TOPIC:

anchorman wrote: I am sure most weeks there will be more WAFL based players playing for EP than WCE players.

anchor interesting stat from saturdays league game sd v ep
swans league 1 afl and 9 non zone players
swans reserves 1 afl player 4 non zone players

east perth league 4 afl players 3 non zone players
east perth reserves o afl 2 non zone players

east perth won both games.we have the least non zone players from all teams and at the moment the majority of players are from the local zone.the reserves which are second on the ladder are basically last years team with a few colts.because of next year we have concentarted on local talent.it is inline with what bronte and brian said that they would not look to non zone recruiting.already three or four debuts this year and finally bennell getting a go with kyanga and eades gone.it is going to be hard next year we may lose some players .we won't be the only ones.apart from the sharks and tigers who have great recruiting areas most of the other clubs have at least a dozen or more non zone players who may rob a local junior a chance of progress.arthur bennell and chris franklin were never going to get a look in last year with the recruitment of kyanga and eades.with several guys leaving early this year both zone and non zone at least bennell,boyes and fraser have had a go and looked good.the problem with the last alignment was that east perth were able to recruit non zone players.the 4or 5 eagles who played were not stars.who ever remembers michael o'brien.

Does the 44 on AFL lists include rookies and those from other sporting or country backgrounds? And should EP make money from players wanting to leave for opportunities because there is no room within their club they have supposedly been developed for? I don't think EP should. It's one of the prices they should pay not the 7 clubs. Players wanting to leave could go into a draft points system based on experience of league, reserves or colts games with the 7 clubs limited to a number of players they can draft from EP or Peel. 11/11 sounds like the mark. The reserves could end up like a development squad anyway so there might not need to be an age limit etc as there won't be many non regular league players hanging around you would think.

If Worsfold wants his players to play league then they will no matter if there are 11, 12 or 13 players available to EP.. as will Lyon at Peel..

SC30 wrote: Does the 44 on AFL lists include rookies and those from other sporting or country backgrounds? And should EP make money from players wanting to leave for opportunities because there is no room within their club they have supposedly been developed for? I don't think EP should. It's one of the prices they should pay not the 7 clubs. Players wanting to leave could go into a draft points system based on experience of league, reserves or colts games with the 7 clubs limited to a number of players they can draft from EP or Peel. 11/11 sounds like the mark. The reserves could end up like a development squad anyway so there might not need to be an age limit etc as there won't be many non regular league players hanging around you would think.

Some will say you are correct but why shouldn't we recoup some of the development process, given that my suggestion is based on basic premise of development and the costs of that all clubs is enormous, there has to be a little fairness in the process for all concerned.

As for the idea that 11/11 is good, I don't agree I would prefer 8 or at most 9 given that not all weagles deserve to play league and should come through the reserves, perhaps that is where the rookies play unless they mature aged. The reasoning for this is that one of the stengths of the WAFL draftees is that after the 18's carnival most play league and Lee Matthews has repeatedly commented that he prefers to see players against men before drafting them

Grump wrote:

SC30 wrote: Does the 44 on AFL lists include rookies and those from other sporting or country backgrounds? And should EP make money from players wanting to leave for opportunities because there is no room within their club they have supposedly been developed for? I don't think EP should. It's one of the prices they should pay not the 7 clubs. Players wanting to leave could go into a draft points system based on experience of league, reserves or colts games with the 7 clubs limited to a number of players they can draft from EP or Peel. 11/11 sounds like the mark. The reserves could end up like a development squad anyway so there might not need to be an age limit etc as there won't be many non regular league players hanging around you would think.

Some will say you are correct but why shouldn't we recoup some of the development process, given that my suggestion is based on basic premise of development and the costs of that all clubs is enormous, there has to be a little fairness in the process for all concerned.

As for the idea that 11/11 is good, I don't agree I would prefer 8 or at most 9 given that not all weagles deserve to play league and should come through the reserves, perhaps that is where the rookies play unless they mature aged. The reasoning for this is that one of the stengths of the WAFL draftees is that after the 18's carnival most play league and Lee Matthews has repeatedly commented that he prefers to see players against men before drafting them

REMEMBER BENNETT COPPING HE PLAYED MOST OF THE FIRST YEAR IN THE RESERVES AND GOT A GAME TOWARDS THE END OF THE YEAR.WE WERE NOT A GOOD SIDE BUT HE DID GET A GAME BECAUSE HE WAS A DOCKER.MOST PROBABLY DESERVED TO PLAY RESERVES FOR THE WHOLE THREE YEARS.A GOOD EXAMPLE WHY IF YOU ARE DRAFTED FROM THE UNDER 18'S YOU STILL NEED TO EARN PROMOTION TO THE LEAGUE.

Gone for 2014 Smith to Subi deal could be done already, Sweet and Moss also on the move, Higgins,Derricx to name a couple who will look elsewhere

Grump wrote:

anchorman wrote: Gump sorry for Hi jacking your posy here.
So what do others think of the post and suggestions.

Not sure what you mean, the responses are fairly positive, 11/11 etc. I just want to have a pathway for the development process at EP albeit limited for lots of reasons.

I thought a draft opportunity to another WAFL club in a formal manner might stop the 'looting' process that other clubs may indulge, would give access to some good players not the best but ......

Does the act of looting only cut one way? East Perth have chosen their path so why should they receive the fruits of the 7 WAFL clubs but be protected from the looting going the other way?

The Eagles and Dockers players leaving various WAFL clubs for EP and Peel next year have already been "paid" for by the eagles and dockers to whichever club they originated from. Clubs that have gotten further WAFL use out of them have further benefitted from not having to pay them for that time.

It therefore stands that EP losing any non-AFL players they have recruited/developed in the meantime should get just compensation for them as per usual.

Still can't understand how this host deal is going to work if Peel and East Perth get the same number of points to build a list and yet the AFL players are currently counted as no points and they will have all of them plus a full zone. Is this how it's going to be and if so why?
Would like to see the zones of these two reduced to even things up or some other arrangement to allow recruiting the excess at these clubs with reduction in the points value of the recruits.
By the way had a good laugh at the Swans scoreboard.

puppy wrote:

Grump wrote:

anchorman wrote: Gump sorry for Hi jacking your posy here.
So what do others think of the post and suggestions.

Not sure what you mean, the responses are fairly positive, 11/11 etc. I just want to have a pathway for the development process at EP albeit limited for lots of reasons.

I thought a draft opportunity to another WAFL club in a formal manner might stop the 'looting' process that other clubs may indulge, would give access to some good players not the best but ......

Does the act of looting only cut one way? East Perth have chosen their path so why should they receive the fruits of the 7 WAFL clubs but be protected from the looting going the other way?

Sorry bad choice of wording! I get you view point but don't necessarily agree with you. The other clubs will get far more compensation for the draft 10 times or more.