Tbh I’m also hoping the club hold Merrett to his contract this year as well, just to be funny.
Swagger
It is my understanding that the thing Essendon refused to do last year under any circumstances, is now a really good idea.
8 Likes
Lol. Exactly.
Dumb ■■■■■ running our club.
What a great exercise this has been. I hope everyone who wanted to keep him around is happy with how it’s gone.
11 Likes
Totally worth it.
Now everyone knows not to fk with us and to take us seriously cos we are tough.
4 Likes
We sure showed Hawthorn!
3 Likes
Yep. Keeping him was always a mistake. We were just a hard NO. It didn’t seem like we were prepared to negotiate at all , other than just saying add another 1st.
I wish we’d said 'keep Henry and pick 22. Give us 10, 2026 1st and 2027 1st. Still three 1st rounders, but more usable to us.
At least we looked tough - and now we look stupid
2 Likes
Another dumb decision to add to our list of trade deal mistakes. Some of our notable recent ones (some of which are hindsight hero calls)
- Not walking away from the Shiel trade and trading away two firsts in very strong drafts.
- Not trading Daniher for what reportedly could have been pick 9 / Papley and Swans 2020 first.
- Rejecting pretty strong offers for the Hobbs and Tsatas picks.
6 Likes
I’m interested in what you’re told but can’t pass on. The real juicy stuff
1 Like
Jon Ralph says that Gold Coast are telling Bailey Humphry ‘You’re not going anywhere, we don’t care’, coming from the club’s footy boss and the CEO. Referred to it as a Zach Merrett-style line-in-the-sand approach.
Gold Coast’s list boss also spoke with Twomey on Gettable (I will get to it with a summary), but basically said the same that he is a contracted player and not going anywhere.
1 Like
Brutal. Humphry is under contract until the end of 2028.
Well he did sign the contract.
6 Likes
From memory, we were waiting on Sydney to trade Paley to Carlton and then take their pick 9 and whatever they got from the Blues. As the Papley trade never happened it forced Sydney to low ball the Daniher trade. I think we were asking for Heeny?
Yeah, totally. Just a ■■■■ situation for club and player now that he wants out and has 2.5 years left. I wouldn’t be all that keen to trade him right now either if i was Gold Coast, because he’s worth half of what he was this time last year.
He’s worth what Dees are prepared to play, they were happy to pay 2x firsts last year.
Well if we show something in 2027 - maybe the timing will be better for us to swoop on Humphry who may do a Merrett and essentially force GCS’s hand to let a trade take place, albeit for less currencey
1 Like
My niece was friends with Bailey at the time he signed that contract. I remember her saying back then that he wasn’t keen to stay on the GC long term even back then but he was young and couldn’t say no to the money.
2 Likes
The way it was, although I’m sure there are others who will dispute it, was Sydney were waiting on us to agree to release Daniher to them as the first Domino that needed to fall. If we agreed to release him they THEN were prepared to trade Papley to Carlton and would have traded the two first founders to us.
But we didn’t want picks, we wanted players. Because we were so close to a flag apparently and didn’t want to take our medicine. Like pretty much always.
2 Likes