The Other Games

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dejavoodoo44
    replied
    I find it mildly amusing, that late last season Channel 7 was very sick of Essendon being non-competitive in prime time Thursday and Friday games, but in the upcoming round one, Essendon have been given the Friday night slot. They've already got a fairly extensive injury toll and Hawthorn a short priced favourites to beat them. Perhaps a better use of the slot would have been Sydney v Brisbane?

    Leave a comment:


  • imuninformedtwo
    replied
    There’s a hundred good micro arguments and nuances when it comes to contracts and salary cap management but there’s also this.

    NWM, TDK and Flanders are on a combined $4.6m a year.

    Chad, Gulden and Heeney are on $3.3-3.4m.

    And Jack Silvagni is on approx the same money at Tom McCartin and more than Blakey.

    That’s a joke.

    Leave a comment:


  • BRS328
    replied
    Originally posted by dejavoodoo44
    I'm really not sure who I'd prefer to win the Collingwood v St Kilda game. On the one hand, I'd really quite like Collingwood to slide way down the table, but on the other hand, I will be death riding St Kilda this year.

    There's two main reasons for that death riding. Firstly, they seem hell bent on ruining the academy system and have been talking some absolute crap in pursuit of that aim. And secondly, I think they've got it wrong, in the massive amount of money that they're throwing at some players. For instance, Wanganeen-Milera is obviously a very good player, but with a salary of $2 million, is he somewhere between a $600,000 to $900,000 a year better player than Errol, Chad or Isaac? And while De Koning could develop into an elite ruck, is he worth around $600,000 a year more than Grundy? I think the answer to both questions is no. And apparently those aren't their only huge contracts. For instance, the AFL site reported earlier this year, that in season 2025, there was one player with a salary in the $1,400,000 to $1,600,000 range, who didn’t play a single game. That player was almost certainly Max King.

    So, it seems to me, that if you're greatly overpaying a cohort of players, then you have to either underpay a significant number of other players, or fill your list with bottom end talent rather than mid-range talent. Which might work for a while, if the elite are really firing and inspiring the rest of the list. But that needs the lesser players to win hard balls, pressure the opposition constantly, run the hard yards, etc. And I definitely think that's less likely to happen, if some of thosethe Saints players are thinking, "stuff it, you're getting paid four times more than me, you can win your own ball."

    So, I would quite like St Kilda's season to degenerate into an acrimonious shambles, but still, do I really want to cheer on Collingwood?
    You would need to look at the individual contracts because while the numbers are big, I suspect a number of these will be front ended due to the fact that the Saints had been “banking” salary cap space by using the full salary cap in recent years. Essendon did this McKay from North Melbourne by paying over $1 million in the first year with the balance being spread over remaining years of the contract. Inevitably it catches up with you when other players at the club put their hands out in future contracts
    Last edited by BRS328; 9 March 2026, 03:52 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lwjoyner
    replied
    great write up re st kilda. glad tthey loss pity it was the pies that won. 2 much bitching about the northern academies and too much paid for players they PURCHASED with inflated prices. Also a S..T job they di on the Giants back man. Chased him offered a decent salary and an upgrade, he accepts and then they reneg

    Leave a comment:


  • imuninformedtwo
    replied
    Lol St Kilda. They forgot among all their whinging, pissing off the salary cap against the wall, rehiring a dud coach, to actually draft players who can kick the ball.

    Leave a comment:


  • dejavoodoo44
    replied
    Now that I think of it, the solution to the above dilemma, is, go the Matildas!

    Leave a comment:


  • dejavoodoo44
    replied
    I'm really not sure who I'd prefer to win the Collingwood v St Kilda game. On the one hand, I'd really quite like Collingwood to slide way down the table, but on the other hand, I will be death riding St Kilda this year.

    There's two main reasons for that death riding. Firstly, they seem hell bent on ruining the academy system and have been talking some absolute crap in pursuit of that aim. And secondly, I think they've got it wrong, in the massive amount of money that they're throwing at some players. For instance, Wanganeen-Milera is obviously a very good player, but with a salary of $2 million, is he somewhere between a $600,000 to $900,000 a year better player than Errol, Chad or Isaac? And while De Koning could develop into an elite ruck, is he worth around $600,000 a year more than Grundy? I think the answer to both questions is no. And apparently those aren't their only huge contracts. For instance, the AFL site reported earlier this year, that in season 2025, there was one player with a salary in the $1,400,000 to $1,600,000 range, who didn’t play a single game. That player was almost certainly Max King.

