Zac Butters?? I. DON'T. CARE.

[ledge]

I live in Melton and get some knowledge from around the traps and as has been reported by so many here and other places he wants to be at the dogs . I get the same response from people I know around here that know the family.
Of course it all depends on a few things but sometimes it’s not just the money .
players have taken less to get to where they want to be.

[Happy Days]

Quick delete this post before Zac sees it

[1eyedog]

Let me start here: I love watching Zac Butters play football.

He’s a competitor. A jet. A guy who somehow combines that slick, outside class with real inside aggression. He never looks out of place, never goes missing, and always seems to be in the middle of the moment when Port need someone to stand up. Honestly, if you were starting a midfield from scratch, he’d be one of the first names on the whiteboard.

But here’s the thing.

I don’t want him.

Not because he’s not good enough — he’s a superstar. Not because he wouldn’t help us — he would. But because chasing big-name players with massive contracts rarely guarantees anything except cap pressure, distraction, and the eventual departure of your own.

We’re the Western Bulldogs. And right now, for all the frustration, we’ve got something special brewing.

We’ve got Joel Freijah and Rylee Sanders.
We’ve got Cody Weightman (injured, again I know) and Sam Darcy.
We *MIGHT* somehow-still-have-the-only-23-year-old Jamarra.
We've even got Lachie McNeil and Harvey Gallagher. You might LOL at this - but I don't. They're OURS!

We’ve drafted well. We’ve been patient. And some of these guys — maybe even two or three of them — are going to be stars.

If we blow up the salary cap to bring in Zac Butters, what message does that send? Not just to the locker room, but to the kids we’re trying to build a team around? How are we going to keep the band together when the next re-signing deadline rolls around? How does Sanders get inside mid time when you add a Butters to the mix??

And it’s not like there's a guarantee of success. Just ask the LA Kings.

Back in 1988, the Kings pulled off the biggest trade in sports history — they landed Wayne Gretzky. The best hockey player in the world. Maybe the best athlete in any sport, ever. And did they win a championship?

Nope.

They made the Finals once (in 1993), and then slowly faded. Meanwhile, the Oilers — the team that lost Gretzky — actually won another Stanley Cup without him the very next year. Go figure. The same thing happen when Sydney pulled off the Buddy Franklin heist. The didn't win one - but Hawthorn won another without him.

Because sometimes, building a team is less about chasing headlines, and more about cultivating belief. Sometimes the real superstars are the ones you’ve already got — if you give them time, trust, and a role to grow into.

So yeah, I’ll still admire Zac Butters every time he puts on the Port jumper. I’ll still rate him as one of the best players in the comp.

But I don’t want him.

I want us.

I want to watch Freijah turn into the best two-way wingman in the AFL.
I want to see Sanders rack up 35 and two in a final.
I want to see Jamarra kick five in a prelim and smile like a kid.
I want to build something that lasts — not just buy something that sells.

So thanks, but no thanks. We don’t need Zac Butters. Or Bergman. Or anyone else we're rumoured to be throwing money at. Leave that kind of stuff to Carlton (how IS Zac Williams going by the way??) and whichever other plastic teams out there who think that ONE PLAYER will put them over the top.

Draft your stars. Recruit experienced role players (Hey - Matt Kennedy, that's you!! Hey Lachie Bramble, that's you!) to fill in the gaps.

#cancelfreeagency

Yeah nah Sanders is gone and McNeill and Gallagher and one or two others can go as well to free cap. Outside of this I want everything you want and Zac Butters.

[1eyedog]

Butters is a great player, I think we all agree on that.

Is there a spot for him?
With Treloar battling injuries, perhaps Libba fading a bit you would think so but with Richards entering his prime and Kenned's form along with the brilliant Bont it may not be a pressing need.
We also have Freijah who should be requesting more midfield time.
I'm all for getting him in though.

Does he make us a better side?
I think it's hard to argue against that. Yes, he is a gun player

Does it impact the salary cap that much?
It stretches it a bit but it's going to rise quickly over the next few years so if we genuinely have him on the radar then I wouldn't be concerned.

Now here is the more challenging part

What will we have to give up in terms of draft capital?
Port would rightly demand more than 2 first rounders, perhaps 2x1st and a 2nd rounder before they would consider trading Butters to us.
It could easily be 3x1st rounders and that's a hard decision for us.

So here is me having a foot in both paddocks
If Marra gets traded we should go boots an all to bring in Butters. Lose a big name, bring a big one is to replace him much like we did with Tom Boyd when when Ryan Griffin requested a trade.
If Marra stays I'm not necessarily pushing all the chips in for Butters but I'd still hope we chase him hard.

Is there a spot for Butters? Lol.

Marra for Butters with extra mayo how does that sound?

[FrediKanoute]

Butters replaces Libba.

Is Saunders ready to replace LIbba?

To me that is what you get from Butters.

[ReLoad]

Butters replaces Libba.

Is Saunders ready to replace LIbba?

To me that is what you get from Butters.

This.

[doggies ftw]

Personally, and this may be controversial, I want to win flags. If that means we pay lots of money to our existing players or we pay lots of money to bring in new players I don’t give a shit. I want to win flags.

