Saints explore top up option

[joeyjohnw]

ST KILDA has joined Port Adelaide in exploring the option of adding a top-up player to its list after coming to terms with the loss of banned recruit Jake Carlisle for the 2016 season.
St Kilda would not be certain to take up the option of signing a top-up player, but it is understood the club is keen to have the option.
Thoughts ? Do we need a top up? Any players that could be of use?

[Con Gorozidis]

ST KILDA has joined Port Adelaide in exploring the option of adding a top-up player to its list after coming to terms with the loss of banned recruit Jake Carlisle for the 2016 season.
St Kilda would not be certain to take up the option of signing a top-up player, but it is understood the club is keen to have the option.
Thoughts ? Do we need a top up? Any players that could be of use?

I thought Alan Richardson answered this question very well on radio last week ( see saintbrat's post).
His answer was basically that for fairness sake - affected clubs (us, demons, port) should get a top-up so they can do like for like.
BUT he said for us in 2016 it wasnt really a big deal because we had Dempster, Fisher, Lee down back.
But lets say a club lost a ruck (e.g Ryder) then they should get a top-up because no club can really cover that position.

[Bluthy]

Richo tweeted that they were working with AFL to be able to add another rookie. I don't know if that is what this is referring to or whether they now want an extra fully list player as an option and not upgrade a rookie. A rookie would be the cheapest option for us. It might also be to back Port and Dogs push for an extra player who are genuine finals hope.

[joeyjohnw]

Richo tweeted that they were working with AFL to be able to add another rookie. I don't know if that is what this is referring to or whether they now want an extra fully list player as an option and not upgrade a rookie. A rookie would be the cheapest option for us. It might also be to back Port and Dogs push for an extra player who are genuine finals hope.

I'd be surprised if richo and the club were doing this just to help out old mates ken and beveridge but I also don't exactly see how having an extra b-grade player or oldie on the rookie list of all things will help us as a young team with heaps of talent and players pushing for selection. So its either we have a particular player on our radar or we are just pursuing justice for us and other clubs without actually needing the bonus. The latter looks more likely at this stage , but who knows- we may see something in someone that has us going after it.

[Bluthy]

Richo tweeted that they were working with AFL to be able to add another rookie. I don't know if that is what this is referring to or whether they now want an extra fully list player as an option and not upgrade a rookie. A rookie would be the cheapest option for us. It might also be to back Port and Dogs push for an extra player who are genuine finals hope.

I'd be surprised if richo and the club were doing this just to help out old mates ken and beveridge but I also don't exactly see how having an extra b-grade player or oldie on the rookie list of all things will help us as a young team with heaps of talent and players pushing for selection. So its either we have a particular player on our radar or we are just pursuing justice for us and other clubs without actually needing the bonus. The latter looks more likely at this stage , but who knows- we may see something in someone that has us going after it.

AFL footy is like Survivor or Big Brother. You form alliances that suit you at the time and create some reciprocal back scratching action. If Port and Dogs get on the phone to Finnis or Richo and say "Hey it would really support our push to get another full player if you guys also request it also", its not a hard thing for the club to whip up a letter to the AFL. Latter down the track we can try and call in that favour.

I think we might like to take the risk on another rookie, particularly as we didn't take a lot in the draft this year. Doesn't cost much and you have an outside chance of finding a player.

[ripplug66]

Richo tweeted that they were working with AFL to be able to add another rookie. I don't know if that is what this is referring to or whether they now want an extra fully list player as an option and not upgrade a rookie. A rookie would be the cheapest option for us. It might also be to back Port and Dogs push for an extra player who are genuine finals hope.

I'd be surprised if richo and the club were doing this just to help out old mates ken and beveridge but I also don't exactly see how having an extra b-grade player or oldie on the rookie list of all things will help us as a young team with heaps of talent and players pushing for selection. So its either we have a particular player on our radar or we are just pursuing justice for us and other clubs without actually needing the bonus. The latter looks more likely at this stage , but who knows- we may see something in someone that has us going after it.

AFL footy is like Survivor or Big Brother. You form alliances that suit you at the time and create some reciprocal back scratching action. If Port and Dogs get on the phone to Finnis or Richo and say "Hey it would really support our push to get another full player if you guys also request it also", its not a hard thing for the club to whip up a letter to the AFL. Latter down the track we can try and call in that favour.

I think we might like to take the risk on another rookie, particularly as we didn't take a lot in the draft this year. Doesn't cost much and you have an outside chance of finding a player.

It has to be a player in the system in the last 2 years or a Sandy player based on the Essendon rules and then if he makes it 17 other clubs have as much hope of getting him as us. To me its a waste of at least 70K.

