Strategy Draft assistance 2023 [Twomey: NMFC get #19 in 2023, x2 end of 1st rd picks in 2024, and x2 extra rookie list spots in 2024; no Sanders/#11]

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Re Gallagher, would you say, maybe, he's going to be the one who saves us?
Not bad.
Charlie Sheen Applause GIF
 
It's funny that every Wet Toast fan that comes in here is shocked, almost offended, by the 'fake news' rumour that Reid doesn't want to go to there. "He and his management have publicly said he's happy to go there... blah blah blah".

Then this bloke comes in here and then actually believes the Sanders made the call that he doesn't want to play for North (yeah... even after he made the application for our NGA)

.... jog on.

Where did I say he didn’t want to play for north?

I said he didn’t want to be pre-listed.
 
Wasn't there something reported a couple of weeks back that they were thinking of allowing clubs to match bids inside 40 again on NGAs in the not too distant future.

So now Sanders is approved as our NGA, taking out all assistance, allowances, special treatment etc, if we don't end up with him, it will because he was in the draft in the couple of that the AFL changed the rules before changing them back?

Bulldogs play finals in 2020 and in the same year take the clear cut number one pick, because he happened to be in their NGA zone.

The team that has been on the bottom of the ladder for four straight years has an eligible NGA player, but there isn't the slightest opportunity for wiggle room on a rule they may well cancel next year anyway? Why, because it may upset Geelong that they might not get access to the best players in the draft after missing the finals for one year in a row?

But of course no one is saying a word about the three academy players being happily handed to the Suns... as well as bending the rules for them a couple of years ago to allow them to prelist academy players (and also expanding their academy zone!)
 
Wasn't there something reported a couple of weeks back that they were thinking of allowing clubs to match bids inside 40 again on NGAs in the not too distant future.

So now Sanders is approved as our NGA, taking out all assistance, allowances, special treatment etc, if we don't end up with him, it will because he was in the draft in the couple of that the AFL changed the rules before changing them back?

Bulldogs play finals in 2020 and in the same year take the clear cut number one pick, because he happened to be in their NGA zone.

The team that has been on the bottom of the ladder for four straight years has an eligible NGA player, but there isn't the slightest opportunity for wiggle room on a rule they may well cancel next year anyway? Why, because it may upset Geelong that they might not get access to the best players in the draft after missing the finals for one year in a row?

But of course no one is saying a word about the three academy players being happily handed to the Suns... as well as bending the rules for them a couple of years ago to allow them to prelist academy players (and also expanding their academy zone!)

 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I think with Tarrant & Higgins leaving to Richmond and Geelong, JHF leaving to Port after 1 year and McKay and Goldy leaving this year it should also tick the box that there is an issue with retaining players when you are in shitsville for too long.

That is the other major issue outside of being s**t, if you are there too long you can be caught in a doom spiral.
 
Imagine pick 11, access to sanders and some late picks to trade... and the media got it completely wrong and AFL have been working to help us significantly

I wouldn't hold your breath, AFL media = AFL.
 
So the AFL asked us to get creative.
It was probably a trick question.

North respond. The AFL discover what is possible and they close off the loopholes before North get the opportunity to expoloit them.

Meanwhile, up at the broadbeach franchise...
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top