No one’s suggesting we blow up the cap to bring in Butters, it’s a balancing act and I trust Power to get it right. If they don’t think we can target Butters whilst keeping the list together we simply… won’t. We apparently think we can.

Are you suggesting you can’t bring in gun players and have a successful team environment? I think you’ll find that is completely wrong - look at last years premiers for most recent example, they brought in Dunks & Neale, 2 of their best players as big name trades on big money.

Zac Butters is not Zac Williams and why are we even talking about McNeil & Gags here, they’ll both be lucky to
be on an AFL list in 2 years. I like our direction too right now, love it actually, but let’s not sugarcoat it, as a club who never gets the big name signings we’ve won how many flags? If we think bringing in a top 5 player in the comp like Butters will get us closer to a 3rd that’s all that really matters.

Also I see it a lot this argument that the locker room won’t be happy that someone else is brought in on more money than them, it’s bullshit, when has this ever been a problem. The players don’t care about this shit, as long as we’re looking after our own which we clearly are id suggest Richards & Sanders are gonna be way more interested to play alongside Butters and better their chances at team success then they’re going to worry about a couple more $s that could have gone their way.

I’ll go as far as saying if any players are worried about that then they’re not the guys we want and they won’t be winning us a flag anytime soon. It’s just a non issue (provided you’re not taking the piss of course) We haven’t won a final in 4 years if our players are pissed off that we’re improving the list with star players on big money rather than paying them overs for? For what performance? Finishing 7th every year? they can leave as far as I’m concerned. Non issue

The Butters money required is big, but he’s worth it. If they club thinks they can afford him you do it, it takes us one step closer to winning a flag and don’t discount the off field benefits we’ll see by winning that big name signing we never get (usually we watch them go the other way year in year out as of late), one step closer to becoming a destination club, one step closer to drawing in bigger crowds, bigger games, whether we like it or not taking these steps is critical to our future success, the games not fair after all.

Go get Butters

[Rusty12]

Sanders is a Bulldogs player until proven otherwise - so I would rather give the money to HIM.

I admire Butters but he's a Port Adelaide player...let him get his cash from them.

This obsession with getting guys in over building a footy team? It's bizarre.

As for the 'Pies, why exactly did they pay all that money for Houston when they already had Noble and he is - by pretty much any measure - having a better season than Houston is. That way they could have kept their powder (cash) dry and used it to ensure that their own role players were well looked after. Collingwood have a team filled with imports because:

1/. They had to blow up their list (Adam Treloar says hi) due to gross mismanagement, and;
2/. They can't draft to save their lives. With apologies to all of those who worship at the temple of Hyne.

So they had to fill the middle of their list (role players ) with mid-range (or less) players from other clubs (Hill, Frampton, Membrey, etc)...they have thrown stupid money at Schultz, Houston etc - and they MIGHT yet get a flag out of it.

I'd just prefer to do it with the players who have 'grown' at our footy club.

And they can only do this because they are Collingwood, and the lure of playing 20 games a year in Melbourne, most at the G, in front of the biggest crowds. Any other clubs mismanaged their list like they did, they would have been at the bottom for years.

[Axe Man]

If we take him at the end of 2026 it will cost zero picks.

Won't he be a restricted free agent at the end of next year? In which case Port can match a bid and force a trade like the Crows did when Dangerfield left.

[Rusty12]

"What If" MJP.

Sanders chooses to go home, with huge money, and be the building block for a new team, in his proud home state. (I would hold no grudge).
We are well compensated.
Butters says he is coming home, we offer what we can, and pay him equally to our top mids, and not in a bidding war.

Are you taking the picks to the draft, with a 31 year old Bont, or Butters?

[comrade]

There's pros and cons for buying a star, plenty of examples of it working and plenty where it blew up. I think on balance, Butters is the type you take a swing at. Especially as 2 of our rolled gold blue chip midfielders - Bont & Libba - are starting to age out (sadface).

[Sedat]

How can you opine about the merits or otherwise of attracting big name free agents without mentioning Matthew Suckling once. Massive oversight.

[mjp]

Are you suggesting you can’t bring in gun players and have a successful team environment? I think you’ll find that is completely wrong - look at last years premiers for most recent example, they brought in Dunks & Neale, 2 of their best players as big name trades on big money.

I never said that (bringing in stars means you can't have a successful team) and I never said I don't want Butters. I said I don't care and I don't think recruiting 'stars' is the way to win.. The way to win is to draft well and 'add pieces/role players' from other clubs. This has been proven time and again. I'll give you Lachie Neale was a 'star' - best and fairest winning mid - who literally fell in Brisbane's lap. I'm sure he's been well paid all along but did they even recruit him? Story is HE called THEM and said, "Hey man, I'm coming to Brisbane....any chance of a game???".

Dunkley a 'star'? C'mon man. He's a good solid player - a role player. He tags for them, does run with, is a defensively minded mid. He'd help us for sure - but he's a team player...exactly the sort of bloke you SHOULD target to recruit.

