Will our conservative club be left behind?

[Altum Volantes]

Looking to gauge opinion on this.

With the introduction of Free Agency, I feel the landscape will change pretty quickly in the league.

Players will move more freely and regularly and some clubs will be quite aggressive in chasing new players and turning over their playing list in search of the right combination.
Needless to say, our club probably won't be one of them.

Earlier in the year we had Trevor Nisbett bemoaning Geelong's rather aggressive pursuit of Travis Boak -

"It's out of the rugby league handbook and I just hope we're not going to see the game stoop to these levels"
"I know if it happened to our club we wouldn't be sitting down and accepting it. We'd be going in and making big offers to all their players. If anyone tried to poach one of our players during the season when he was contracted we'd go back and try to poach as many of theirs as possible."

Essentially he's saying WCE won't be going after anyone until the season is over (followed by an empty threat about poaching the other teams players..). This may be from 'the rugby league handbook' but it may also be the way things work going forward.

So far this off season we're losing an unrestricted free agent to a direct competitor for a top 4 spot and we are losing a young player who we have put 3+ years of development into. The opportunity to be an active party in 2012 is here.

Do you think the club will be suited to the changing times or will it be left behind with the 'wait and see' approach of the past?

 

[Tiff]

no we are nabbing Wellington to the west coase

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

no we are nabbing Wellington to the west coase

Nabbing for pick 17?

 

[Marlin01]

Give me continuity and commitment to a long-term goal over drastic change any day.

 

[Tiff]

We're strong on all fronts, our club is second favorites for the flag 2013, we got nailed by injuries and finished fifth and just missed beating the Pies at the G. We fill holes when required when in premiership mode and develop when rebuilding.

It's all good.

 

[Definitely Maybe]

Looking to gauge opinion on this.

With the introduction of Free Agency, I feel the landscape will change pretty quickly in the league.

Players will move more freely and regularly and some clubs will be quite aggressive in chasing new players and turning over their playing list in search of the right combination.
Needless to say, our club probably won't be one of them.

Earlier in the year we had Trevor Nisbett bemoaning Geelong's rather aggressive pursuit of Travis Boak -

"It's out of the rugby league handbook and I just hope we're not going to see the game stoop to these levels"
"I know if it happened to our club we wouldn't be sitting down and accepting it. We'd be going in and making big offers to all their players. If anyone tried to poach one of our players during the season when he was contracted we'd go back and try to poach as many of theirs as possible."

Essentially he's saying WCE won't be going after anyone until the season is over (followed by an empty threat about poaching the other teams players..). This may be from 'the rugby league handbook' but it may also be the way things work going forward.

So far this off season we're losing an unrestricted free agent to a direct competitor for a top 4 spot and we are losing a young player who we have put 3+ years of development into. The opportunity to be an active party in 2012 is here.

Do you think the club will be suited to the changing times or will it be left behind with the 'wait and see' approach of the past?

Did depends on what is available. Too be fair, the FA crop isn't that appealling IMO.

Secondly, Nisbett's comments were regarding how public Geelong was in their pursuit (flying Scott, Selwood & Bartel to Adelaide to meet with Boak.) In the end, it didn't work for Geelong with Boak staying with Port. Clubs target players, but it is through more discrete channels such as through their agents. The fact Cripps has said he wants to be traded to West Coast suggests we've been in contact with him. Cripps isn't going to come out and say he wants to be traded to West Coast if we aren't interested?

 

[Ian Dargie]

Do you think the club will be suited to the changing times or will it be left behind with the 'wait and see' approach of the past?

There's no problem.

The implications of free agency - this idea that the landscape is dramatically altered - may yet prove overstated.

What are the big free agency stories so far?

Cloke, who has stayed. And Goddard, who has gone. But Goddard might very well have requested a trade anyway, even without free agency.

Lynch leaving because he was offered two years rather than the one we were offering hardly equates to a brave new world that we are ill-equipped to deal with. That has happened plenty of times in the past. Where is the evidence that everything is now totally different?

 

[JackJako27]

There's no problem.
The implications of free agency - this idea that the landscape is dramatically altered - may yet prove overstated.

