AFL Player 7: Indefatigable Zach Merrett - Stepping down as captain for 2026

[bombersim]

I reckon it was a stand more than anything in a draft where we could do it. We already had five top 30 picks and limited list space and their offers were more draft picks this year plus one more pick next year which would have been in the twenties.

They needed to come to the party with a good future pick or a decent player.

Which is fine, but maybe tell them in advance we want a player, maybe even specify one (MacDonald etc).

Look, it’s not just on us. Hawthorn were incompetent too (if not more so).
It just feels like we’ve cut off our nose to spite our face by keeping someone that doesn’t want to be here, when we could have moved him for future draft capital to a series of clubs. To me, keeping him is relatively pointless - I think a fresh start for both parties made more sense.
I think we will still be able to get two first for him, most likely from a contender.

As an aside, I wonder if he left during UFA what our compensation might be?
I’m not au fait with the compensation rules, but it he gets a 4 year contract, I wonder what that would net (just curious). Should still be a first but who knows…?

 

[boncer34]

Which is fine, but maybe tell them in advance we want a player, maybe even specify one (MacDonald etc).

Look, it’s not just on us. Hawthorn were incompetent too (if not more so).
It just feels like we’ve cut off our nose to spite our face by keeping someone that doesn’t want to be here, when we could have moved him for future draft capital to a series of clubs. To me, keeping him is relatively pointless - I think a fresh start for both parties made more sense.
I think we will still be able to get two first for him, most likely from a contender.

As an aside, I wonder if he left during UFA what our compensation might be?
I’m not au fait with the compensation rules, but it he gets a 4 year contract, I wonder what that would net (just curious). Should still be a first but who knows…?

We did?

 

[Vindicater]

Which is fine, but maybe tell them in advance we want a player, maybe even specify one (MacDonald etc).

Look, it’s not just on us. Hawthorn were incompetent too (if not more so).
It just feels like we’ve cut off our nose to spite our face by keeping someone that doesn’t want to be here, when we could have moved him for future draft capital to a series of clubs. To me, keeping him is relatively pointless - I think a fresh start for both parties made more sense.
I think we will still be able to get two first for him, most likely from a contender.

As an aside, I wonder if he left during UFA what our compensation might be?
I’m not au fait with the compensation rules, but it he gets a 4 year contract, I wonder what that would net (just curious). Should still be a first but who knows…?

We did tell them we wanted a player.

It all happened very quickly.

There were no series of clubs, there was only Hawthorn.

 

[MiguelM]

We did tell them we wanted a player.

It all happened very quickly.

There were no series of clubs, there was only Hawthorn.

Exactly.

None of this was on us it was ALL on them. They just didn't pony up for the best player on our list, Captain at that and contracted.

It was amateur hour with the manager running around like a goose in the last hour. They had weeks to negotiate but thought we would cave.

It was like getting cold feet when feeling pressured by a dodgy car salesman!

 

[Lore]

As an aside, I wonder if he left during UFA what our compensation might be?
I’m not au fait with the compensation rules, but it he gets a 4 year contract, I wonder what that would net (just curious). Should still be a first but who knows…?

It wouldn’t be a first because of his willingness to accept a decent but not crazy salary. Would be lucky to get a band 2 comp and could even drop further with his age.

It’s the thing about formulas that assume everyone gets paid according to their worth and that everyone has the same career longevity and injury experiences and so on.

 

[maskmcgee]

The 'hes not for trade" stance didn't really help there, instead we could of given Hawthorn or the media a list of 10 players, and told them unless one of those players is included in a deal we aren't even going to pick up the phone. Put them on notice a month in advance.

 

[yodellinhank]

The 'hes not for trade" stance didn't really help there, instead we could of given Hawthorn or the media a list of 10 players, and told them unless one of those players is included in a deal we aren't even going to pick up the phone. Put them on notice a month in advance.

Who were the players?

 

[Chucks]

The 'hes not for trade" stance didn't really help there, instead we could of given Hawthorn or the media a list of 10 players, and told them unless one of those players is included in a deal we aren't even going to pick up the phone. Put them on notice a month in advance.

Disagree, as it wouldn't have made a difference IMO. They wouldn't have parted ways with anyone we'd truly want/need anyway.

They were already well and truly put on notice for 5 weeks in my view, irrespective of whether we specifically outlined what it would take. Blind Freddy could tell you that it was going to take a big offer in order to twist our arms.

Still makes me chuckle seeing the bias hawthorn fans saying it was a good trade lol. At absolute best it was an OK offer - and that's the point, any offer had to be absolutely overs given the circumstances and context

 

[Yoda_]

it looked to me like Hawthorn, much like Brisbane and Jordan Ridley

14

Jordan Ridley

Age

27

Ht

195cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

15.6

4star

K

11.1

4star

HB

4.5

3star

M

6.4

5star

T

1.7

4star

MG

244.8

4star

D

17.0

4star

K

11.9

5star

HB

5.1

3star

M

6.7

5star

T

1.7

3star

MG

265.4

4star

D

13.8

4star

K

9.6

4star

HB

4.2

4star

M

5.2

5star

T

1.4

4star

MG

208.2

4star

did sme digging on a mature, experienced AFL player and got them to turn there head enough seeing if they could get a cut price deal.

When we dug our heels in it turned to shit on both fronts with Hawthorn looking poor when the episode dug deeper with leeked stories called out and character attack on at hand.

 

[doug85]

it looked to me like Hawthorn, much like Brisbane and Jordan Ridley did sme digging on a mature, experienced AFL player and got them to turn there head enough seeing if they could get a cut price deal.

When we dug our heels in it turned to shit on both fronts with Hawthorn looking poor when the episode dug deeper with leeked stories called out and character attack on at hand.

Yeah, that happened a couple of months ago…

 

[faible]

The 'hes not for trade" stance didn't really help there, instead we could of given Hawthorn or the media a list of 10 players, and told them unless one of those players is included in a deal we aren't even going to pick up the phone. Put them on notice a month in advance.

Sounds like we requested a player / players. They just didn’t want to trade them.

Hawthorn and Merrett’s manager came up at the last minute, trying to run a media campaign to get a cut price trade done. They failed. That’s not on EFC.