European 15s Draft

[Torpedo10]

Comeone Holz, Couldn't you put the AFL draft up to 30? Then we would have 40 players. We don't have as many things at our disposal as they do. I think that 40 is a fair number. Also because we are picking from most of the teams there is more chance of injuries. I think that a squad of 40 iis the fairest. So your saying that we will do the National draft and PSD draft next year( +10 players) and then have a normal draft where there is 5 rounds (+5 players) but you would have to delist 10 players before all the drafts. Then at the end of all the drafts next year we have a trade week or 10 days. You could always pick up a player you wanted but had to delist him in the PSD if you have a high pick. I think what I just said would be fair.

At this stage i would like to keep it to 35 as that was the rules and i for one have been planning for 35 players thats why i have been picking up guys i know will play but not necessarily be good DT players. Would you be happy if i allowed all players left to be picked in the rookie draft, i think that a fair compromise.

In terms of the delisting thing next year im leaning towards 35 players and possible 5 rookie spots. Im thinking its best if you go through the trade period and the national draft and at that stage cut players. Therfore you can only enter the last draft if you have less than 35 or 40 players.

Im thinking of keeping the draft all remaining players each year so if you want a player you can get him, any opinions on this.

I think that you should be able to cut as many players as you want. I agree with the last line of your post Holz. As we are starting with 35 players. So lets say you have 35 players and you finish the 2012 season. We have 10 rounds of picking AFL players we didn't pick in the 2011 draft( +10 players) then the National draft( +5) then we have to delist 8+ players. What does rookie listing players do? I think that it should limit them to a certain amount of games, Let's say 10? If we do the process I said above every year we would keep advancing 5 players each year. I think that would be fair.

[LaHug]

I don't feel the need to increase list numbers any year. 35 each year makes sense to me. Increasing list numbers does not.

[Torpedo10]

If we did that LaHug we would have to delist 15 players at the least.Holz, What would be the order of events? Ithink this would be a good order. End of 2012 season- Find out picks of all drafts(AFL, National, PSD)- Trade week( 7 days)- AFL draft( 10 Rds/picks)- National draft( 5 Rds/picks)- PSD( 5 Rds/picks)- Trade week-(7 days).

[Holz]

If we did that LaHug we would have to delist 15 players at the least.Holz, What would be the order of events? Ithink this would be a good order. End of 2012 season- Find out picks of all drafts(AFL, National, PSD)- Trade week( 7 days)- AFL draft( 10 Rds/picks)- National draft( 5 Rds/picks)- PSD( 5 Rds/picks)- Trade week-(7 days).

i thnk you may have interpreted what i meant, each year 5 rounds of the national draft and 5 rounds of all the players left, so if you dont have any retiring players you will have 40 players after the national draft. You will need to cut 5 ( or im thinking or rookie listing 5 players) if you cut 6 players you will get one pick in the rookie/ afl players left draft if you cut 10 you can pick 5 if you cut 11 you will have a squad of 29 can only pick 5 and will be left with 34 players.

Therefore if you de-list players people can pick them up in the draft

[nostradamus]

The reason why i'd liek to see more players drafted is because i don't want the next cash cow to be sitting on the bench and not be in anyones squad.

i think that's a good thing, we don't want it to be too easy.  I will keep it as it is a cap of 35, next year if you want to pick up the rookies or get that guy not in anyone squad you will have to cut some players from your team.

People say they want it to resemble an afl squad but they need 22 players and we only need 15 so i would say keeping it at 35 would be equivalent to the afl system. Im thinking either next year keep it to a strict 35 cap or 35 + 5 rookie listed players that can play if you have long term injuries.

I think its better to have to cut players than just build up huge squads , you will have to make hard choices example do i cut this rookie who hasnt played yet but could be good or this guy who has been in the system for years and is only averaging 75

Glad to hear it Holz.....good stuff mate  ;)

I think it could create interesting opportunities for trading say i have 3 extra players but i dont want to cut anyone so i could try a trade like

e.g. Priddis + 1st round pick + Harry Taylor for Rockliff

l think this idea is fraught with danger holz.....l think we should only trade like for like e.g. 1 for 1, 2 for 2, 3for 3 etc
....otherwise we will end up with unbalanced squads, that then could be affected disproportionately by injury, suspension etc.