What are the big free agency stories so far?

Cloke, who has stayed. And Goddard, who has gone. But Goddard might very well have requested a trade anyway, even without free agency.

Lynch leaving because he was offered two years rather than the one we were offering hardly equates to a brave new world that we are ill-equipped to deal with. That has happened plenty of times in the past. Where is the evidence that everything is now totally different?

I think you're getting a bit ahead of yourself, given it's lunch time on day one of the free agency period, with deals already done.

 

[greennick]

Looking to gauge opinion on this.

With the introduction of Free Agency, I feel the landscape will change pretty quickly in the league.

Players will move more freely and regularly and some clubs will be quite aggressive in chasing new players and turning over their playing list in search of the right combination.
Needless to say, our club probably won't be one of them.

While I agree with he overall premise of your thread in that there is a high risk we could get left behind, I agree with a cautious approach. I think the NFL is a good example for how free agency can backfire. Look at the Pittsburgh Steelers. They almost never grab big money free agents and instead just invest in the players they have, their known quantities. They build through the draft and encourage loyalty. If a player wants more money than they're worth to the system, they let them go and get another player in the draft.

With free agency, managing the salary cap becomes more important than ever.

Earlier in the year we had Trevor Nisbett bemoaning Geelong's rather aggressive pursuit of Travis Boak -

"It's out of the rugby league handbook and I just hope we're not going to see the game stoop to these levels"
"I know if it happened to our club we wouldn't be sitting down and accepting it. We'd be going in and making big offers to all their players. If anyone tried to poach one of our players during the season when he was contracted we'd go back and try to poach as many of theirs as possible."

Essentially he's saying WCE won't be going after anyone until the season is over (followed by an empty threat about poaching the other teams players..). This may be from 'the rugby league handbook' but it may also be the way things work going forward.

I don't think he is saying that. I think he was saying that we wouldn't be so blase about it. Approaches can be made discreetly through managers and meetings can be had in a way that is on the DL.

So far this off season we're losing an unrestricted free agent to a direct competitor for a top 4 spot and we are losing a young player who we have put 3+ years of development into. The opportunity to be an active party in 2012 is here.

Do you think the club will be suited to the changing times or will it be left behind with the 'wait and see' approach of the past?

What will we do though? We shouldn't over pay for Lynch because he wants a 2 year deal. Similarly, we shouldn't be chasing players for a lot more than they're worth. Free agency can be one of those times we as supporters want WC go to after all these FA, but they probably won't go after the big fish we want. However, in the long run, it is likely we will be better off...

 

[Masto]

Looks like a thread just for the chicken littles to bitch and moan. They want to improve our club in the short term but if it involves giving up draft picks they'll bitch and moan about that instead.

 

[Toshowyouwhy]

Alphabet says we're getting Wellingham, we're high rollers.

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

Looks like a thread just for the chicken littles to bitch and moan. They want to improve our club in the short term but if it involves giving up draft picks they'll bitch and moan about that instead.

Getting a FA doesnt require giving up draft pciks

 

[Ian Dargie]

I think you're getting a bit ahead of yourself, given it's lunch time on day one of the free agency period, with deals already done.

How so?

I've seen the list of free agents. Who are the big names that might still move clubs?

These guys are ultimately out of contract so could have asked to be traded anyway, especially when you consider that the vast majority of free agents are not top-tier players. Free agency makes it easier for these guys to change clubs but the idea that it has totally changed everything is overblown.

For example, how is Goddard's move to Essendon different to what Chris Judd did five years ago? Hell, Brad Ebert basically assumed free agency status last year, four years before it would have been available to him under the new rules. At least in Goddard's case, St Kilda had the opportunity to match the offer.

And the vast majority of free agency moves will not involve guys like Judd and Goddard, who are among the top five of a club's list. Most free agency moves will involve guys like Lynch and Knights, players who, after a period of service at one club, want the freedom to negotiate their next contract without relying on the clubs hammering out a deal with the prospect of being forced into the PSD hanging over them. Like I said, these guys are out of contract so could have asked to be traded anyway - free agency merely simplifies what has otherwise been a very messy, chaotic process.

