Rumour GFC 2022 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists PT2

[Isaac Norm Smith]

Imagine 14 (15 including Mark himself) Geelong players showing up at your door - how could you say no?

 

[Hinkley29]

Just wait waiting waiting...


Come on get the Bowes thing done.





For those that think players should be contracted for 3 or 4 years after drafting ... how would it work? Give all R1 picks. 250 or 400 for year 3 just wondering as it seems I hear thsi sai a bit but as we are into 2 player after their 3rd year this year ... should GWS and Collingwood still have both players contracted for another year or two?

2 years is long enough.

If a club can’t convince a player to stay after 2 years then that is on the club.

Also, if draftees were given 4 year contracts clubs would be stuck with a heck of a lot of players on their list who they wish weren’t contracted.

2 years is plenty.

 

[Shadow89]

would you understand him ..if he said no?

To be sure, to be sure

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Do you recall who we used 30 for? Or did we trade it out?

30 became higgins. 51 became nick stevens who we delisted

 

[Shadow89]

We have had that many on the bandwagon, now they think they are wells that's why lol

They think they are Wellsy, and then they simultaneously think they're better than Wellsy and Mack...BF Schrodinger's list managers

 

[Turbocat]

2 years is long enough.

If a club can’t convince a player to stay after 2 years then that is on the club.

Also, if draftees were given 4 year contracts clubs would be stuck with a heck of a lot of players on their list who they wish weren’t contracted.

2 years is plenty.

I have been an advocate for that as well but I feel like I hav mostly been almost one out ...so welcome to the dark side

Consodering these guys are being told where to go ..one has to be very careful about equity and fairness.


I suspect club would like 2 and 2... an option to activate. Perhaps a set rate . Perhaps capable of matching offers... but you are right they do not want to be tied up with all players.


but I acknowledge I see it different to many others.


Id also like to get to the stage where free agency is far more available with more players capable of moving. Loosen up the number..get rid of compensation


The idea of any club , including geelong , getting something for an out of contract player is anachronism . A club should own the contract not the player. Once the contract is done they are free to select their own place of work...like anyone else.

Clubs rightly have a strong say over contracted players.

 

[Shadow89]

This is basically me at work right now:

 

[Turbocat]

With GWS already having 3, 12, 5, 18, 19 ....


Just what sort of an influence will they have over this draft. ... I still do not get why they took 18 from us.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Clubs rightly have a strong say over contracted players.

Bearing in mind that the "contract" which draftees have to sign is not really an arms-length contract at all in the normal sense; it is a "standard form" contract issued on "a take it or leave it basis", where the terms are actually dictated by a third party.

 

[year of the cat]

With GWS already having 3, 12, 5, 18, 19 ....


Just what sort of an influence will they have over this draft. ... I still do not get why they took 18 from us.

Assume trying to get enough picks to entice North to trade pick 1 to secure Cadman.

 

[Hamingja]

The legend of Sav Down Back grows...

I don't see him making it down back but whatever we would get from trading him would just end up steak knives for Henry to Collingwood so we might as well just keep him

 

[catempire]

 

[Hinkley29]

I have been an advocate for that as well but I feel like I hav mostly been almost one out ...so welcome to the dark side

Consodering these guys are being told where to go ..one has to be very careful about equity and fairness.


I suspect club would like 2 and 2... an option to activate. Perhaps a set rate . Perhaps capable of matching offers... but you are right they do not want to be tied up with all players.


but I acknowledge I see it different to many others.


Id also like to get to the stage where free agency is far more available with more players capable of moving. Loosen up the number..get rid of compensation


The idea of any club , including geelong , getting something for an out of contract player is anachronism . A club should own the contract not the player. Once the contract is done they are free to select their own place of work...like anyone else.

Clubs rightly have a strong say over contracted players.

Amen brother

 

[MisterMarcus]

At least some of this has got to be AFL manipulation for the final night.

There's no way that basically zero trades go through on the morning of the third last day.....

 

[dazbroncos]

Ralph ,,what more can you say... The media is becoming a mouth piece to put pressure on clubs this is the second time aligned media mouths have had a go at us in this period...





