until it was too late. I know I thought we were no chance until Cumming nominated us?
We need to delist 2 players today, re-drafting them in the RD, just to meet the AFL's mandatory 3 draft selection rule.Erm. Why aren't we doing this just for the flexibility? I guess it's a bit of a kick in the balls for the delisted player having to wait to see if they're playing next year but realistically if part of the deal was Smith got to play SANFL next year on the list or off for the same dollars then it's not too severe.
I guess we would also have a read on the likelyhood of a trade being possble. Maybe it's just not realistic.
Upgrading a rookie & re-drafting a delisted player onto the rookie list doesn't create any additional options on draft night. It's a zero-sum game. The fundamental problem is that we currently have 40 of 42 list positions filled, shuffling them between lists doesn't change thatOne of the big failings of the year.
Even if we just upgraded a rookie and then re-drafted a delisted player onto the rookie list, at least we would have had the option to do something on draft night. Why we keep on tying our own hands behind our backs I will never understand.
We went after Redman, other targets and got only Burgess. If we are running at close to 100% cap in 2024 I’d be shocked.We need to delist 2 players today, re-drafting them in the RD, just to meet the AFL's mandatory 3 draft selection rule.
We aren't going to be delisting players speculatively, without committing to re-drafting them, because we'd have to pay out their future salaries in the 2024 salary cap, which has mostly been spent already.
I understand Schoenberg/Burgess as both are contracted, but both were big errors in how long we signed them forSmith was the one , we have a plethora of half backs and he’s done
Schoenberg , yeah he prob won’t make it now but they gave him time post Achilles as 1st year post Achilles is always difficult , Peatling coming though means we don’t need Schoenberg ( especially after re signing Berr )
No issue with burgess , need a tall , the sanfl needs a tall to help the young guys in any case and have a decent structure at the level . He will prob kick a goal a game at afl level but hopefully not required
lol, you don’t reckon Nicks knew what Smiths trigger was? Cmon mate, out of the Reid and Nicks one is clearly more competent than the other.I understand Schoenberg/Burgess as both are contracted, but both were big errors in how long we signed them for
Smith in a similar boat, but moreso a communication fault as he absolutely shouldn’t have been played to his trigger. Reid should’ve communicated this to Nicks
Out of the OOC guys, the one that shouldn’t have been re-signed given the circumstances was Berry, especially since we’ve gone and got Peatling
I mean, that’s not Nicks’ job. Now it’s still bullshit that he played Smith so much, as he should’ve been dropped much earlier than he was, but I don’t think that he had his contract in mindlol, you don’t reckon Nicks knew what Smiths trigger was? Cmon mate, out of the Reid and Nicks one is clearly more competent than the other.
Yeh sorry, I didn't explain that well.Upgrading a rookie & re-drafting a delisted player onto the rookie list doesn't create any additional options on draft night. It's a zero-sum game. The fundamental problem is that we currently have 40 of 42 list positions filled, shuffling them between lists doesn't change that
Well he should have. He could see his form and would have known about the trigger.I mean, that’s not Nicks’ job. Now it’s still bullshit that he played Smith so much, as he should’ve been dropped much earlier than he was, but I don’t think that he had his contract in mind
I don't know what your feelings were for this year's draft but at the end of the U18's 2023 season I certainly didn't have the feel for the absolute depth this draft appears to have. My feel after watching the U17's Futures Grand Final day was the 1st round certainly looked quality but so many not seriously on the radar have elevated this year, take Alixzander Tauru and Alex Dodson virtual unknowns before the season started and there's plenty of others. I don't think Dodson even played footy last year, certainly not in the U18's comp.Yeah I get that but it shows you need to plan better and be flexible
There could have been other players delisted we were keen on or imagine Dodson gettint to 40 and we can’t trade in to get him
Even having a list spot open and train on players competing for it would make more sense if we didn’t use it in draft
Berry was re-signed end of August I highly doubt we thought we were a shot at Peatling at that point.I understand Schoenberg/Burgess as both are contracted, but both were big errors in how long we signed them for
Smith in a similar boat, but moreso a communication fault as he absolutely shouldn’t have been played to his trigger. Reid should’ve communicated this to Nicks
Out of the OOC guys, the one that shouldn’t have been re-signed given the circumstances was Berry, especially since we’ve gone and got Peatling
Yours was a terrible idea though.Damn it sounds like Port are trying to get in on the Richmond move up to 2. Gets them to 10.
Saint's deal is 7 + F1 for 2... and I got laughed out of the building for suggesting sliding our F1 to F2.
View attachment 2155078
Who are port going for at 10?...Travaglia, Allan?Damn it sounds like Port are trying to get in on the Richmond move up to 2. Gets them to 10.
Saint's deal is 7 + F1 for 2... and I got laughed out of the building for suggesting sliding our F1 to F2.
View attachment 2155078