Latest Result

Grand Final MCG
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 • 12:00 WST
West Coast Collingwood
11.13 (79) 11.8 (74)
Game Focus

Why the Eagles NEED to mtach FA offers.

The list and its future

Moderator: DALBY

Why the Eagles NEED to mtach FA offers.

Postby Crazy Dazz on Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:28 pm

Putting aside the individuals concerned, I believe that wherever possible, the Eagles need to match these offers and force a trade.

The attitude of the Eagles seems to be one of "we're above such things, if a players wants to leave we wish them well."
I don't disagree with that sentiment, however I believe it has other consequences.

1) It leaves us open to getting shafted by the compensation system. As happened with Selwood, we often don't qualify for the pick we think we deserve. Furthermore, especially this year, even our in-round compo picks are at the end due to finishing 1st. There's a good chance we'll get a 2nd round pick for Lycett (which will be somewhere in the 40's.) Gaff at the trade table would be worth a top 5 pick, whereas we'll likely get something like pick 20.

2) It allows the poaching club to get the player for nothing. That is not only unspeakably unfair, but it encourages this type of poaching, and makes clubs believe that we are an easy target.

3) It encourages this obsession with qualifying for FA. There is clearly a growing attitude amongst players that they should "stay loyal" for 8 years, and then it's a free-for-all. It kicks in much earlier, because a player who has completed 6 years, will only sign a 2 year deal "to keep his options open." I believe that if a player wants to go home, or go to a club that can afford to pay them more, or go somewhere for more opportunity, then they should go. But an an opportune time, and in exchange for fair compensation. The Eagles have a good history of making deals and even de-listing to get a player to their preferred destination. But why should a club make a fair offer, when they can wait a couple of years and get the player for free?

Now I appreciate that some offers may be very difficult and risky to match. I don't want us to go insane, but at the same time we need to revert from our default position.

I also question whether matching is as risky as some might think? In reality what is most likely to happen, is that the bidding club is forced to trade, and the pressure is on them. A Club that walked away from an offer would lose a lot of credibility.
And we don't need to play hardball in the trade.

Of course, if the fucking AFL would simply fix the compensation system, that would solve most of these issues.
Crazy Dazz
EFH Legend
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 5:18 pm

Re: Why the Eagles NEED to mtach FA offers.

Postby MrWoollie on Sat Oct 06, 2018 5:17 pm

I think we need to make a call on each offer.

It seems that the Selwood trade worked like...
1. Selwood accepts an offer from Geelong.
2. We decide to match or not; in this case not, expecting a 2nd round compo.
3. AFL decide to give a 3rd round compo, screwing us badly.
4. Club is outraged but can do nothing. Lots of noise about we would have matched if we thought it would be this bad.

Why does it seem to work that you don't know the compo before deciding whether to match? Surely that is a big part in your determination.

Lycett. Big danger of the compo being end of 2nd round. That's just shite for a guy who is a fully developed, #1 Premiership ruckman. Who is going as the 'takeover from Ryder/be #1 now or very soon' ruck. Solid 1st round for me. Match and trade.
Gaff. Not so sure. Mainly because we probably don't have the salary cap space to actually honour it if Norf say no. We will certainly be royally screwed by the compo system, even more then the Hawks on Buddy. Not sure what we can do about it though.
2017 sponsor of #6 - Elliot Yeo. 2017 B&F, 2017 EFH POTY.
User avatar
EFH Hall of Fame
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 3:53 am
Location: Peak District National Park

Re: Why the Eagles NEED to mtach FA offers.

Postby Hamburger on Sat Oct 06, 2018 6:18 pm

As far as I can see, there is nothing to lose by matching the offer for Lycett.
Is there anyone better than him available as a replacement? Maybe Lobb? But certainly not Roughhead or Hickey, neither of whom could get regular games this season for their current sides.
If we match the offer we keep him do we not? unless Port negotiate with us to provide an incentive to an agreed trade. We can agree if we think what they offer is fair. And it has to/will be better than what the AFL will toss us as compensation.
If Port bail and he stays on our list...well he will be the #1 ruckman on the list for most of next season. If we pay $600k per year, then ok perhaps he is worth it. In other years maybe not but this is a year where demand is high and quality of supply is low. We are currently paying a lot more than that to a ruckman who will have missed 2 years of the last 3.
Suspect that Lycett is doing this because he is in effect our current #1 ruck and he is getting a hell of a lot less than the the injured guy. If he is happy to move to Adelaide on $600k a year I expect he would be happy with the same offer here.
If we don't match the offer we are stating we don't rate him all that highly.
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:17 pm
Location: Bassendean sur le Mer

Re: Why the Eagles NEED to mtach FA offers.

Postby Peter_Melesso_Fanclub on Sat Oct 06, 2018 6:28 pm

MrWoollie wrote:Why does it seem to work that you don't know the compo before deciding whether to match? Surely that is a big part in your determination.

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:05 pm

Return to Drafts and Trading

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests