-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
How many can be cut??
- Thread starter graystar1
- Start date
Disco08 said:
Just remember reading an article a few months back talking about the RFC "cutting the list as deep as the AFL rules will allow".
if we were to do it with just nd picks and allocated psd and rookie picks and assuming we finished 15th ,it would go like this. nd 3 20 36 52 68 75 76 77 78 79 80 etc etc plus psd picks 2 18 34 etc plus more than likely 3 rookie picks. which would be 2 18 34 etc.we may gain a pick out of squence thru a player for pick trade.graystar1 said:
we could delist the whole list but we would be replacing everyone with very late nd picks the majority from pick 68 onwards and with psd and rookie picks.
to me 6 nd picks all kids. 1 psd pick mature player if need be. 3 rookies and any player for player swap that may eventuate.
the claw said:
Claw is it this year that GC get the first 7 picks in the rookie draft? Confirmed its the first 5
2009
Gold Coast to have the capacity to sign 12 x 17 year-olds born in the January – April window (January 1 to April 30, 1992).
Gold Coast also get picks 1-5 in the rookie draft.
Hence why I have said we will need to use some late picks in the ND.
The only limitation I'm aware of is having to pay 92.5% of the TPP.
Given draft picks (other than recycled players nominating a salary) have a fixed salary of about $50-60k per year, you can't clean out too many of you won't reach the minimum
Given draft picks (other than recycled players nominating a salary) have a fixed salary of about $50-60k per year, you can't clean out too many of you won't reach the minimum
The Club can cut as many players as it wants to, as long as they stick within their Salary Cap and Minimum Player Payments, when it comes to getting new players in as well as paying out the culled players.
God Richmond could cut between 25 & 30 of the current playing list, but there is no way you can do that in one year. Its a 3 year plan, I reckon 10 will go this year, 8 each of the next 2 years.
Hopefully, the Recruiting Team have identified the key areas that need to be addressed, after all plenty of PRE have already done it, so it can't be that hard, the hard part will be identifying CORRECTLY the right draft, rookie or PSD pick to fill that gap.
To date the Recruiting area has not exactly covered itself in glory.
God Richmond could cut between 25 & 30 of the current playing list, but there is no way you can do that in one year. Its a 3 year plan, I reckon 10 will go this year, 8 each of the next 2 years.
Hopefully, the Recruiting Team have identified the key areas that need to be addressed, after all plenty of PRE have already done it, so it can't be that hard, the hard part will be identifying CORRECTLY the right draft, rookie or PSD pick to fill that gap.
To date the Recruiting area has not exactly covered itself in glory.
the claw said:
Sounds like a good plan
we are already a rookie short
with Bowden's retirement we can now select 2 rookies.
I'd cut Sylvester: that's 3
I would upgrade Nahas and Browne: that would be 5 rookie spots.
we need 6 kids in the national draft and a Pre-season draft pick.
so we should look at 12 players incoming
We are in for a minimum of 2 years of absolute pain until we rid ourselves of the crap on our list.
Being realistic this year i would remove
Delist
Johnson
Bowden
Pettifer
Polak
Brown
Richardson
Sylvester(rookie) doesn't count as a delist
Trade
Tuck
Raines
Mcmahon
Schulz
That would be 10 players removed from our list if trades were to eventuate for that group as well. With Nahas and Browne elevated it would leave us with 8 ND and Pre season picks. I am more than happy to bring in 8 new kids and give them a go rather than watch the same crap run around again and again. Following year would do the same and all of a sudden we have a new list. Sick and tired of watching the same garbage run around each year and give us nothing. The culture needs to be ripped out immediately and until those players leave we have no chance.
Being realistic this year i would remove
Delist
Johnson
Bowden
Pettifer
Polak
Brown
Richardson
Sylvester(rookie) doesn't count as a delist
Trade
Tuck
Raines
Mcmahon
Schulz
That would be 10 players removed from our list if trades were to eventuate for that group as well. With Nahas and Browne elevated it would leave us with 8 ND and Pre season picks. I am more than happy to bring in 8 new kids and give them a go rather than watch the same crap run around again and again. Following year would do the same and all of a sudden we have a new list. Sick and tired of watching the same garbage run around each year and give us nothing. The culture needs to be ripped out immediately and until those players leave we have no chance.
frawleyudud said:
I agree....cut and cut aggressively....not necessarily the same players, but in terms of numbers. Although i doubt there would be much interest at the trade table for those you have mentioned, but if another club were to offer draft picks, i would take em.
DirtyDogTiger said:
Our first pick in the rookie draft will be pick 7 or 8.
I would be taking than extra kid as a late pick in the ND.
Barnzy said:
Why'd he stop there? Why not 42? Tony Shaw has no idea. Was possibly the worst coach ever. How does he get a gig as a commentator? Always amazes me.
Most teams could list 15 or so names as possible delistings who might not be big losses. Thats not really the point though. The point is who replaces them. No team ever is going to replace 15 players in one season for 15 new, untried recruits. So let's ignore Tony Shaw's silly meaningless comments.
Id like to see Hughes given one more year under a new coach. Not sure if i feel the same for JON....he just doesnt look like being able to play football.
SCOOP said:
Well that's a matter of opinion I guess. The point I am making is its not just about cutting players, its about the plan of attack in terms of replacing those players. On this basis I think saying we need to to get rid of18 players is pointless and simply attention grabbing.
tha8ball said:
It's really weird. Players who are drafted obviously show they can play. I wonder how culture, personality, communication, development, support etc affect future development once they arrive. I'd love to see JON make it but I doubt, after all this time, if that would happen at Tigerland.
