AFL Clubs are preparing for list sizes to be cut to 35 players next season who do we cut?

[caesar]

There is a headline reporting that AFL clubs are preparing for list sizes to be cut to 35 players next season? so I thought pre-enders with time on their hands might like an exercise in who to cull?

We currently have 44 players on our list so that's a cull of 9 but do we also have to make room for a mandatory uptake in the draft? this would only add to that number, even only taking 2 players in the draft would mean a cut of 11.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Plenty of time yet to make these decisions as we've only played one game. Let's see who'll take their chances with it all on the line.

 

[caesar]

Big R I am very close to yours I have:

Miller
Aarts
Egg
English
Markov
Chol
Rance
Houli, (Soft tissue injuries to finally catch up with him)
Garthwaite
Kmac, (more valuable than Naish and Turner now but not ready to burn possible young future players just yet)
Biggie, (not sure whether I am allowed to cut a player drafted only last year, but new list sizes won't allow for 4 year development players)

Let's hope the list size is something like 38 and not as dramatic as 35.

Who'd want to be a list manager this year.

 

[ToraToraTora]

Trade Cotchin Riewoldt Shank for picks.

 

[DavidSSS]

Yeah, 35 is too small for a list, they must have more to allow for development players as well as injuries.

DS

 

[Tigers of Old]

Trade Cotchin Riewoldt Shank for picks.

Not sure you'd get much at this stage of their careers tbh. More value in keeping them til retirement from a cultural perspective.
That said Hardwick is a Clarkson protege & will have watched closely what's happened with Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis etc. & no doubt these conversations will be happening with Hartley & the brains trust behind closed doors.
Would be tough calls on seasoned stalwarts but time stands still for nobody in the modern (& rapidly changing) game..

 

[zippadeee]

Why wasn't this introduce in 2010 or 2004. When we had king duds
We could've reduced our list to 18.
Why now?
I reckon if you have the funds to run the club with 44 or 45 on the list you should be allowed.
We are apparently a non AFL assisted club. Whatever that means.
Gilligan can't see us.
Hocking is slowly destroying this game.

There's No one i would cut.

 

[tigerdell]

....

I can't see us going to 35 though, 13 reserves is not going to work.

We average 150 odd games missed through injuries a season on each list which means you have almost 7 guys out each week for the entire season if you are having an average year.

So is a reduced list size of 35 based on a statistical curve?
if the median injury is 150 games or 7 players each week, then 2 standard deviations could be 11 players.
This would mean that almost all teams will have the 22 +3 emergencies each week.

The problem with a reduced list size is that it demands first year players to be ready to play some games

 

[momentai]

To get 44 down to 35 and allow for two draftees, 11 would have to go.
If that was to include players who are contracted they would be entitled to be paid out in full, which rather defeats the purpose, Apart from that every player on any list would feel extremely vulnerable and react accordingly.
It won’t happen.
Instead only those players presently uncontracted will be looked at.
As I understand from Oldtigers list, ours are
Aarts
Broad
English
Graham
Garthwaite
Houli
Markov
Miller
Nankervis
Pickett
and Turner, with Rance having retired but kept on the list as a still contracted player.
There are several clubs, I believe Gold Coast is one, which already have more than 44 players on their list who are contracted beyond this season.
As I see it if the AFL were to insist on a reduction to 35 next year, there would be massive contractual difficulties, not to mention clubs planning also thrown into the fire.

Gil has always been a shmoozer. He negotiates solutions. He doesn’t impose them.

So I think it will instead turn out to be 38 players per list for the 2021 season and maybe 35 plus a supplementary list in the years to follow.

In addition to making room for 2 draftees next year, in 2 or so seasons we will have some salary space to reinvest, which very well might see us chase a this year out of contract pie.
If we follow that course 9 presently uncontacted players would have to be let go. Rance has to make up his mind, but if he returns as I think .... maybe only Graham and Pickett are re contracted with Broad with a strong chance of being redrafted.

