Kurt Tippett

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Answers critics with a command performance tonight v big time opposition

So all my Saints need to do is pay some clown $1,000,000 a season and he will kick two goals for us a game as well then hey? Gee Josh Bruce needs to kick less goals and get more money then :p
 
Sydney would be better off with Mumford and a mid that can kick the ball rather than Tippett.
 
Even commentary were questioning it tonight so it's not as though this is the only place it's being discussed so don't be so precious
He's been in a slump the past month but prior to that he'd been very good for us and his stats back it up.

If he wasn't performing I'd be the first one to admit it. I have no problems with criticism towards our players who aren't performing. I had no issue with criticism towards White, Reid & Jetta on here when their output was sub par and to be honest even the Tippet criticism doesn't concern me. I just find it strange.

If people expected him to become the next Franklin or Pav just because he's being paid big bucks then maybe the issue is with their expectations and not Tippetts output.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

He's been in a slump the past month but prior to that he'd been very good for us and his stats back it up.

If he wasn't performing I'd be the first one to admit it. I have no problems with criticism towards our players who aren't performing. I had no issue with criticism towards White, Reid & Jetta on here when their output was sub par and to be honest even the Tippet criticism doesn't concern me. I just find it strange.

If people expected him to become the next Franklin or Pav just because he's being paid big bucks then maybe the issue is with their expectations and not Tippetts output.

Why shouldn't we expect him to deliver those sorts of performances? The bloke is top two in salary, yet lucky to be top ten in performance.
 
Not at all. Just responding to,a comment above re. Expectation.

I think it's laughable he's getting paid that money for the output he delivers.

For us to 'worry' about.

Think of the savings we will have at the end of this contract. Our administration will offer him much less.
Perhaps up to 600K less at the end of the 2016 season. We could potentially offer him 350-400K per year for 3 years.
Reports say he will be on 950K in season 2016.

It all sorts itself out in the wash.

I'd be more concerned about my own team if I were you.
Like who's going to step up when Hodge, Mitchell, Gibson & Burgoyne are done?
Certainly hope you aren't relying on Suckling!

But that's your problem.
 
For us to 'worry' about.

Think of the savings we will have at the end of this contract. Our administration will offer him much less.
Perhaps up to 600K less at the end of the 2016 season. We could potentially offer him 350-400K per year for 3 years.
Reports say he will be on 950K in season 2016.

It all sorts itself out in the wash.

I'd be more concerned about my own team if I were you.
Like who's going to step up when Hodge, Mitchell, Gibson & Burgoyne are done?
Certainly hope you aren't relying on Suckling!

But that's your problem.

Wow, you took it all to heart didn't you.

No doubt we have our concerns, but as should you. You have a guy on huge coin, who is not necessarily going to just take unders after coming off a huge contract.

Your midfield group of Kennedy, Hannebery, Mitchell, jack and Parker and going to want commensurate pay soon enough, and justifiably so. They are all top echelon.

Maybe when we lose the above guys we can chase your underpaid midfield!
 
This. You get Tippett or Mumford with change. Losing Mumford is seriously hurting the Swans.

Yeah man, we're hurting bad. 7-2 totally sucks.

Key forwards having form slumps isn't a new thing. For the first time in three years he's played more than 4 consecutive games without injury. He's probably just undercooked considering he's doing a good chunk of the ruckwork too. He'll be fine.
 
For us to 'worry' about.

Think of the savings we will have at the end of this contract. Our administration will offer him much less.
Perhaps up to 600K less at the end of the 2016 season. We could potentially offer him 350-400K per year for 3 years.
Reports say he will be on 950K in season 2016.

It all sorts itself out in the wash.

I'd be more concerned about my own team if I were you.
Like who's going to step up when Hodge, Mitchell, Gibson & Burgoyne are done?
Certainly hope you aren't relying on Suckling!

But that's your problem.

In what world will Tippett sign for $350k :eek: Out of the goodness of his heart presumably - it's not like he doesn't have history with these things :rolleyes:

Hawks will be fine. Have you guys got no old players there o_O
 
Wow, you took it all to heart didn't you.

No doubt we have our concerns, but as should you. You have a guy on huge coin, who is not necessarily going to just take unders after coming off a huge contract.

Your midfield group of Kennedy, Hannebery, Mitchell, jack and Parker and going to want commensurate pay soon enough, and justifiably so. They are all top echelon.

Maybe when we lose the above guys we can chase your underpaid midfield!

No doubt Tippett will have to move on then.
We are notorious for keeping required players.
 
In what world will Tippett sign for $350k :eek: Out of the goodness of his heart presumably - it's not like he doesn't have history with these things :rolleyes:

Hawks will be fine. Have you guys got no old players there o_O

Against us the other night there was no Hodge.
Mitchell was shut down for 2 quarters & your team went to pieces.
Take out Gibson & Burgoyne & we'll see where the 'courage' comes from.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top