Butters isn't that. He is a #1 mid at many of the clubs in the AFL and will be the 'sun' around which the other planets revolve. Will he be as good with us? We actually don't have any idea. NONE. I mean - he might be...but he also might not be.

Zac Butters is not Zac Williams and why are we even talking about McNeil & Gags here, they’ll both be lucky to
be on an AFL list in 2 years. I like our direction too right now, love it actually, but let’s not sugarcoat it, as a club who never gets the big name signings we’ve won how many flags? If we think bringing in a top 5 player in the comp like Butters will get us closer to a 3rd that’s all that really matters.

Well - I mentioned Gags and McNeil with a bit of a LOL - which I did point out. I mentioned them because they are OURS. That means something to me. You might have gotten the idea that I like to back our players in the 20-odd years I've been posting...no - players aren't perfect (and I was as mystified as anyone with all the times Gags was selected last year) but he's still 'one of us'. I want to see him succeed and would LOVE for US to succeed with him.

Zac Williams isn't Zac Butters. And nor is Andrew Cerra. Or Mitch McGovern. But all were highly touted recruits at the Blues...there season continues to be dictated by Cripps, Weitering, Curnow and co...not the 'cherries on top'. I get you are saying Butters is more than a cherry on top and you MIGHT just be right. BUT. Just like Williams was a far better half back at the Giants than midfielder at the Blues - and both Shultz and Houston was a far more impactful players at Freo/Port respectively than they have been at Collingwood - there is no guarantee that the player you recruit is the same at his new club. Things change - and LOTS of things go into the pot and get stirred around - then you see the outcome on the field. Who actually knows whether a new environment will help Zac Butters play footy? He might be pouring the 'secret sauce' out of the pot with any change of club/coach/role/off-field environment.

In the OP I talked about the recruiting of the 4-time Stanley Cup winner Wayne Gretzky by the LA Kings. He won ZERO titles after the move...Edmonton won another won despite his absence. The same thing happened with Buddy Franklin - Sydney won zero, Hawthorn won another. Same thing with Gary Ablett Jr - even in his absence, the Cats won another flag. Saying you are in it for the premierships is cool and all - but recruiting high profile players - "Top 5 Players" (no way that's true by the way) is not really the way to get them. Good drafting and methodical player development processes get you there.

Also I see it a lot this argument that the locker room won’t be happy that someone else is brought in on more money than them...

Yeah - most players are pretty happy when other players get good contracts. I'm not concerned about the 'locker room' (that's very American by the way) at all.

The Butters money required is big, but he’s worth it. If they club thinks they can afford him you do it, it takes us one step closer to winning a flag and don’t discount the off field benefits we’ll see by winning that big name signing we never get (usually we watch them go the other way year in year out as of late), one step closer to becoming a destination club, one step closer to drawing in bigger crowds, bigger games, whether we like it or not taking these steps is critical to our future success, the games not fair after all.

Saying it takes us one step closer to 'big crowds, bigger games, being a destination' etc is just all bs. None of that stuff is going to change. The destination clubs are who they are - our new facilities are a great recruiting tool but in 5-years they will be 'middle of the road'. Butters is one player with a unique set of circumstances...it's cool that we think recruiting one player will change everything - if that is true then that player is Sam Darcy - who others will desperately want to play with - and NOT Zac Butters.

Just as an aside - I'm not saying don't get him. I'm basically saying I don't care (it is, in fact, the name of the thread). Don't talk to me about Butters. Talk to me about the development of our players and how we are planning to win regardless of the outcome of one recruitment decision. This isn't basketball where one player can change a team - after all, there are only 5 on the court. It is a totally different beast and a player like Matt Kennedy (as everyone would surely agree) who understands his role and executes it well can be just as useful as adding a 30-possession per game player.

[lemmon]

See - I don't actually care what Geelong do nor do I really consider them too much. When Dangerfield retires half of his highlights will be as a Crow not a Cat. That matters to me - I want my 'great' players to be born and bred, tried and true.

1-player doesn't make a team. If Butters wants to go there (Geelong) - let him. It'll be all the sweeter when he has to put up with Bailey Smith missing targets through the midfield and watching helplessly as the Richards-Sanders-Freijah midfield tears his new team apart down there.

His premiership photos will be in blue and white hoops though.

If Butters came to the Dogs and has the kind of impact that Dangerfield has had at Geelong, I couldn't care less that he spent the first half of his career at Port. It's 2025, we have a national draft and 18 club sides - players aren't 'zoned' anymore.

If one of the AFL's absolutely elite premier mids says he wants to come to our club (and he's only 25), we'd be silly to not do everything we can to get him across the line. Even more so when our own premier midfielder is on the cusp of turning 30 and having one of the quietest years of his career.

I think Freijah, Darcy, Sanders, Richards and co would be over the moon to player with Zac Butters - good players want to have success and play with good players. These guys are pros and winners, they want to play with guys who are going to help them have success. I bet all of those born and bred Geelong types were over the moon when Jeremy Cameron walked in the door in 2021.

[Pedro Sanchez]

Give me Butters in a dogs jumper 8 days a week, 25 hours a day. Full stop.