No Oppo Supporters Re-signing Tex, Danger and Sloane *** Crows Only ***

[Sanders]

I think it's totally normal. He's said "not yet thanks" and we've respected that. If there's still no discussion by August then yep... trouble.

To be fair you think Douglas is barely best 22, so...

 

[Pdub]

So we can offer JC 8m over 7 years (good) a year out, and a bunch of superstars have signed a year out, and we're expected to believe its perfectly normal not to be discussing terms with danger?

Something doesn't feel right there.

I think the fact that they were offering JC $1mil per year is why they aren't in discussions with Danger. Now JC has knocked back the offer I expect them to start talks with Danger and finish off Sloane's deal before round 1.

 

[Sanders]

I think the fact that they were offering JC $1mil per year is why they aren't in discussions with Danger. Now JC has knocked back the offer I expect them to start talks with Danger and finish off Sloane's deal before round 1.

Substitute expect for hope, then sure.

 

[Cap]

Of course it's bullshit. Monfries was as close to being delisted as dougie.

Yes, he was shopped by his managers to the SA teams becuase his stocks were sooooo high at Essendon.

Look ultimately I don't care what either of you wish to believe but the fact remains he wasn't targeted, which was the discussion we were having.

 

[Red mist]

Impressive work from the Giants. As soon as a week ago there was talk that a huge number of their uncontracted players would walk away at season's end.
Now....3 major players (Davis, Jezza and Smith) who were all big chances of leaving, locked up within 3 days. Got to give them credit. Something has changed there since trade period.

AFL would be relieved He's hitched his wagons to say the least.

 

[Cap]

If you think monfries was about to be delisted, then... You must be thinking of someone else. He was a very solid 2nd tier free agent signing. 400k x 4 years.

He was told he wouldn't be first 22 material.

Look that maybe a long way from delisting material but for me it says Essendon weren't fussed.

 

[AFC979810]

Sorry bro, born in Victoria.

http://www.aflplayers.com.au/jack-steven/

DAMNIT ALL TO HELL! 3/5 then

 

[AFC979810]

He was told he wouldn't be first 22 material.

Look that maybe a long way from delisting material but for me it says Essendon weren't fussed.

Stop. Just stop.

You don't sign a player to a 4 year contract if you don't think they are first 22 material*






*closest we have come is signing Tambling to 3 years.

 

[Bacon8]

DAMNIT ALL TO HELL! 3/5 then

Just blame Wikipedia. That says JS was born here.

 

[Cap]

Stop. Just stop.

I agree, you should stop posting here.

 

[AFC979810]

I agree, you should stop posting here.

I won't need to post if you don't say stupid things.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...in-deal-for-bombers-power-20121008-278jo.html

Essendon offered Monfries a further 2 year deal. In the 7 years preceding his trade - Monfries played at least 17 games for the bombers every year.

Port offered Monfries a 4 year deal.

We aren't talking about Kyle Cheney here.

 

[Tex200]

I won't need to post if you don't say stupid things.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...in-deal-for-bombers-power-20121008-278jo.html

Essendon offered Monfries a further 2 year deal. In the 7 years preceding his trade - Monfries played at least 17 games for the bombers every year.

Port offered Monfries a 4 year deal.

We aren't talking about Kyle Cheney here.

This is why I keep any arguments with you to a bare minimum

 

[Cap]

I won't need to post if you don't say stupid things.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...in-deal-for-bombers-power-20121008-278jo.html

Essendon offered Monfries a further 2 year deal. In the 7 years preceding his trade - Monfries played at least 17 games for the bombers every year.

Port offered Monfries a 4 year deal.

We aren't talking about Kyle Cheney here.

Poor Kyle.

I didn't say stupid things, Monfries wasn't high on Essendons priorities, he was shopped and Port took advantage, which was the premise of my initial discussion and the one we were having.

There are reasons players like Monfries arte offered 2 year deals and it wasn't because Essendon were desperate to keep him.

I won't need to post if you don't say stupid things.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...in-deal-for-bombers-power-20121008-278jo.html

Essendon offered Monfries a further 2 year deal. In the 7 years preceding his trade - Monfries played at least 17 games for the bombers every year.

Port offered Monfries a 4 year deal.

We aren't talking about Kyle Cheney here.

 

[AFC979810]

Poor Kyle.

I didn't say stupid things, Monfries wasn't high on Essendons priorities, he was shopped and Port took advantage, which was the premise of my initial discussion and the one we were having.

