Gone! James Frawley walks away from rebuilding Demons

Jason, you and TD below are misquoting Lance Franklin. He did not say he was leaving Hawthorn to win more premierships.What he said was that (having made the decision to move to Sydney, pretty obviously for personal reasons) that he chose the Sydney Swans over GWS because he wanted more premierships. Here's the quote: 'Franklin denied he had "mucked around" with Greater Western Sydney, who he was expected to join on a big contract before agreeing terms with Sydney. GWS are going to be great, no doubt, but that's probably four to five years (away), I want success pretty much straight away - that's why I chose Sydney. "In the end of the day, I wanted to come to a club that was going to win more premierships," Franklin said. "GWS are going to be great, no doubt, but that's probably four to five years (away), I want success pretty much straight away - that's why I chose Sydney." He denied suggestions that a desire to get out of the Melbourne media spotlight had triggered his decision to move.' http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-09/franklin-makes-his-bow-as-a-swan/5011198

Swans offered Franklin 10 million dollars over 9 years, knowing that no other club could/would match that. Hawks/Cats/Freo offered Frawley how much money, and for how many years? Franklin's reason for going to Swans - win more premierships (too bad he missed out this year to his former team). Reason everyone else knows he went to Swans - 10 million dollars over 9 years (although I'm not sure that Buddy thought this one through very well as he probably could've gotten more money by being on the market every couple of years). Frawley's reason for going to Hawks/Cats/Freo - chance to win a premiership. Other possible reason - experience what it's like to be in a team that has a good culture. In all likelihood, Frawley will be receiving less money at whichever club he goes to, than what he had been getting at the Demons (who paid him way too much - he's not Buddy, so why act like he is? I don't understand the hype). Let's see how much money Frawley ends up agreeing to, and how many years he signs for. I have a feeling that it's not going to be 10 million dollars over 9 years.

Same as Buckley at Brisbane ;0)

To win more premierships :D

Buddy wanted to get out of the hawks too ;0)

Yep - back to school - where I work with kids who would give their eye teeth to be able to even kick a footy - not behave like the Elways, Mannings, Frawleys who don't want to toil in a team that was generous enough to give them a chance. - Is Melbourne not a poor club - I think the fans might think otherwise - Read about Robbie Flower - no GF - but toiled for a club he loved - So the Hawks have now pillaged North for Gibbson and Melbourne for Frawley More importantly all we have hird (boom boom) all week is hawks fans pillorying buddy for leaving the club that drafted him And as Don Freo points out - any top 200 player is needed at Melbourne Agree Don - the GF win as a bit part is not nearly as valuable as staying to work - ask Leppa or Brad Scott who both had big offers to go to Hawks (surprise) and St Kilda

They are still a poor club. A top 300 player is a star at that club. He could have been a hero in Roosy's rebuild...now, just a cog in another team. What I don't get is that he would have been one of the highest paid players at Melbourne. He could not, possibly, be getting the same amount at Hawthorn. A winning Grand Final would not have the same currency if you just trade into a GF team. It would have greater value if you stayed with one club and worked towards a premiership...like Freo players next year.

Probably because Frawley is the one that wants to get out of the Dees, and play for *any* club that has a chance to win a Premiership. He will be receiving less money, not more.

TD, back to school for you next week? Snatched Frawley from a poor club? Are you serious?! 1. He's not even a Top 50 player. 2. He wanted to leave the Dees - for any other club in finals contention! 3. He will have to take a massive pay cut to be able to join the Hawks (just like Brian Lake). 4. The Dees have had ample time to become a force since 2006. Not other clubs fault that they can't get their sh*t together.

Funk the hawks can't buy premierships crew are quiet....

And haven't hawks fans moaned since Bit quiet after the frawley episode :0) bit reminiscent of your gibbon effort and before you hit reply go back and read what brad scotty said about gibbon

If there is any weak link in Hawthorn it is actually their midfield. Not because they are not great players - they are - but they are all over 30. Conversely, Freo's midfield will only improve - Mundy is their oldest at 29 and players like Fyfe, Neale, Wlalters (who played his junior career as a midfielder ) and Hill (who has an inside game that his brother Brad hasn't developed yet) haven't reached their peak. If Morabito's knee holds up and (crossing every finger) they can turn around Simpson that is a very impressive line up. There's Sylvia too but he would need to show a lot more character to get a game in the midfield. Depth is not a problem. Freo's problem is its forward line. It will be better than this year but Pav not getitng any younger...

Are all the hawks fans who belly ached about the buddy move quiet now they have snatched frawley from a poor club - irony much.................

With Ball, Lumumba and Beams continuing the massive exodus of star power at Collingwood, Pies supporters could reasonably be excused for asking why the club is incapable of attracting even a player like Mitch Clark, who has many questions that remain unanswered. The debacle surrounding failed coach Buckley is obviously not helping, with experienced players opting to join a club with some reasonable prospect of success, in comparison with the Pies seemingly inevitable downward spiral into oblivion. Meanwhile Collingwood continues the Buckley era pattern, of recruiting out and out duds including Lynch, White, Russell and Young and crocks like Scharenberg, Freeman and Karnesis, who could not manage a senior game between them during season 2014.

You gotta love free agency - Geelong has rarely seen what the view looks like from below 4th in the past 10 years yet they are allowed to take Frawley, Clarke and a couple of years ago rivers of Melbourne - who haven't been out of the bottom 4 since 2007. Seems fair.

I have my doubts about the wisdom of free agency, but I don't think Hawthorn can be criticised for taking advantage of it. Especially not after losing their marquee player via free agency last year. More importantly, if the Hawks get Frawley, they will be scary good in 2015. They already have the AFL's best forward line and a midfield that is at least the equal of any other (in my view only matched by Freo, on a good day, but with a bit more depth than Freo). The point of vulnerability is the defence, which is strong but lacks depth. When Lake and Gibson were out for long periods this year, the defence looked vulnerable. But a backline including Gibson, Lake, Birchall and Frawley starts to look very imposing indeed. Bottom line is that the the only way Hawthorn could really improve in 2015 is with another quality big defender. Getting Frawley would be massive.

Every time someone makes a comment like "farcical COLA fiasco" they show themselves to be ignorant of the facts and/or prejudiced and/or innumerate. Give it a rest!

Come on JIm, the premiers have lost the best player in the competition to Sydney in the farcical COLA fiasco. The trade off was a Buddy allowance that all clubs can get if they lose a player like that to free agency. Hawthorn are smarter than most clubs also. Bet they'd rather have Buddy than Frawley, not a like for like by any means. A poor substitute but that club will make it work, watch his development with interest.

Free agency creates two massive obstacles to maintaining a fantastic, competitive AFL league: (1) Free agency players will always have a choice of suitors if they are any good, so they will nearly always pick a team contending finals - which helps the playing lists of the strong clubs become stronger at the expense of the weaker clubs; and (2) The recipient club of a free agency player doesn't have to give up anything for the player. So while the weaker clubs are trading players or draft picks to bring other players to their club, the strong clubs sacrifice nothing to receive a free agency player. WHY DID THE AFL ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN?

The *pitch* for free agency was that it would allow players who aren't getting a go at their club, to seek opportunities elsewhere, after years of service. The reality of course, is that ageing players want a final tilt at a premiership...and that means leaving weak clubs and going to already-strong clubs. The players fought hard for free agency, the clubs are now left to deal with the fall out.