Geelong is making promises to Esava Ratugolea it knows it cannot keep.

It is telling the 24-year-old there is a meaningful role for him next year after only four AFL games in 2022.

The problem for Ratugolea, a newly re-cast intercept defender after two dominant VFL games in rounds 20 and 21, is that there are just so many star-studded teammates ahead of him.

In defence he is behind Tom Stewart, Sam De Koning, Jack Henry, Jake Kolodjashnij and part-time defender Mark Blicavs.

In the ruck when Blicavs isn’t playing the ruck-rover role there are Rhys Stanley, John Ceglar and the emerging Toby Conway.

If Ratugolea has to wait until Tom Hawkins retires it might be 2025 until he gets a decent crack at it alongside Jeremy Cameron, Gary Rohan, Brad Close and co.

In any other situation Geelong would do what premiership sides or dominant teams have with frustrated depth players and allowed him to prosper elsewhere.

The Tugger bitterness in this is just seeping all over the place...

cheap pot shots from a glorified blogger lol

Go Catters

 

[Larry Donohue]

Imagine 14 (15 including Mark himself) Geelong players showing up at your door - how could you say no?

My thoughts precisely
What a productive trip that would be

 

[Larry Donohue]

To be sure, to be sure

Father of our entire half back line

 

[FredLeDeux]

At least some of this has got to be AFL manipulation for the final night.

There's no way that basically zero trades go through on the morning of the third last day.....

Club Boards have to OK all Futures trades.
These are the sort of people who are too important to take calls on Monday mornings.

 

[Hamingja]

At least some of this has got to be AFL manipulation for the final night.

There's no way that basically zero trades go through on the morning of the third last day.....

Clubs were tied up with draft testing over the weekend.

They would only be starting the meetings again this am.

You can guarantee they will start holding some of these over for Wednesday night though even if they are done.

 

[GeelongFTW]

At least some of this has got to be AFL manipulation for the final night.

There's no way that basically zero trades go through on the morning of the third last day.....

Well it's all about the time pressure. If the trade period went till next Monday trades wouldn't be done till then. If it had finished last Friday everything would've through last week.

 

[Hinkley29]

Club Boards have to OK all Futures trades.
These are the sort of people who are too important to take calls on Monday mornings.

Seriously? Boards have to approve future trades? That is amazing if true

 

[bellpark]

You know what - if we keep Sav and dont do the Henry deal this year, we are overall a better team and we add picks 7 and 25. Still a great offseason with Bowes, Bruhn, retaining F1, pick 7 and 25. If we trade Sav and get Henry then maybe better long term or not but not the end of the world.

 

[cat_shack]

2 years is long enough.

If a club can’t convince a player to stay after 2 years then that is on the club.

Also, if draftees were given 4 year contracts clubs would be stuck with a heck of a lot of players on their list who they wish weren’t contracted.

2 years is plenty.

No way bud. Think of the amount of resourcing clubs pour into scouting, interviewing, testing and then facilitating the arrival and transition of draftees. 2 years is no where near the mark. Contracts should be scaleable relative to their round. 1st round 4 years, 2nd round 3 years etc. that would also stop the garbage of expansion clubs drafting 5 first rounders every 2nd year.

 

[calder_daddy]

Top10 ... early first round pick..

You and Pure_Ownage are never getting a priority pick the way you guys post

 

[Hinkley29]

No way bud. Think of the amount of resourcing clubs pour into scouting, interviewing, testing and then facilitating the arrival and transition of draftees. 2 years is no where near the mark. Contracts should be scaleable relative to their round. 1st round 4 years, 2nd round 3 years etc. that would also stop the garbage of expansion clubs drafting 5 first rounders every 2nd year.

Why would any young player want to be a 1st round pick in that scenario?

You are correct, clubs do pour money into scouting, interviewing, testing, etc. maybe if they spent as much money on being a desirable workplace then they wouldn’t lose players after 2 years.

It is up to the clubs to retain players, players already have severe restrictions on their workplace mobility, why should they be restricted even further?

Sorry bud, As the Collingwood report said, clubs need to “do better”