There are reasons players like Monfries arte offered 2 year deals and it wasn't because Essendon were desperate to keep him.

You might not rate Monfries - thats fine. But in no world was he not valued by either Port or Essendon. He was automatically best 22 in both of those sides.

He wasn't shopped at all. He was a free agent at the end of 2012. Essendon wanted to keep him considering he had been a big part of their best 22 for the past 7 years. Port lured him away offering him a much more secure and lucrative deal, combined with the fact he was an Adelaide boy.

You may have gotten a little thrown off by his worth because he was traded for Pick 48. The only reason he was traded was that a trade would work out to be more beneficial to both Essendon and Port than Monfries leaving through free agency. Essendon wouldn't be able to claim any AFL compensation for Monfries leaving as they had already committed to picking up Goddard as a free agent. A 3rd round pick was an added bonus. Port were willing to give up a 3rd round pick, because by doing so they would receive (IIRC) pick 29 for the departing Pearce.

 

[AFC979810]

This is why I keep any arguments with you to a bare minimum

Still as wily as ever, Pete!

You have had the better of me on numerous occasions.

 

[Cap]

You might not rate Monfries - thats fine. But in no world was he not valued by either Port or Essendon. He was automatically best 22 in both of those sides.

He wasn't shopped at all. He was a free agent at the end of 2012. Essendon wanted to keep him considering he had been a big part of their best 22 for the past 7 years. Port lured him away offering him a much more secure and lucrative deal, combined with the fact he was an Adelaide boy.

You may have gotten a little thrown off by his worth because he was traded for Pick 48. The only reason he was traded was that a trade would work out to be more beneficial to both Essendon and Port than Monfries leaving through free agency. Essendon wouldn't be able to claim any AFL compensation for Monfries leaving as they had already committed to picking up Goddard as a free agent. A 3rd round pick was an added bonus. Port were willing to give up a 3rd round pick, because by doing so they would receive (IIRC) pick 29 for the departing Pearce.

Look that is a superb hindsight analysis that you have put together and bravo to you.

But in simple terms Monfries didn't see a future at the Dons for good reason, his management approached both SA clubs Port pounced, Crows didn't.

Yes I didn't rate Monfries, still don't really, but he has been good for Port.

But that doesn't change the fact that Port didn't aggressively target Monfries, but that isn't in any way taking credit away from them for pouncing.

 

[Cleric]

Sorry bro, born in Victoria.

http://www.aflplayers.com.au/jack-steven/

AFC confirmed to be Rucci. Only the idiot himself could get that much wrong in two post.....

 

[AFC979810]

Look that is a superb hindsight analysis that you have put together and bravo to you.

But in simple terms Monfries didn't see a future at the Dons for good reason, his management approached both SA clubs Port pounced, Crows didn't.

Yes I didn't rate Monfries, still don't really, but he has been good for Port.

But that doesn't change the fact that Port didn't aggressively target Monfries, but that isn't in any way taking credit away from them for pouncing.

I wouldn't call it hindsight. I would call them facts that show you are completely wrong.

 

[Cleric]

As everyone is well aware, im not much of a PAP fan..., but you do have to give their recruiting team some big props. They targeted the players they wanted, and they got them. They even managed to change Ryder and his GFs mind about going to a Qld club. On the other hand we havent been so good in that area.

 

[AFC979810]

AFC confirmed to be Rucci. Only the idiot himself could get that much wrong in two post.....

Wanna come visit me in Italy?

 

[Cleric]

Wanna come visit me in Italy?

If the rumours are true, no thanks buddy. I dont swing that way

 

[AFC979810]

If the rumours are true, no thanks buddy. I dont swing that way

Thats a mighty high opinion of yourself. How do you even know you are my, i mean Ruccis, type?

 

[Cap]

I wouldn't call it hindsight. I would call them facts that you show you are completely wrong.

There were some facts in there yes.

But a hell of a lot more opinion.

Oh and a newspaper article, which was nice.

 

[Sanders]

Yes, he was shopped by his managers to the SA teams becuase his stocks were sooooo high at Essendon.

Look ultimately I don't care what either of you wish to believe but the fact remains he wasn't targeted, which was the discussion we were having.

What do you mean he wasn't targeted? He was a freaking free agent signing.

It doesn't get more targeted than that.

 

[Pdub]

If the rumours are true, no thanks buddy. I dont swing that way

Apparently Rucci won't * anyone unless they are dressed up as Kochie's cash cow.