[Holz]

The reason why i'd liek to see more players drafted is because i don't want the next cash cow to be sitting on the bench and not be in anyones squad.

i think that's a good thing, we don't want it to be too easy.  I will keep it as it is a cap of 35, next year if you want to pick up the rookies or get that guy not in anyone squad you will have to cut some players from your team.

People say they want it to resemble an afl squad but they need 22 players and we only need 15 so i would say keeping it at 35 would be equivalent to the afl system. Im thinking either next year keep it to a strict 35 cap or 35 + 5 rookie listed players that can play if you have long term injuries.

I think its better to have to cut players than just build up huge squads , you will have to make hard choices example do i cut this rookie who hasnt played yet but could be good or this guy who has been in the system for years and is only averaging 75

Glad to hear it Holz.....good stuff mate  ;)

I think it could create interesting opportunities for trading say i have 3 extra players but i dont want to cut anyone so i could try a trade like

e.g. Priddis + 1st round pick + Harry Taylor for Rockliff

l think this idea is fraught with danger holz.....l think we should only trade like for like e.g. 1 for 1, 2 for 2, 3for 3 etc
....otherwise we will end up with unbalanced squads, that then could be affected disproportionately by injury, suspension etc.

well we will all have 35-40 players in the end. Stupid trades will be vetoed but the example above i feel thats a fair trade maybee slighty better for the person giving up rockliff, but i cant see it destroyign any teams.

If i have alot of mids and no backs i see no harm in say Shiel + Priddis for Lids

[nostradamus]

The reason why i'd liek to see more players drafted is because i don't want the next cash cow to be sitting on the bench and not be in anyones squad.

i think that's a good thing, we don't want it to be too easy.  I will keep it as it is a cap of 35, next year if you want to pick up the rookies or get that guy not in anyone squad you will have to cut some players from your team.

People say they want it to resemble an afl squad but they need 22 players and we only need 15 so i would say keeping it at 35 would be equivalent to the afl system. Im thinking either next year keep it to a strict 35 cap or 35 + 5 rookie listed players that can play if you have long term injuries.

I think its better to have to cut players than just build up huge squads , you will have to make hard choices example do i cut this rookie who hasnt played yet but could be good or this guy who has been in the system for years and is only averaging 75

Glad to hear it Holz.....good stuff mate  ;)

I think it could create interesting opportunities for trading say i have 3 extra players but i dont want to cut anyone so i could try a trade like

e.g. Priddis + 1st round pick + Harry Taylor for Rockliff

l think this idea is fraught with danger holz.....l think we should only trade like for like e.g. 1 for 1, 2 for 2, 3for 3 etc
....otherwise we will end up with unbalanced squads, that then could be affected disproportionately by injury, suspension etc.

well we will all have 35-40 players in the end. Stupid trades will be vetoed but the example above i feel thats a fair trade maybee slighty better for the person giving up rockliff, but i cant see it destroyign any teams.

If i have alot of mids and no backs i see no harm in say Shiel + Priddis for Lids

l understand your point of view Holz, but l still think it undermines the integrity of our lists. l reckon if we wanted t do something like you suggest why not trade Shiel + Priddis for Lids + Relton (extreme example but you get my point), thus keeping all player lists to the same number

[Holz]

The reason why i'd liek to see more players drafted is because i don't want the next cash cow to be sitting on the bench and not be in anyones squad.

i think that's a good thing, we don't want it to be too easy.  I will keep it as it is a cap of 35, next year if you want to pick up the rookies or get that guy not in anyone squad you will have to cut some players from your team.

People say they want it to resemble an afl squad but they need 22 players and we only need 15 so i would say keeping it at 35 would be equivalent to the afl system. Im thinking either next year keep it to a strict 35 cap or 35 + 5 rookie listed players that can play if you have long term injuries.

