Yeah, all the best CBH, been great coaching against you!
Re the 16 teams. First off I would look to try and fill the 2 vacancies and keep it an 18 team comp. if we don’t get sufficient interest then the alternative is to condense down to 16 teams and as proposed a mini draft of sorts to allocate out the players from those 2 teams that would be disbanded. Would that mean list sizes (and possibly keeper numbers) would expand?
Would have to think about a 16 man comp, would we just draft from those 2 teams in a mini draft? I think new coaches should have a proven Blitz track record. More interaction = better comp. CBH’s draft write ups will be sorely missed.
Some interesting calls in there. Not sure I agree with a few, but there’s always some dispute with CD’s decisions.
Both Horne-Francis and Daicos being mids only might be of interest to those with early picks in the draft.
And I have to laugh at the list of key players for Geelong. Those five must have a combined age of 150+ years, and they haven’t even listed Selwood! Lol, how ancient is that playing list!? And as an offshoot of that, how did CD decide that Jordan Clarke is a mid-only ?
Anyway, it’s nice that it’s starting to fire up again. We’ll start making some list decisions in a few weeks. Still inclined to break up the squad, rebuild it and hopefully aid some sides that didn’t make finals. But I’ll need to know if we’re sticking with 18 clubs before anything else can happen.
And if we do go to 16, I’d be inclined to drop those playing lists straight into the normal draft. Could be an interesting first round or two with established players and new draftees mixed in.
While i agree it would make the first round more interesting i think it would be better to have those players in a separate draft based on ladder position with no trading for ladder position shifts allowed.
That way the best players will go to the teams that need them, not to the strongest teams.
I don’t really feel strongly one way or the other about how many coaches we have but probably leaning more towards 16.
Some of those positional changes are laughable but you can say that most years i guess.
Happy with either decision re keeping 18 teams or feasting on the carcasses with 16 teams. Agree with CB and DtD that I think it should be done via a separate mini draft with no pick trading if we were to condense though.
Poses an interesting question about list or keeper sizes, but if the intent of the consolidation is to improve the free agent pool then we’d be better off holding at 30 for list sizes and probably 20 for keepers, although think there could be more scope for an increase on keepers, albeit by only one or two rather than a significant number.
I’ve thought about it a bit more and I think I’d be leaning towards 16 teams, and the draft held via a separate mini draft. Each team has 2 picks in reverse ladder order (if they choose not to pass) would be my preference. That way the worst teams would be guaranteed to get the better players and improve their sides and with an improved free agency pool it should hopefully improve competition competitiveness going forwards. I think a big issue is always the bottom coaches spending years down the bottom and eventually losing interest and effort. I’d also be in favour of keeping at 20 keepers for now and list sizes of 30.
Full list of position changes for next season in the table below. There will likely be another handful of changes that the UF team make on top of the champion data positions, but this will be the vast majority. UF only ever add a position.
Still a lot of coaches haven’t given their input or final decision on a 16 man comp. I’ve decided i think 16 coaches has more benefits so it’s a yes from me.
Maybe now would also be a good time for issues or suggestions that could be discussed and possibly implemented for the upcoming season.
I suspect that Red is already chasing 17th and 18th coaches, and may already have a couple . Absolutely no knowledge on my part , though. Just a guess.
I get a distinct feeling that Covid may impact us more (in terms of FF) in 2022 than it did in 20/21. Maybe Omicron blows through so quickly that it comes and goes before the season commences, but if the cricket is any hint then expect to lose lots of players for a few weeks during the year. I’m not sure there’s a solution to that, unless we just adopt an “average” allowance for any players officially missing due to Covid , as per bye weeks.
I was talking to someone from the AFLPA last week. Without saying the exact words I think the AFL are working on avoiding players missing games even if they have Covid - unless they physically can’t play.