Training 2024 training updates.

[Fat Jesus]

obviously Hawthorn didn't think so ...........or the other 17 clubs who have passed him over

You idjuts passed on Mitchell to us.
Thanks for that.
Premiership player now.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Maybe it's because we had the maximum amount of players listed as SSP's by the time he'd signed on with our VFL side.

Either way, we had looked at Long training with the AFL side, ostensibly for the VFL side, before any SSPs were selected, and I’m pretty sure before we’d filled out our train-on list which was a maximum of 6 (2 train-ons per list vacancy).

If we rated him so highly as to give him all this extra access, then it’s odd we didn’t give him a train-on spot. His rating by the club shouldn’t have changed that much from the end of 2023 to the start of preseason.

Not up in arms about it, it just seems illogical to me.

 

[swoop42]

That’s just not true.

We may have had our maximum number of players who were allowed to train with us (“train-on players”), hence Long was only allowed to train with us ostensibly with a view to be added to our VFL list. There was nothing preventing Long being selected, just as we did Markov from Carlton’s train-ons, or St. Kilda tried to do with Steene from ours.

We hadn’t added any SSPs though, we still had Teakle and Hustwaite running around.

You keep insisting this but as I've tried to explain before both Markov (who trained with us first) and Steene were nominated SSP candidates (unlike Long) so clearly the AFL rules stipulate that other teams are able to field offers to players in this circumstance but those clubs that originally nominated them get the first call.

This makes sense as why should Markov be disadvantaged if we wish to bypass on him and another club is interested. Sof got the same opportunity with Essendon this preseason.

If my memory serves me correctly Long was only invited to train with the intention of adding him to the VFL list after we had selected our SSP candidates (possibly Sullivan had yet to be added as our 6th and final one).

Even if not correct shit happens and after 17 clubs decided not to take him in the national, rookie or as a DFA I don't think we can be to harshly judged.

In reality if we have loved what we've seen to date we do have the option of asking him not to nominate for the MSD and guarantee he's a Collingwood AFL listed player in 2025 by drafting him as a DFA.

The ball is in our court as I see it and it all depends on what our true feelings are about him (as opposed to us the fans).

 

[stormskye]

Either way, we had looked at Long training with the AFL side, ostensibly for the VFL side, before any SSPs were selected, and I’m pretty sure before we’d filled out our train-on list which was a maximum of 6 (2 train-ons per list vacancy).

If we rated him so highly as to give him all this extra access, then it’s odd we didn’t give him a train-on spot. His rating by the club shouldn’t have changed that much from the end of 2023 to the start of preseason.

Not up in arms about it, it just seems illogical to me.

Maybe we are prepping him to bypass the MSD

 

[The Royal Sampler]

You keep insisting this but as I've tried to explain before both Markov (who trained with us first) and Steene were nominated SSP candidates (unlike Long) so clearly the AFL rules stipulate that other teams are able to field offers to players in this circumstance but those clubs that originally nominated them get the first call.

The club doesn’t get to make the call, the player does. And there’s no such thing as “SSP candidates”, there are players added to your AFL train-on list, and you can add twice as many players as you have vacancies. Then you can offer a player a contract, and if they accept you add them as a rookie during the nominated SS periods. Any club can offer any eligible player a contract, but the entire idea of the train-on list is you can get a good close look at them first. St. Kilda must have had guys at our training reporting back that Steene was good enough to offer a contract. Rather than lose him, we offered him one and he accepted. He could have accepted St. Kilda’s offer if he wished.

Ultimately, it looks like we had already given our train-on spots to other players. Sullivan got the last train-on spot on 05/12, and Long began training with us (with AFL but for VFL) on 13/12. The players who received contracts during the SSP did officially joined on 14/02, and presumably we simply liked Eyre, Bytel and Sullivan more. Fair enough if so.

 

[swoop42]

Ultimately, we're talking about a player who no one wanted. He's been really good in the VFL but that doesn't always guarantee that they can play AFL. I think the hype is premature

I appreciate what you're saying but no AFL club wanted our best tall forward since 2018 until we came knocking.

Even then he was originally seen as key defensive depth was he not?

Players mature at different rates and while there are no guarantees with Long or any other it shouldn't be overlooked that he was drafted at the end of 2021 by Hawthorn meaning that both his bottom age (2020) and eventual draft season were severely impacted by COVID.