I think its better to have to cut players than just build up huge squads , you will have to make hard choices example do i cut this rookie who hasnt played yet but could be good or this guy who has been in the system for years and is only averaging 75

Glad to hear it Holz.....good stuff mate  ;)

I think it could create interesting opportunities for trading say i have 3 extra players but i dont want to cut anyone so i could try a trade like

e.g. Priddis + 1st round pick + Harry Taylor for Rockliff

l think this idea is fraught with danger holz.....l think we should only trade like for like e.g. 1 for 1, 2 for 2, 3for 3 etc
....otherwise we will end up with unbalanced squads, that then could be affected disproportionately by injury, suspension etc.

well we will all have 35-40 players in the end. Stupid trades will be vetoed but the example above i feel thats a fair trade maybee slighty better for the person giving up rockliff, but i cant see it destroyign any teams.

If i have alot of mids and no backs i see no harm in say Shiel + Priddis for Lids

l understand your point of view Holz, but l still think it undermines the integrity of our lists. l reckon if we wanted t do something like you suggest why not trade Shiel + Priddis for Lids + Relton (extreme example but you get my point), thus keeping all player lists to the same number

yeah thats what normally happens when you need to trade 2 for 2, its likely i will just delist the player anyway so i dont see the point. Its only if we had no player cap that i think 2-2 is necessary

[nostradamus]

The reason why i'd liek to see more players drafted is because i don't want the next cash cow to be sitting on the bench and not be in anyones squad.

i think that's a good thing, we don't want it to be too easy.  I will keep it as it is a cap of 35, next year if you want to pick up the rookies or get that guy not in anyone squad you will have to cut some players from your team.

People say they want it to resemble an afl squad but they need 22 players and we only need 15 so i would say keeping it at 35 would be equivalent to the afl system. Im thinking either next year keep it to a strict 35 cap or 35 + 5 rookie listed players that can play if you have long term injuries.

I think its better to have to cut players than just build up huge squads , you will have to make hard choices example do i cut this rookie who hasnt played yet but could be good or this guy who has been in the system for years and is only averaging 75

Glad to hear it Holz.....good stuff mate  ;)

I think it could create interesting opportunities for trading say i have 3 extra players but i dont want to cut anyone so i could try a trade like

e.g. Priddis + 1st round pick + Harry Taylor for Rockliff

l think this idea is fraught with danger holz.....l think we should only trade like for like e.g. 1 for 1, 2 for 2, 3for 3 etc
....otherwise we will end up with unbalanced squads, that then could be affected disproportionately by injury, suspension etc.

well we will all have 35-40 players in the end. Stupid trades will be vetoed but the example above i feel thats a fair trade maybee slighty better for the person giving up rockliff, but i cant see it destroyign any teams.

If i have alot of mids and no backs i see no harm in say Shiel + Priddis for Lids

l understand your point of view Holz, but l still think it undermines the integrity of our lists. l reckon if we wanted t do something like you suggest why not trade Shiel + Priddis for Lids + Relton (extreme example but you get my point), thus keeping all player lists to the same number

l think we're going to have to agree to differ Holz ........l don't want you to think that l'm just trying to prove myself right or get my own way though, l really do believe that we need to have equal squads and if we don't it'll come back and bite us on the bum later. Will say no more on the matter  :-X

[Torpedo10]

Holzl, If you rookie list a player what does it do and mean?

[Holz]

Holzl, If you rookie list a player what does it do and mean?

im thinking they stay on your squad list so knowone can take them except you cant play them this year. Next year you can put them in your team and put others on the rookie list. Im thinking no need to use a pick to do so like in the afl.

[Holz]

The reason why i'd liek to see more players drafted is because i don't want the next cash cow to be sitting on the bench and not be in anyones squad.

i think that's a good thing, we don't want it to be too easy.  I will keep it as it is a cap of 35, next year if you want to pick up the rookies or get that guy not in anyone squad you will have to cut some players from your team.