    So, it seems to me, that if you're greatly overpaying a cohort of players, then you have to either underpay a significant number of other players, or fill your list with bottom end talent rather than mid-range talent. Which might work for a while, if the elite are really firing and inspiring the rest of the list. But that needs the lesser players to win hard balls, pressure the opposition constantly, run the hard yards, etc. And I definitely think that's less likely to happen, if some of those players are thinking, "stuff it, you're getting paid four times more than me, you can win your own ball."

    So, I would quite like St Kilda's season to degenerate into an acrimonious shambles, but still, do I really want to cheer on Collingwood?

    Leave a comment:


  • KSAS
    replied
    It add further insult to iinjury, Brisbane has also confirmed Hugh McCluggage will also miss next week with a calf strain.

    So thete's a potential of 5 players out depending how they go at the tribunal, assuming they'll make appeals

    McCluuggage & Harris are definite outs ( can't se hin beating the ban).

    Bailey & Gardiner might be a outside chance .
    Question mark with Logan Morris broken hand.

    Nevertheless, beware the wounded Lions. Last night's game was a classic.


    Leave a comment:


  • dejavoodoo44
    replied
    Originally posted by imuninformedtwo
    So the MRO has given Harris 3 weeks, and the other two a week each. Happy days.
    Mitch Cleary has also reported that Logan Morris played with a broken hand. So you'd assume that he's in some doubt as well?

    Leave a comment:


  • imuninformedtwo
    replied
    So the MRO has given Harris 3 weeks, and the other two a week each. Happy days.

    Leave a comment:


  • KSAS
    replied
    Originally posted by dejavoodoo44

    If the Heeney suspension from a while back is anything to go by, Andrews shouldn't be playing next week and possibly a week or two after that. I'm sure that the Lions will try to argue that he didn't mean to hit Jones in the head, but the precedent has been set, for the tribunal to say, "well, you threw your arm back, when you knew that he was behind you..."
    Yes good point. Heeney copped a week for accidental hit on St Kilda's Webster in 2024, when he went to push off him (rather than a round arm) but Webster slipped at crucial moment and got collected on the nose which drew blood (no concussion).

    On that basis, Harris should get 3 weeks but we know how consistently inconsistent the Tribunal is!

    P.S. I thought Jai Newcombe was extremely lucky to get off his 1 match man for that sling tackle. Seems so outcome based.

    Leave a comment:


  • imuninformedtwo
    replied
    Gardiner was lucky he didn’t quite make contact, or else a week or two easily. And the Harris one is no contest. At best it’ll be careless, which would be two weeks.

    Leave a comment:


  • dejavoodoo44
    replied
    Originally posted by KSAS
    Andrew Harris, Zac Bsiley & Darcy Gardner will all come under for MR0 scrutiny for head high contacts. Consensus is that all 3 will face suspension, particularly Harris with his round arm causing concussion to Arty Jones .2-3 week suspension likely.
    If the Heeney suspension from a while back is anything to go by, Andrews shouldn't be playing next week and possibly a week or two after that. I'm sure that the Lions will try to argue that he didn't mean to hit Jones in the head, but the precedent has been set, for the tribunal to say, "well, you threw your arm back, when you knew that he was behind you..."

    I haven't seen the other two incidents, but from the way that some commentators are talking, it seems that the Bailey one was a deliberate elbow. So, it'll be interesting how that is judged. Will they deem that it was malicious and give him a week or two? Or will they just continue on down the path of: no concussion, no problem?
    Last edited by dejavoodoo44; 8 March 2026, 10:09 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • KSAS
    replied
    Andrew Harris, Zac Bsiley & Darcy Gardner will all come under for MR0 scrutiny for head high contacts. Consensus is that all 3 will face suspension, particularly Harris with his round arm causing concussion to Arty Jones .2-3 week suspension likely.

    Leave a comment:


  • dejavoodoo44
    replied
    I'm not watching the game, but checking the score, I was surprised to see that the Giants kicked eight goals in the first quarter, to lead 51-32 at the first break. I suppose I'm going for the Giants in that one, as I have a long-term enmity towards Hawthorn. Well, I also have that towards the Giants, but it’s stronger in regards to Hawthorn.

    And after Petracca tore it up last night, I'm vaguely interested in how Clayton Oliver goes. Since the Giants got him for a very modest trade price, I had it in my head that he was older than Petracca and almost on his last legs, but he's only 28. Could be a big bargain.

    Leave a comment:

Working...