Thanks Thanks:  304
Likes Likes:  1,081
Page 48 of 119 FirstFirst ... 38394041424344454647484950515253545556575898 ... LastLast
Results 706 to 720 of 1778
  1. #706
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    13,052
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Quote Originally Posted by bulldogtragic View Post
    Last ones without a seat as the music soon to stop:

    Mitch Wallis
    Pat Lipinski
    Lewis Young

    Roarke Smith
    Jordan Sweet

    Stefan Martin
    Will Hayes
    Ben Cavarra
    Sweet is likely dependent on Lewis Young?
    More of an In Bruges guy?

  2. #707
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,546
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    I think its fair to say that Wally and Lippa will go. Smith/Martin are probably safe, with Martin getting another year unless we can secure another ruck. I think Hayes and Cavarra are finished.

    Young is the interesting one. Given he has played the last few games and don ok, I think there will be interest. That said I am not sure that we will trade him out/let him go as his games this year have generally been good.

  3. #708
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    32,302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Quote Originally Posted by azabob View Post
    Sweet is likely dependent on Lewis Young?
    Who knows at this point? I’d think he stays under normal logic, but Bevo seems resistant to go near him after Gawn got him. Plus his form was really not good after it too. Toss of the coin. Being that Sweet & Khamis are both fourth year rookies you’d think a joint announcement if they were both wanted no matter what. So maybe his future relies on what Power does in trade week. At minimum we are no rush to give him another year it seems.
    Rocket Science: the epitaph for the Beveridge era - whenever it ends - reading 'Here lies a team that could beat anyone on its day, but seldom did when it mattered most'. 15/7/2023

  4. Likes Threedogs liked this post
  5. #709
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,741
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    I have a feeling Sweet may be unlucky, and miss out. Giving him another year doesn't worry me too much.
    Nobody's looking for a puppeteer in today's wintry economic climate.

  6. #710
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    E.J. Whitten Stand
    Posts
    17,162
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    We'd have to have a definite target in mind if Sweet is delisted.
    Our 1954 premiership players are our heroes, and it has to be said that Charlie was their hero.

  7. #711
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    32,302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Quote Originally Posted by comrade View Post
    We'd have to have a definite target in mind if Sweet is delisted.
    If you accept:

    1. Martin
    2. English
    3. Sweet
    4. Young (undersized)

    Martin is shot. Young May go. If sweet goes. We have Tim, and only Tim. Darcy is a kid.

    We’d need two mature rucks ready to sign on to have around Tim. One very good, one solid depth. What are the odds on that happening?
    Rocket Science: the epitaph for the Beveridge era - whenever it ends - reading 'Here lies a team that could beat anyone on its day, but seldom did when it mattered most'. 15/7/2023

  8. #712
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,822
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Fwiw Young is ranked higher than Sweet. We haven't touched the latter in the second half of the year, despite there being a clear need for a ruckman. Young has been given multiple goes and was chosen as our number one ruck in a final. He has moved comfortably ahead of Sweet in the pecking order.

    I would suggest we see the pecking order next year as:
    1. Currently AFL listed recruit
    2. English
    3. Young
    4. Darcy

    We may bring in another if we think Young is more of a "play elsewhere fill in when required" option, as I doubt we have any expectations on Darcy to play next year and probably not ever as a proper ruck.

    But this is the second season now where we have proactively found other players who are absolutely not the answer (Hannan and Dunkley prime examples) to avoid playing Sweet. That to me says we aren't interested in him.
    I should leave it alone but you're not right

  9. Likes jeemak liked this post
  10. #713
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    32,302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Last ones without a seat as the music soon to stop:

    Safe: Roarke Smith

    Gone??: Mitch Wallis, Lewis Young, Jordan Sweet

    All The Best: Stefan Martin, Will Hayes, Ben Cavarra


    Vacancies, 2: Jong, Lipinski.
    Rocket Science: the epitaph for the Beveridge era - whenever it ends - reading 'Here lies a team that could beat anyone on its day, but seldom did when it mattered most'. 15/7/2023

  11. #714
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mulligan's Boogie-board
    Posts
    13,682
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Quote Originally Posted by jeemak View Post
    I have a feeling Sweet may be unlucky, and miss out. Giving him another year doesn't worry me too much.
    The forth year rookie rule may come into play. I'd re-rookie him
    Western Bulldogs: 2016 Premiers

  12. #715
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    13,052
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Cal Twoomey has been talking about a category B "Ruckman list" and is under serious investigation. It will give clubs the opportunity to draft young, raw ruckman and develop them away from the senior list for 2,3,4 years.

    Could be an interesting development.
    More of an In Bruges guy?

  13. Likes Vred, bornadog liked this post
  14. #716
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria
    Posts
    1,210
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Quote Originally Posted by azabob View Post
    Cal Twoomey has been talking about a category B "Ruckman list" and is under serious investigation. It will give clubs the opportunity to draft young, raw ruckman and develop them away from the senior list for 2,3,4 years.

    Could be an interesting development.

    If that's the case, Sweet stays on.
    "Its always good to win the Ashes test match'' - Libba, AFL Grand Final, 2016

  15. #717
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    6,687
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    I think Sweet should be safe either way. He keeps progressing and our ruck stocks are as bare as as they get.

  16. Likes Vred liked this post
  17. #718
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,546
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Quote Originally Posted by azabob View Post
    Cal Twoomey has been talking about a category B "Ruckman list" and is under serious investigation. It will give clubs the opportunity to draft young, raw ruckman and develop them away from the senior list for 2,3,4 years.

    Could be an interesting development.
    The problem with all of these extra lists though are that they aren't used in the way they are intended. No way is Rourke a rookie. Sure he has played less than 50 games, but he has been in the system for what 6 years? We know whether he is going to make it or not and what we really know is that he is a quality team player that has a level.

    Sweet, will end up on the supplemental developing ruck list. He has been in the system 3/4 years and played a handful of games. Maybe he fits the bill. But what about when we decide to take a punt on an aging Martin and put him on the ruck list or Lewy Young, using the argument that he is developing.

    I am against supplemental lists. Cat B rookies for Next Gen talent I can live with, but Rookie's staying on rookie lists indefinitely.....

  18. #719
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,822
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Yeah there is no way if they were starting from scratch would they come up with the system we have now.

    The rookie list is weird, the blokes on it have all the same commitments as the main listed guys but are put on a special list like they are all developmental players and not just the 38th best bloke available.

    At the very least they should just combine it all into the same big list. Every side has to list 36 (? whatever they have now) players and then can list up to 6 more. Each of the extra list spots only increases the salary cap by the minimum wage so they are effectively the same as rookies but allows more flexibility and doesn't separate them from the rest of the squad.

    Instead of special list spots for ruckmen they should bring back the reserves idea, and use it as an extended squad. Anyone who plays for your reserves side and has previously been eligible for the draft (so not underage players) is tied to your club. Can make it like the academy bidding system, or can make them automatically listable.

    Both changes kind of just redefine the current system, rookie listed players just get recognised as main listers which is how the clubs treat them, and instead of giving clubs specific spots for semi-coordinated abnormally tall men they can have a bunch more players to develop, but I think they would both be good changes in simplifying this stuff and making it better for the overall AFL ecosystem.
    I should leave it alone but you're not right

  19. Thanks jazzadogs thanked for this post
  20. #720
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,615
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Player Contract Status

    Jon Ralph saying Wallis 'expected' to re-sign
    Listening to Brahm's 3rd Racket

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •