List Mgmt. 2020 List Management

[Ricky Mott]

They should be taking a paycut at the top end of things if they have to, starting with the CEO.

Any solution that hampers player or viewer/supporter welfare should be the last thing to be cut back on.

Totally agree. Must start from the top. The players put on the game and only have a short life span in their career.

in my view we can let our development fall away. Our future is our young talent. To keep Betts, Simpson, Kreuzer etc for one more year will be a disaster!

List cloggers have to go. Newman and Gibbons aren’t taking us anywhere. Very average players.

 

[SurreyBlue]

It's still utterly stupid. There isn't a professional team sport on the planet that has such restrictive roster rules, nor are any of them trying to do this.

If the AFL is being so horribly mismanaged that this is how it responds to a 24-month period in which they will only be hit hard for 6-9 months, they should be utterly ashamed of their business acumen.

Couldn’t agree more.

 

[thylacine60]

A disaster? End of the world level disaster or just death of the club? Do you even enjoy the sport?

 

[Ricky Mott]

A disaster? End of the world level disaster or just death of the club? Do you even enjoy the sport?

Happy Easter

 

[HereComesJuddy]

My crack at a the off-season assuming the 35 playing list goes ahead (for what it’s worth I hope not):

Trades
-Papley and Swans 2nd for our first
-Matt Kennedy for pick upgrades
-Wines and change for a future first

Retire
-Betts
-Simpson

Delist
-Moore
-Lang
-Polson
-Owies
-Macreadie
-O’Dwyer
-BSOS
-Cottrell
-Goddard
-Phillips (extremely unlucky)

Draft 2 Players early in the second round

Best 22
Plowman, Jones, Marchbank
Docherty, Weitering, SPS
Walsh, E. Curnow, Murphy
Kreuzer, Cripps, Wines
Martin, Charlie, Cuningham
Papley, McKay, McGovern

Newman, Dow, Fisher, Setterfield

Depth: Casboult, Gibbons, JSOS, Newnes, Stocker, Philp, Kemp, TDK, Willo, Pittonet

Who is Phillips you are saying we should let go?

 

[Cripptonite]

Who is Phillips you are saying we should let go?

Fraser Phillips. Not that I think we should let him go. Sounds like the kid has talent but the 35 player list hypothetical is unfortunately brutal.

 

[HereComesJuddy]

Fraser Phillips. Not that I think we should let him go. Sounds like the kid has talent but the 35 player list hypothetical is unfortunately brutal.

Hmmmm yeah. Thought you meant him. Not ideal at all. Id definitely prefer not to let him go and think we would need to clear others out before a guy who has zero chance.

Think id put a big name player on the trade table or a few to see what we could get in return tbh

 

[Eiffel 65]

Hmmmm yeah. Thought you meant him. Not ideal at all. Id definitely prefer not to let him go and think we would need to clear others out before a guy who has zero chance.

Think id put a big name player on the trade table or a few to see what we could get in return tbh

Who would you suggest?

 

[thylacine60]

honey is as likely to be discarded as the coroney thread is to reach an accord..............

 

[HereComesJuddy]

Who would you suggest?

It wouldnt be a popular decision, but id let Charlie go (for the right pick/s of course). No one has the hindsight to see if he will be what we hope he will be, but ive thought for a long time he wont live up to expectations.

 

[SurreyBlue]

Having loaded up on youth, this is not the time for us to be cutting our list to the extent being discussed.
If the AFL force us to make this change, it will hurt us more then other teams. We need to fight hard for this change to not occur.

 

[thylacine60]

if ya can't pay ya wages...........

 

[HereComesJuddy]

Not ideal to cut into a "raw" list, but it will be about removing lets say 3 million from our books, rather than the 10 worst on our list. Offers will come in strong to all clubs for picks as it seems the draft will be an unknown

 

[Jeremias]

No interest in moving Charlie on any time soon.

We'd be crazy to do it at the end of this year too, regardless of the offers that may come.

 

[Eiffel 65]

It wouldnt be a popular decision, but id let Charlie go (for the right pick/s of course). No one has the hindsight to see if he will be what we hope he will be, but ive thought for a long time he wont live up to expectations.

Not ideal to cut into a "raw" list, but it will be about removing lets say 3 million from our books, rather than the 10 worst on our list. Offers will come in strong to all clubs for picks as it seems the draft will be an unknown

There's merit to every suggestion, but Charlie offers more than just his forward craft. He's the face of Charlie's Crew and the draw card attracting kids to support Carlton during what has been a pretty dark time on field for the club.

I get that he's had a bad run with injuries, but he's still got a good decade of footy left in him.

We're also not in need of bulk picks to strengthen our list anymore, as was the case with Tuohy, Henderson, Bell and Menzel to name a few. It's also very hard to attract big name players, so I wouldn't bank on using those picks to trade for big names from other clubs.

 

[HereComesJuddy]

There's merit to every suggestion, but Charlie offers more than just his forward craft. He's the face of Charlie's Crew and the draw card attracting kids to support Carlton during what has been a pretty dark time on field for the club.

I get that he's had a bad run with injuries, but he's still got a good decade of footy left in him.

We're also not in need of bulk picks to strengthen our list anymore, as was the case with Tuohy, Henderson, Bell and Menzel to name a few. It's also very hard to attract big name players, so I wouldn't bank on using those picks to trade for big names from other clubs.