I feel players taken over the last few years deserve a little more patience than normal as their development and path way to the AFL was clearly interrupted at junior level and not everyone is a Naicos or JHF.

Being recruited by Hawthorn meant Long had immediate competition from the older and even bigger 197cm 93kg Nash, impressive young Day (187cm) and strong bodied Worpel (185cm 85kg) and Newcombe (186cm 85kg). There is a chance Hawthorn made a quick call on him because they felt comfortable they already had the players that filled his skill set.

Ultimately if Long gets signed by us I hope Hawthorn didn't know what they had and discarded a diamond covered in mud.

If he signs with another I hope he ends up a potato.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

The club doesn’t get to make the call, the player does. And there’s no such thing as “SSP candidates”, there are players added to your AFL train-on list, and you can add twice as many players as you have vacancies. Then you can offer a player a contract, and if they accept you add them as a rookie during the nominated SS periods. Any club can offer any eligible player a contract, but the entire idea of the train-on list is you can get a good close look at them first. St. Kilda must have had guys at our training reporting back that Steene was good enough to offer a contract. Rather than lose him, we offered him one and he accepted. He could have accepted St. Kilda’s offer if he wished.

Ultimately, it looks like we had already given our train-on spots to other players. Sullivan got the last train-on spot on 05/12, and Long began training with us (with AFL but for VFL) on 13/12. The players who received contracts during the SSP did officially joined on 14/02, and presumably we simply liked Eyre, Bytel and Sullivan more. Fair enough if so.

Obviously we liked Sullivan, Bytel & Eyre more as SSP selections and they're now on our list.

Now we're looking at players for the msd & at the end of year...some of those players may already be on our VFL list, including Long.

Hopefully we continue to look at other players we didn't invite to be train on's or SSP's during the last pre-season..

 

[Jen2310]

I like the idea to start recruiting from our vfl side if the club sees potential there.
Gives these players more incentive to sign with align clubs. Like Eyre.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

I like the idea to start recruiting from our vfl side if the club sees potential there.
Gives these players more incentive to sign with align clubs. Like Eyre.

Same. Seems like a no brainer to me.

 

[Jen2310]

Same. Seems like a no brainer to me.

Under the club's program, these players would know each other, know the afl players, the staff. Better than recruiting from those you dont know, or how they would settle in your environment.

Dogs and Hawks have done this for multiple years.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Under the club's program, these players would know each other, know the afl players, the staff. Better than recruiting from those you dont know, or how they would settle in your environment.

Dogs and Hawks have done this for multiple years.

And most significantly they know our game plan/style & have the opportunity to train with the AFL boys during pre-season & throughout the year.

 

[Jen2310]

And most significantly they know our game plan/style & have the opportunity to train with the AFL boys during pre-season & throughout the year.

Thats right, there wouldn't be too much of a transition issue, given the game plan is the same.

 

[swoop42]

The club doesn’t get to make the call, the player does. And there’s no such thing as “SSP candidates”, there are players added to your AFL train-on list, and you can add twice as many players as you have vacancies. Then you can offer a player a contract, and if they accept you add them as a rookie during the nominated SS periods. Any club can offer any eligible player a contract, but the entire idea of the train-on list is you can get a good close look at them first. St. Kilda must have had guys at our training reporting back that Steene was good enough to offer a contract. Rather than lose him, we offered him one and he accepted. He could have accepted St. Kilda’s offer if he wished.

Ultimately, it looks like we had already given our train-on spots to other players. Sullivan got the last train-on spot on 05/12, and Long began training with us (with AFL but for VFL) on 13/12. The players who received contracts during the SSP did officially joined on 14/02, and presumably we simply liked Eyre, Bytel and Sullivan more. Fair enough if so.

You've answered your own question and what I've been trying to point out.

We had limitations on the number of players we could trial, almost certain they had to be nominated by a set date and if successful were added during the SSP (Supplementary Selection Period) thus the generally accepted term SSP candidates.

Long was never in contention as a SSP listing once Sullivan took that final spot however someone like Jen might be able to clarify whether we did still have the option of taking him as a DFA and only filling 2 list spots via SSP (instead of 3). Not sure of the deadlines and if they overlapped.

At the end of the day at least we had the sense to give him a state league level opportunity unlike 16 others (I haven't included the Hawks) and we do have the mechanism in place (players never lose DFA status once uncontracted) to guarantee he's a Collingwood AFL listed player in 2025.