[GrumpyOne]

Richo tweeted that they were working with AFL to be able to add another rookie. I don't know if that is what this is referring to or whether they now want an extra fully list player as an option and not upgrade a rookie. A rookie would be the cheapest option for us. It might also be to back Port and Dogs push for an extra player who are genuine finals hope.

I'd be surprised if richo and the club were doing this just to help out old mates ken and beveridge but I also don't exactly see how having an extra b-grade player or oldie on the rookie list of all things will help us as a young team with heaps of talent and players pushing for selection. So its either we have a particular player on our radar or we are just pursuing justice for us and other clubs without actually needing the bonus. The latter looks more likely at this stage , but who knows- we may see something in someone that has us going after it.

AFL footy is like Survivor or Big Brother. You form alliances that suit you at the time and create some reciprocal back scratching action. If Port and Dogs get on the phone to Finnis or Richo and say "Hey it would really support our push to get another full player if you guys also request it also", its not a hard thing for the club to whip up a letter to the AFL. Latter down the track we can try and call in that favour.

I think we might like to take the risk on another rookie, particularly as we didn't take a lot in the draft this year. Doesn't cost much and you have an outside chance of finding a player.

It has to be a player in the system in the last 2 years or a Sandy player based on the Essendon rules and then if he makes it 17 other clubs have as much hope of getting him as us. To me its a waste of at least 70K.

Why does it have to be by the Essendon rules?

What did we do wrong?

FFS take another rookie. Not expensive, and you never know what they might turn out to be.

Another Milney perhaps?

[ripplug66]

Richo tweeted that they were working with AFL to be able to add another rookie. I don't know if that is what this is referring to or whether they now want an extra fully list player as an option and not upgrade a rookie. A rookie would be the cheapest option for us. It might also be to back Port and Dogs push for an extra player who are genuine finals hope.

I'd be surprised if richo and the club were doing this just to help out old mates ken and beveridge but I also don't exactly see how having an extra b-grade player or oldie on the rookie list of all things will help us as a young team with heaps of talent and players pushing for selection. So its either we have a particular player on our radar or we are just pursuing justice for us and other clubs without actually needing the bonus. The latter looks more likely at this stage , but who knows- we may see something in someone that has us going after it.

AFL footy is like Survivor or Big Brother. You form alliances that suit you at the time and create some reciprocal back scratching action. If Port and Dogs get on the phone to Finnis or Richo and say "Hey it would really support our push to get another full player if you guys also request it also", its not a hard thing for the club to whip up a letter to the AFL. Latter down the track we can try and call in that favour.

I think we might like to take the risk on another rookie, particularly as we didn't take a lot in the draft this year. Doesn't cost much and you have an outside chance of finding a player.

It has to be a player in the system in the last 2 years or a Sandy player based on the Essendon rules and then if he makes it 17 other clubs have as much hope of getting him as us. To me its a waste of at least 70K.

Why does it have to be by the Essendon rules?

What did we do wrong?

FFS take another rookie. Not expensive, and you never know what they might turn out to be.

Another Milney perhaps?

We did nothing wrong at all but I'm guessing, and I think it is reasonable to be a good guess that it will be exactly the same rules. Could be a milney most likely not and will be available to 18 clubs once this milney plays which is unlikely especially if he is a Milney who didn't play a game in his first year. Unfortunately that will be his only year with us unless we draft this previously delisted player or Sandy player. 70k for a Sandy player. At least they will be happy.

[borderbarry]

Who is out there that did not get picked in the draft or rookie draft that we would want as a rookie? Maybe the club have someone in mind.

[saintspremiers]

Once again, the stupidity of the AFL is shown up again. They should've thought of this issue and announced compensation for us the Dogs and Port at the same time as helping their lovechild protected species club Essendrug.

In reality, Essendon should have ZERO top ups this season. They should have been deregistered for the season and actually punished as a club for doping.

[ripplug66]

Once again, the stupidity of the AFL is shown up again. They should've thought of this issue and announced compensation for us the Dogs and Port at the same time as helping their lovechild protected species club Essendrug.

In reality, Essendon should have ZERO top ups this season. They should have been deregistered for the season and actually punished as a club for doping.

You are living in fantasy land. That would cost the AFL millions of dollars and probably then see the end of a poorer club or two. It would also mean no hope of ever buying Etihad earlier. Guess who would be the first to complain then? People can dislike the decision but it was always going to happen. As for top ups to the other sides well we should probably be entitled but even if we got it surely we wouldn't use it.

[magnifisaint]

Once again, the stupidity of the AFL is shown up again. They should've thought of this issue and announced compensation for us the Dogs and Port at the same time as helping their lovechild protected species club Essendrug.

In reality, Essendon should have ZERO top ups this season. They should have been deregistered for the season and actually punished as a club for doping.

you're right