List Mgmt. GWS Players Contract Status

dlanod

Moderator
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Posts
38,902
Likes
47,210
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
GWS; CCMariners; NQCowboys; Ravens
Moderator #176
Wow. Did you not watch his press conference? Have you not followed his career here?

Giant for life my friend.
Pretty standard these days. Most players will sign on to expire on their FA eligibility because it gives them more options - one of those options is to absolutely re-sign with the club again, and most do.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

(Log in to remove this ad.)

captainMyCaptain

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Posts
6,941
Likes
4,751
Location
Wollongong
AFL Club
GWS
Thread starter #187
As been suggested by others our timetable has changed and as of 2017 our cap and list size will move into line with other clubs from next year.
Greater Western Sydney lost access to more than $1.1 million extra salary cap space over the next two years as part of the AFL's new competitive balance policy. The Giants' total player payments have been reduced two years ahead of the schedule laid out when the newest club's draft and salary cap concessions were announced in 2009, contributing to a list squeeze this year.
http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/...st-squeeze-at-gws-giants-20161006-grwmi8.html
 

dlanod

Moderator
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Posts
38,902
Likes
47,210
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
GWS; CCMariners; NQCowboys; Ravens
Moderator #189

General Giant

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Posts
28,161
Likes
19,389
AFL Club
GWS
Except not... What the ****...

"Instead the Giants will go into 2017 with a primary list of 40 players, and have to spread their cap over two more players than the 17 other clubs."
Wait what?

So we have 2 more players but the same cap?

**** me drunk you ******* cheating mexican scum bags.

Play to the rules you give us and you still arent satisfied.
 

General Giant

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Posts
28,161
Likes
19,389
AFL Club
GWS
My fav part

he removal of the extra money is not a kneejerk response to the Giants' success this year, but formed part of the new competitive balance policy announced in mid-2014.

If thats true. Why didnt we know about this until the last 2 weeks?
Im sure we would of entered last years trade period differently.
 
Joined
Sep 25, 2016
Posts
666
Likes
741
Location
Narellan
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Swifts Panthers, Wanderers, Thunder
My fav part

he removal of the extra money is not a kneejerk response to the Giants' success this year, but formed part of the new competitive balance policy announced in mid-2014.

If thats true. Why didnt we know about this until the last 2 weeks?
Im sure we would of entered last years trade period differently.
Surely more would have been made about this "fact" than some announcement now. I call bullshit! As if it wasn't a knee-jerk reaction.:rolleyes:
 

dlanod

Moderator
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Posts
38,902
Likes
47,210
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
GWS; CCMariners; NQCowboys; Ravens
Moderator #194
Except not... What the ****...

"Instead the Giants will go into 2017 with a primary list of 40 players, and have to spread their cap over two more players than the 17 other clubs."
Looking at it a bit closer, the normal range is 38-40 so I'm not sure WTF the article writer was implying. I think they might have ****** it up. Brisbane had 40 this year, for example.
 
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Posts
6,629
Likes
5,694
Location
Baulkham Hills
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
St Kilda, Dragons, Bucks
Moderator #195
Looking at it a bit closer, the normal range is 38-40 so I'm not sure WTF the article writer was implying. I think they might have stuffed it up. Brisbane had 40 this year, for example.
We will have had to change our list management strategy mid stream, from 42 to 40, plus lose the extra cap, meaning our exposure to higher wages for the two optional spots is likely to be greater than most, given they are not likely to be optional for us
 

dlanod

Moderator
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Posts
38,902
Likes
47,210
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
GWS; CCMariners; NQCowboys; Ravens
Moderator #196
We will have had to change our list management strategy mid stream, from 42 to 40, plus lose the extra cap, meaning our exposure to higher wages for the two optional spots is likely to be greater than most, given they are not likely to be optional for us
That's all right, but it's not "two more players than the 17 other clubs". I wish journalists would know the rules about what they're writing.
 
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Posts
3,095
Likes
3,781
AFL Club
GWS
Moderator #199
How many Draft picks is GWS expected to take to the draft. Interested because of the changes to the academy points system
Will be limited by the revised academy & father/son bidding rules, so number of live picks will match the number of list spots open. (The only caveat to this is that the AFL when they announced the new rules made a comment that clubs taking future picks last year wouldn't lose them under the revised rules, but has never explained what they meant. So a little bit of ambiguity.)

Therefore, I expect that GWS will trade or delist between 8 & 10 players, taking us down to between 32 & 34 main list players before draft night, allowing 6 to 8 live picks. The exact number probably depends on how many kids want to leave. That would allow GWS to take an early live pick and 4 to 5 academy kids (possibly Setterfield, Perryman, Macreadie, Sproule & ?). If there's still list spots open then maybe a couple of late picks such as Garthwaite, [EDIT: delete Cumming] or Connor Byrne or similar who cost very little (i.e. aren't bid on, or if so, very late) or current rookies being upgraded onto the main list.

The exact list size seems to be unclear - the recent media reporting indicates GWS has a stipulated size of 40, but other clubs are at 38-40. If GWS is actually the same (38-40) then the last bit of my postulation would be irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Posts
6,629
Likes
5,694
Location
Baulkham Hills
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
St Kilda, Dragons, Bucks
Moderator #200
Will be limited by the revised academy & father/son bidding rules, so number of live picks will match the number of list spots open. (The only caveat to this is that the AFL when they announced the new rules made a comment that clubs taking future picks last year wouldn't lose them under the revised rules, but has never explained what they meant. So a little bit of ambiguity.)

Therefore, I expect that GWS will trade or delist between 8 & 10 players, taking us down to between 32 & 34 main list players before draft night, allowing 6 to 8 live picks. The exact number probably depends on how many kids want to leave. That would allow GWS to take an early live pick and 4 to 5 academy kids (possibly Setterfield, Perryman, Macreadie, Sproule & ?). If there's still list spots open then maybe a couple of late picks such as Garthwaite, Cumming or similar who cost very little (i.e. aren't bid on, or if so, very late) or current rookies being upgraded onto the main list.

The exact list size seems to be unclear - the recent media reporting indicates GWS has a stipulated size of 40, but other clubs are at 38-40. If GWS is actually the same (38-40) then the last bit of my postulation would be irrelevant.
Cummings will go 2nd round for sure
 
Top Bottom