Whether we value his potential high enough to not risk losing him via the MSD is only known by Fly and Co.

P.S- I know players have a level of control over their destination but ultimately it would appear that the teams they elected to train with and the ones they had already built relationships with are in the box seat to sign them if another party shows interest.

Hell Markov even trained with Carlton once didn't he but quickly came running back once we decided to open up a list spot for him.

Best decision ever!

 

[Jen2310]

You've answered your own question and what I've been trying to point out.

We had limitations on the number of players we could trial, almost certain they had to be nominated by a set date and if successful were added during the SSP (Supplementary Selection Period) thus the generally accepted term SSP candidates.

Long was never in contention as a SSP listing once Sullivan took that final spot however someone like Jen might be able to clarify whether we did still have the option of taking him as a DFA and only filling 2 list spots via SSP (instead of 3). Not sure of the deadlines and if they overlapped.

At the end of the day at least we had the sense to give him a state league level opportunity unlike 16 others (I haven't included the Hawks) and we do have the mechanism in place (players never lose DFA status once uncontracted) to guarantee he's a Collingwood AFL listed player in 2025.

Whether we value his potential high enough to not risk losing him via the MSD is only known by Fly and Co.

P.S- I know players have a level of control over their destination but ultimately it would appear that the teams they elected to train with and the ones they had already built relationships with are in the box seat to sign them if another party shows interest.

Hell Markov even trained with Carlton once didn't he but quickly came running back once we decided to open up a list spot for him.

Best decision ever!

We may never know. But unlikely we would have had 5 mids train with us. And maybe they didn't get a good enough look at Long prior to SSP invitations. They would have a good idea now, he is more of less involved in the whole program with how much he has trained with the seniors.

Maybe they didn't realise how good he was before pre-season. And yeah, sure after xmas we could have dropped a player or two. and invited him to offiicially trail. But maybe they still thought enough of the others to give until the deadline, so he was a tad unlucky. But they clearly liked him enough to ask him to train in an unofficial nature through all pre-season and even now.

Now its up in fate's hands. If we pick him. Or if he gets selected elsewhere. If he doesnt, he can play out the season with the VFL and believe we can pick him for free as a DFA at the end of the year.

 

[The Kaiser Chief]

Most of them are probably at work or uni when the AFL team trains in the morning.

For those that aren't I guess it comes down to how hard you want it and Long clearly does so might have asked to participate in extra training alongside our AFL listed squad.

I don't think you just 'ask' is you can attend AFL training sessions..............

 

[The Royal Sampler]

You've answered your own question and what I've been trying to point out.

We had limitations on the number of players we could trial, almost certain they had to be nominated by a set date and if successful were added during the SSP (Supplementary Selection Period) thus the generally accepted term SSP candidates.

We had limitations on the number of players we could trial, but not a limitation on the number of eligible players we could consider for the three available spots. Our recruiting department should have been, and probably was, abreast of the development of all eligible players training as train-ons across the entire league. And plenty who weren’t.

Long was never in contention as a SSP listing once Sullivan took that final spot

There is literally no reason for that to be the case.

At the end of the day at least we had the sense to give him a state league level opportunity unlike 16 others (I haven't included the Hawks) and we do have the mechanism in place (players never lose DFA status once uncontracted) to guarantee he's a Collingwood AFL listed player in 2025.

Yes, but only if he’s willing to forego the MSD and the prospect of becoming an AFL player 6 months sooner.

 

[swoop42]

We had limitations on the number of players we could trial, but not a limitation on the number of eligible players we could consider for the three available spots. Our recruiting department should have been, and probably was, abreast of the development of all eligible players training as train-ons across the entire league. And plenty who weren’t.


There is literally no reason for that to be the case.


Yes, but only if he’s willing to forego the MSD and the prospect of becoming an AFL player 6 months sooner.

Of course there is.

Only players officially invited to train during the SSP under the terms set out by the AFL (which include a payment to players, possible compensation to state league clubs, a cap on numbers and presumably a deadline in which you must nominate the players) are subsequently then able to be added on to a list via this SSP window by the club they have trained with or another.

So unless we could have removed one of the 6 SSP candidates once they had started training and replace them with Long (you yourself pointed out he only started training with us after we had filled our maximum quota of 6) he was never eligible and the only mechanism I could possibly see for us or another would be via the DFA window which may not may not have shut prior to the deadline for our decsion over our SSP signings.