Where as id say he wont play much past 30 and his knees now are certainly an unknown. Im not saying i want him gone from the club, just that if lists need to be cut into, id hold onto mckay before Charlie.
If clubs do need to shed 3 million, where does this come from? Its not macreadie, lang, polson, phillips, o'dwyer, owies, betts etc like many have suggested

 

[DangerousD]

Where as id say he wont play much past 30 and his knees now are certainly an unknown. Im not saying i want him gone from the club, just that if lists need to be cut into, id hold onto mckay before Charlie.
If clubs do need to shed 3 million, where does this come from? Its not macreadie, lang, polson, phillips, o'dwyer, owies, betts etc like many have suggested

Where did the $3M come from, or was it just a hypothetical? I see your point that there is a massive difference between getting rid of your 10 worst and cutting back to a required cap.

As all other clubs will be in the same situation, if it was to come to $3M, id say there won't be that many clubs with $$$ to raid others, as they will be needing to cut back as it is. Id more suggest that we would cut what was deemed to be dead wood and then try and renegotiate exciting contracts for the remainder.

Without being an expert, if the AFL were to change the salary cap going forwards, id say there would be a need to renegotiate most contracts.

Theres quite a few others id be moving before i came to Curnow

 

[NYCFC]

This is utterly crazy.
Why cut list numbers so dramatically, which will have god-knows how many flow-on effects regarding injuries, quality of gameplay, supporter disenchantment as favorite players are culled from the game, when the obvious answer is a short-term (1-2 years) salary cut across the entire list.
Any business that isn't stupid is right now doing this, in descending order of preference:
Cutting heavily into all non-essential spending.
Salary cuts for senior people.
Reduced hours for staff, with pro-rata salary reduction.
Salary cuts across the board.
Layoffs.

Layoffs are (and should be) a last resort. Not just because of the cost to the people involved, but also cutting quality people you'd otherwise rather keep will ultimately hinder your ability to bounce back from this.

Is it player greed driving this? I'd think a football club with all that entails (mateship, collective goals, team) would be the last to accept this approach.

Ultimately you'd hope that this was a club-based decision. That way, the clubs with the strongest cultures with players willing to individually sacrifice for the good of the whole, will come out on top. As it should be.

 

[Rockwell]

I think the numbers (list size/ salerey cap)are all just hypothetical .
I can remember when WCE first entered the comp, their list was only 35.
They struggled with injuries and to field a competitive side at times.
I think this talk is to conditions the players into realizing they will be required to take a pay cut. If you use the figure of 3 mIllion that equates to about 25% pay cut. I feel it will be pitched to the players that it is better to take a pay cut than loss 160 players, which could be any one of you.

 

[Team DJ]

35 with 3 Train on players who can be promoted if a player is moved to the LTIL would be the prime number for mine

 

[Red Bull]

Where as id say he wont play much past 30 and his knees now are certainly an unknown. Im not saying i want him gone from the club, just that if lists need to be cut into, id hold onto mckay before Charlie.
If clubs do need to shed 3 million, where does this come from? Its not macreadie, lang, polson, phillips, o'dwyer, owies, betts etc like many have suggested

I suspect there is a level of frustration re Charlie with many supporters stemming from reports of an “adventurous” off field lifestyle.
Not everyone has the makeup of a Weitering or a Walsh, that’s just life and hopefully a natural maturity see’s him make the most of his career.
Finding his kind of ability in the draft is hitting the jackpot, you only trade that away when Fevola levels are reached.
If/when salary caps are slashed, we will be in a pretty good position.
Conceivably, Simpson, Betts and Kreuzer may well all retire with Murphy and Ed to follow soon after.
That would clear considerable space and in any case, contracts will possibly all be renegotiated in a new AFL environment.

 

[Jeremias]

Without being an expert, if the AFL were to change the salary cap going forwards, id say there would be a need to renegotiate most contracts

This is 100% correct.

We may see clubs needing to shed $3m off their salary cap, but most of that will be covered by list cuts and contract renegotiation.

Every club will be in the same boat, and no club will need to get rid of a marquee player to get down to the required number.

There's just no way we'd need to get rid of Charlie, nor is there a circumstance in which it would be beneficial for us to do so at the end of the 2020 season.

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

With contracts likely to be renegotiated at the end of the year with the salary cap reduction, we're gonna be in for a massive trade period.

Player managers would be licking their chops already....

 

[Red Bull]

With contracts likely to be renegotiated at the end of the year with the salary cap reduction, we're gonna be in for a massive trade period.

Player managers would be licking their chops already....

Dunno about that BH.
You would imagine contracts will be renegotiated down following any salary cap slash.
Reduced contracts would mean reduced percentages for player managers you’d expect ... what a shame ...

 

[SurreyBlue]

if ya can't pay ya wages...........

As a manager, I run a tight ship. I don’t add individuals into my team easily and certainly don’t remove any just as easily. To lose an individual means that the workload is spread across my team, which if everyone is at capacity, increases work hours, stress and ‘work life balance’.

As someone mentioned, look at that overview in footy list terms; with youth, injuries, mental issues, form, etc. playing a weekly role in the 22 selections every week. How is 30 - 35 player lists to cover a team over 7 months of football? Which we all know our game is brutal on the body without adding, grounds, travel, times, etc. in the equation.

There are ways to manage your business model by not selling your assets. You just need to have to think outside the square and in most times it’s simply, cutting expenses, ie, new hardware/software, changing providers, and/or increase equity - as simple examples.