People say they want it to resemble an afl squad but they need 22 players and we only need 15 so i would say keeping it at 35 would be equivalent to the afl system. Im thinking either next year keep it to a strict 35 cap or 35 + 5 rookie listed players that can play if you have long term injuries.

I think its better to have to cut players than just build up huge squads , you will have to make hard choices example do i cut this rookie who hasnt played yet but could be good or this guy who has been in the system for years and is only averaging 75

Glad to hear it Holz.....good stuff mate  ;)

I think it could create interesting opportunities for trading say i have 3 extra players but i dont want to cut anyone so i could try a trade like

e.g. Priddis + 1st round pick + Harry Taylor for Rockliff

l think this idea is fraught with danger holz.....l think we should only trade like for like e.g. 1 for 1, 2 for 2, 3for 3 etc
....otherwise we will end up with unbalanced squads, that then could be affected disproportionately by injury, suspension etc.

well we will all have 35-40 players in the end. Stupid trades will be vetoed but the example above i feel thats a fair trade maybee slighty better for the person giving up rockliff, but i cant see it destroyign any teams.

If i have alot of mids and no backs i see no harm in say Shiel + Priddis for Lids

l understand your point of view Holz, but l still think it undermines the integrity of our lists. l reckon if we wanted t do something like you suggest why not trade Shiel + Priddis for Lids + Relton (extreme example but you get my point), thus keeping all player lists to the same number

l think we're going to have to agree to differ Holz ........l don't want you to think that l'm just trying to prove myself right or get my own way though, l really do believe that we need to have equal squads and if we don't it'll come back and bite us on the bum later. Will say no more on the matter  :-X

i will put it up to a vote before we trade next year than. I dont see the point of it, but if a majority agree with you i have no problem making the rule.

[nostradamus]

The reason why i'd liek to see more players drafted is because i don't want the next cash cow to be sitting on the bench and not be in anyones squad.

i think that's a good thing, we don't want it to be too easy.  I will keep it as it is a cap of 35, next year if you want to pick up the rookies or get that guy not in anyone squad you will have to cut some players from your team.

People say they want it to resemble an afl squad but they need 22 players and we only need 15 so i would say keeping it at 35 would be equivalent to the afl system. Im thinking either next year keep it to a strict 35 cap or 35 + 5 rookie listed players that can play if you have long term injuries.

I think its better to have to cut players than just build up huge squads , you will have to make hard choices example do i cut this rookie who hasnt played yet but could be good or this guy who has been in the system for years and is only averaging 75

Glad to hear it Holz.....good stuff mate  ;)

I think it could create interesting opportunities for trading say i have 3 extra players but i dont want to cut anyone so i could try a trade like

e.g. Priddis + 1st round pick + Harry Taylor for Rockliff

l think this idea is fraught with danger holz.....l think we should only trade like for like e.g. 1 for 1, 2 for 2, 3for 3 etc
....otherwise we will end up with unbalanced squads, that then could be affected disproportionately by injury, suspension etc.

well we will all have 35-40 players in the end. Stupid trades will be vetoed but the example above i feel thats a fair trade maybee slighty better for the person giving up rockliff, but i cant see it destroyign any teams.

If i have alot of mids and no backs i see no harm in say Shiel + Priddis for Lids

l understand your point of view Holz, but l still think it undermines the integrity of our lists. l reckon if we wanted t do something like you suggest why not trade Shiel + Priddis for Lids + Relton (extreme example but you get my point), thus keeping all player lists to the same number

l think we're going to have to agree to differ Holz ........l don't want you to think that l'm just trying to prove myself right or get my own way though, l really do believe that we need to have equal squads and if we don't it'll come back and bite us on the bum later. Will say no more on the matter  :-X

i will put it up to a vote before we trade next year than. I dont see the point of it, but if a majority agree with you i have no problem making the rule.

you can't get fairer than that.......a true man of democracy  8)

[PowerBug]

Daniel Gorringe.

That was the last pick, over 24 hours ago. Not sure who is picking for Mails but BB may pick now. :)

[FisherSaints]

Sorry didnt realise it was my/MailMan's pick, David Rodan please