For the guys at the top end, we've had a practical form of free agency for a while, as the Judd example shows. This merely formalises it.

Whereas Judd nominated a club and then had to wait for us to deal with Carlton, Goddard just nominates his club and, after the Saints decide they won’t match the offer, the AFL takes care of the compensation rather than everyone sitting on their hands while the clubs play poker. The trade week bullshit gets cut out but it's still a case of a gun player deciding where he wants to go without his original club deciding what suits them. That is, in practice, what free agency means and, as we know from experience, it's happened before.

So the talk of brave new worlds is, in my view, misplaced.

 

[Altum Volantes]

Looks like a thread just for the chicken littles to bitch and moan. They want to improve our club in the short term but if it involves giving up draft picks they'll bitch and moan about that instead.

It's not necessarily about 'right now - this second', I'm talking more about whether the club will be willing to roll the dice and build the team from 'also ran' (5th with a good chunk of our top 10 over 28) to contender. The time is now if we want to take advantage of champions like Cox, Kerr and Glass.

Who knows, maybe the club will attempt to bring in some experience - but it would be against character - hence the question...

 

[Ian Dargie]

It's not necessarily about 'right now - this second', I'm talking more about whether the club will be willing to roll the dice and build the team from 'also ran' (5th with a good chunk of our top 10 over 28) to contender. The time is now if we want to take advantage of champions like Cox, Kerr and Glass.

Who knows, maybe the club will attempt to bring in some experience - but it would be against character - hence the question...

But is this really a question about free agency?

I don't see too many guys on the list of free agents who immediately appeal.

If your question is about whether we are willing to trade more aggressively, that's fine. But that's got nothing to do with free agency, which, by definition, is not about trading.

 

[Ian Dargie]

Similarly, we shouldn't be chasing players for a lot more than they're worth. Free agency can be one of those times we as supporters want WC go to after all these FA, but they probably won't go after the big fish we want.

Who are we talking about here?

Who among the current free agents are "big fish"?

Goddard and Cloke, fine. One of those is staying put anyway.

Who are these other "big fish"? Aren't the current free agents mostly role players and journeymen?

 

[Spartan]

Looks like a thread just for the chicken littles to bitch and moan. They want to improve our club in the short term but if it involves giving up draft picks they'll bitch and moan about that instead.

Personally I think we should be looking to improve our list in the short term and if that involves losing pick 17 so be it. Our window is open now and we should be adding a best 22 player if possible and not trying to hit the lottery with the 17th pick in the draft.

With regards to free agency I'm disappointed we're not chasing Pearce, I think he fills an obvious need in the team and would be of greater benefit than Wellingham or Cripps as examples. Susceptible to a tag but you would think would be behind Kerr and Shuey at least in terms of copping the tag.

Instead Freo make a play for him and will probably get him. That being said I guess we can't be sure what our cap looks like or if we are in a position to be making these bids.

 

[Altum Volantes]

But is this really a question about free agency?

I don't see too many guys on the list of free agents who immediately appeal.

If your question is about whether we are willing to trade more aggressively, that's fine. But that's got nothing to do with free agency, which, by definition, is not about trading.

Wellingham and Pearce would add the pace that we need to add to the midfield - as Worsfold noted.

Even David Rodan would add something off the bench.

Pearce is already off the agenda, gone to a fellow top 4 aspirant.

Wellingham will be interesting (admittedly it would take a trade, unless Collingwood willingly delist the guy).

My point is that free agency will see players move more freely, clubs will be more aggressive and the prospect of changing teams will not be as restricted.

 

[Ian Dargie]

Wellingham and Pearce would add the pace that we need to add to the midfield - as Worsfold noted.

Even David Rodan would add something off the bench.

Pearce is already off the agenda, gone to a fellow top 4 aspirant.

Wellingham will be interesting (admittedly it would take a trade, unless Collingwood willingly delist the guy).

My point is that free agency will see players move more freely, clubs will be more aggressive and the prospect of changing teams will not be as restricted.