 

[Apex36]

Of course there is.

Only players officially invited to train during the SSP under the terms set out by the AFL (which include a payment to players, possible compensation to state league clubs, a cap on numbers and presumably a deadline in which you must nominate the players) are subsequently then able to be added on to a list via this SSP window by the club they have trained with or another.

So unless we could have removed one of the 6 SSP candidates once they had started training and replace them with Long (you yourself pointed out he only started training with us after we had filled our maximum quota of 6) he was never eligible and the only mechanism I could possibly see for us or another would be via the DFA window which may not may not have shut prior to the deadline for our decsion over our SSP signings.

Can you please show us this rule? Because I’m pretty sure that’s 100% not true.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

Interesting debate.
I can see both sides.

My question is why was Long allowed to train with us?
If we have to nominate SSP options….then why were we allowed a 7th to train?

I haven’t seen any rule to suggest only nominated players can be picked and I too thought anyone was fair game….. but if we were allowed Long to train as well, then what’s the point of the nomination?

Seems a pointless act to have to nominate.
But then bring anyone in to train who can be picked.

 

[Apex36]

Interesting debate.
I can see both sides.

My question is why was Long allowed to train with us?

Because he was listed with our VFL team. VFL players are often asked to train with the AFL squad to make numbers for match play. It’s 100% allowed.

If we have to nominate SSP options….then why were we allowed a 7th to train?

See above.

I haven’t seen any rule to suggest only nominated players can be picked and I too thought anyone was fair game….. but if we were allowed Long to train as well, then what’s the point of the nomination?

The nomination allows us to bring in any player outside our system to train. Yes, we nominated Hustwaite, but as far as I’m aware we wouldn’t have necessarily had to. There’s a possibility he was offered a spot by another club while we were also interested and we offered him the official spot in order to get the best opportunity to see whether he had what it takes.

Seems a pointless act to have to nominate.
But then bring anyone in to train who can be picked.

We couldn’t just bring in anyone.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Of course there is.

Only players officially invited to train during the SSP under the terms set out by the AFL (which include a payment to players, possible compensation to state league clubs, a cap on numbers and presumably a deadline in which you must nominate the players) are subsequently then able to be added on to a list via this SSP window by the club they have trained with or another.

Pretty sure you just made that up. Adelaide signed Keane last year despite him being in Ireland and not having trained with anybody.

 

[Apex36]

Pretty sure you just made that up. Adelaide signed Keane last year despite him being in Ireland and not having trained with anybody.

Brisbane did essentially the same with Connor McKenna. Signed him on day 1 of the period without even asking him to train.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

Because he was listed with our VFL team. VFL players are often asked to train with the AFL squad to make numbers for match play. It’s 100% allowed.

See above.

The nomination allows us to bring in any player outside our system to train. Yes, we nominated Hustwaite, but as far as I’m aware we wouldn’t have necessarily had to. There’s a possibility he was offered a spot by another club while we were also interested and we offered him the official spot in order to get the best opportunity to see whether he had what it takes.

We couldn’t just bring in anyone.

So, based on all of that…..it stands to reason that you can only select from a nominated SSP.

Otherwise any team is free to promote their own VFL player as SSP signing without being limited as to who they can choose.

Seems like a fair loophole if that’s the case.
Not advocating one way or the other because I thought anyone was fair game. But now I’m thinking they’re not.

If I could be bothered….i’d go and look it up.

 

[Apex36]

So, based on all of that…..it stands to reason that you can only select from a nominated SSP.

Otherwise any team is free to promote their own VFL player as SSP signing without being limited as to who they can choose.

Seems like a fair loophole if that’s the case.
Not advocating one way or the other because I thought anyone was fair game. But now I’m thinking they’re not.

Except there’s two examples above your post of players who were signed without being invited to train.

If I could be bothered….i’d go and look it up.

I tried, and could find no such rule.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

So, based on all of that…..it stands to reason that you can only select from a nominated SSP.

Otherwise any team is free to promote their own VFL player as SSP signing without being limited as to who they can choose.

The rules are pretty well laid out here. Nothing relating to what you and [mention]swoop42 [/mention]
are speculating. You could sign your own VFL player… if they’d previously been AFL listed.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/690161/...les-for-ssp-mid-season-draft/amp?webview=true