 

[Stig]

Big R I am very close to yours I have:

Miller
Aarts
Egg
English
Markov
Chol
Rance
Houli, (Soft tissue injuries to finally catch up with him)
Garthwaite
Kmac, (more valuable than Naish and Turner now but not ready to burn possible young future players just yet)
Biggie, (not sure whether I am allowed to cut a player drafted only last year, but new list sizes won't allow for 4 year development players)

Let's hope the list size is something like 38 and not as dramatic as 35.

Who'd want to be a list manager this year.

McIntosh is of interest
Output has steadily decreased since 2016
Needs an improved 2020 to stop trend !

 

[zippadeee]

McIntosh is of interest
Output has steadily decreased since 2016
Needs an improved 2020 to stop trend !

McIntosh will join Freo.
Thats his only chance of getting a senior AFL game
He won't get a game this year

 

[The Mole]

This is a difficult exercise bearing in mind we used 39 players in 2019 which was the most in the league. What happens if we can’t field a team? Can we draw from our VFL side? Will players stay in the VFL or a similar supp list and paid poorly outside the cap or leave to join another team or better paying gigs in country or state leagues elsewhere?

 

[taztiger4]

This is a difficult exercise bearing in mind we used 39 players in 2019 which was the most in the league. What happens if we can’t field a team? Can we draw from our VFL side? Will players stay in the VFL or a similar supp list and paid poorly outside the cap or leave to join another team or better paying gigs in country or state leagues elsewhere?

yep, we used 39 up to the bye & 29 after the bye

 

[Brooklyn Tiger]

So is this just for next season to try and recoup costs or is this going to be the new list size.... This is way too small... I'm not sure what the justification for this is for seasons past 2021. Didn't really hear about reduced list sizes prior to C19. in fact it was more about making the rookie listed players part of the main list.

 

[caesar]

There are several clubs, I believe Gold Coast is one, which already have more than 44 players on their list who are contracted beyond this season.

With he assistance package given to Gold Coast by the AFL Commission in late September Gold Coast have a staggering 51 players on their list.

'The AFL hasn't seen a list this big': Why size matters for the Suns.

Gold Coast will take 51 players into the 2020 season. AFL.com.au journalist Michael Whiting looks at how the Suns are managing their extra players.

www.goldcoastfc.com.au

 

[eZyT]

ive got no issue with people cutting players in May, but im not gonna do it.

I could cut Performing Aarts or Mulga Markov now, and they win this years Norm Smith.

If a week was a long time on footy in the old days,

its at least two long times now.

How many would have trimmed Towner in May of 2017?

they're talking a 20% list cut. It'll be the lowest paid players mostly cut. why not take a 10% paycut (5% nett) across the list and keep everyone employed/playing?

or why not say you can have as many players as you want, as long as they share $9m?

 

[Streak]

or why not say you can have as many players as you want, as long as they share $9m?

This. Just trim the cap and tell the clubs/players to sort it out.

 

[TT33]

The "Average" pay across the AFL is said to be about $350k. If that's the case I don't see the need to cut lists at all.
What should be looked at is a sliding scale of pay cuts for the Highest paid players. Surely the guys who are on $500k up to $1m or more can afford to take a pay cut to accommodate the needs of the lower paid ones.
Imo a sliding scale starting at something like 10% up to 20% for the Highest paid players would be quite equitable.

Let's face it, someone on over $1m is not going to feel as much pain from a pay cut of say $200k as a guy on $80k who gets the bullet from the list.
$800k is something like over 8 times what the "Average weekly wage".
The other thing that needs to be taken into account is the commercial opportunities that are available to the "stars". They can make a swag of money from that. The lesser players have far more limited chances in that regard.

 

[zippadeee]

The AFL has just released a statement
"Due to Richmond's dominance over the last 3 years, we have come to the conclusion, all Richmond home games will be played at Kardinia Park and 6 players will have one of their arms strapped to their body"
Gilligan McLaughlin

 

[AngryAnt]

Hilarious