But Wellingham has nothing to do with free agency.

He's an out of contract player who may be asking for a trade. Just like every player in the same boat every year before. How does the advent of free agency affect his movement and whether or not we go after him?

You reckon David Rodan would get a game at West Coast?

 

[reimersworstguy]

people just want to see us grab players from other clubs because it's more exciting than drafting some kid we've never heard of. we'll be fine.

the best player we can potentially land (wellingham) will still have to be done through traditional trading anyway.

 

[Altum Volantes]

But Wellingham has nothing to do with free agency.

He's an out of contract player who may be asking for a trade. Just like every player in the same boat every year before. How does the advent of free agency affect his movement and whether or not we go after him?

You reckon David Rodan would get a game at West Coast?

My point was that I think FA will change the landscape and processes - players will move more freely and have more control - whether they are a Lynch style free agent or an unsigned player ala Wellingham. Some clubs will be aggressive and use this increase in movement to build their sides. My question is whether the club will need to change their attitudes or risk being left behind. You're quite welcome to disagree.

Re. Rodan - he'd add more spark off the bench than the likes of Swift, Stevens, Strijk, Neates et al. He's an explosive player when given the opportunity. We have 1 of them (Naitanui).

 

[September_Glory]

It's a good question.. but my answer is no.

Trust the players we have and trust the players we bring in will fit and develop incrementally. Since cleaning out the list 5 years ago, the club has put a heavy emphasis on recruiting the right type of player - work ethic, fits into team dynamics, doesn't get in trouble off-field and good in the community.

Of course we have to adjust to the new rules and make the right moves at the right time and all that but let the other teams make the "big splash".

Admins like Chris Connolly and Schwab who want to go for the flashy, headline grabbing play do it so they can go to their bosses and say "look at what we've accomplished here, my contract should be renewed".

Slow and steady wins the race.

 

[Ian Dargie]

My point was that I think FA will change the landscape and processes - players will move more freely and have more control - whether they are a Lynch style free agent or an unsigned player ala Wellingham.

Huh?

Free agency will mean players who aren't even free agents will move more freely? How? Because of the vibe?

Uncontracted players, like Welingham, have been asking for trades for years. It's got nothing to do with free agency. Ebert pulled something similar last year. Was that because of free agency as well? What about Judd at the end of 2007? Free agency at work five years early?

If you want to make an argument about the effects of free agency, that's fine. But pointing to players whose situations have nothing to do with free agency doesn't help you.

Re. Rodan - he'd add more spark off the bench than the likes of Swift, Stevens, Strijk, Neates et al. He's an explosive player when given the opportunity. We have 1 of them (Naitanui).

Ease up.

Rodan is yesterday's news.

Our failure to pursue a player like that is hardly evidence that we are ill-equipped to deal with free agency.

If he and Pearce are the best two guys on the free agency shopping list, I don't think we're missing out on too much.

We're chasing Wellingham - he's better than the free agents available, so what are you complaining about?

It actually sounds like you're just annoyed that we didn't get involved in the free agency fun fair and are trying to massage that into a broader criticism of the club.

 

[Altum Volantes]

I think the 'vibe' (if you like) around players changing clubs will change. It will become more common, free agency in it's current form will help that, as will the fact that delisted players become 'free agents' too. That's my opinion.

I did already say Wellingham would take a trade, as I said it will be interesting to see if the club can get it done with other clubs also in the frame.

 

[Ian Dargie]

I think the 'vibe' (if you like) around players changing clubs will change. It will become more common, free agency in it's current form will help that.

How will free agency make it any easier or more common for players who aren't free agents to move clubs?

I just think that's a bit illogical, particularly when we have already seen these uncontracted guys moving clubs pretty easily before free agency. So what's changed for those guys who are uncontracted but aren't free agents?

Do you not see my point? Judd moved. Ebert moved. It wasn't about free agency but about uncontracted players changing clubs, which is nothing new.

You're conflating two sets of circumstances and attributing all of it to free agency. The majority of moves between clubs are nothing to do with free agency.