Tom Boyd

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
IanW said:
Which is a really, really weird accusation to make when GWS did end up taking yes for an answer and saying 'thank you' to the kings ransom the Dogs eventually offered for Boyd.
Click to expand...
No but before it was done you wrote Boyd will not be traded, yet posted numerous times on the Bulldogs board that once a player decides to leave the club gets him to his destination. That sir is the definition of being hypocritical
 
Bulldog15 said:
No but before it was done you wrote Boyd will not be traded, yet posted numerous times on the Bulldogs board that once a player decides to leave the club gets him to his destination. That sir is the definition of being hypocritical
Click to expand...

Yep, because theres a GWS process thats in place to find if players are happy, and if they arent, then we move them - see, for example, Jaksch, Giles and Frost this year.

I didnt think we'd deviate from that. I was wrong.

However, I also didnt see the Bulldogs selling the farm to get Boyd, which they did with pick 6, Griffen and a million in cap room.

Bluntly, that showed a shitload of fear about Boyd's chances of going to the Dogs, and that all his "I want to play at Footscray" was just cover for "Time for me to get paid".

If your club really believed in his loyalty to the Western Bulldogs, then hanging tough and parking him at GWS until he is out of contract and spending this year's pick 6 on a KPD - and, heck, doing the trade of Griffen for 7 and picking up another player - makes a heck of a lot of sense.

Instead, the Dogs kept sweetening the offer to short-circuit an auction the Dogs clearly felt they couldnt win next year until GWS said yes.
 
IanW said:
Yep, because theres a GWS process thats in place to find if players are happy, and if they arent, then we move them - see, for example, Jaksch, Giles and Frost this year.

I didnt think we'd deviate from that. I was wrong.

However, I also didnt see the Bulldogs selling the farm to get Boyd, which they did with pick 6, Griffen and a million in cap room.

Bluntly, that showed a shitload of fear about Boyd's chances of going to the Dogs, and that all his "I want to play at Footscray" was just cover for "Time for me to get paid".

If your club really believed in his loyalty to the Western Bulldogs, then hanging tough and parking him at GWS until he is out of contract and spending this year's pick 6 on a KPD - and, heck, doing the trade of Griffen for 7 and picking up another player - makes a heck of a lot of sense.

Instead, the Dogs kept sweetening the offer to short-circuit an auction the Dogs clearly felt they couldnt win next year until GWS said yes.
Click to expand...
That was done because of the bargaining chip the Dogs had in Griffen and how he was contracted, so Tom wanted to go to the Dogs next year im of the strong opinion of but he seen a chance or his manager did, to get there one year earlier. The dogs sweetener was done as ive stated and the club has a few time because, without it and the the dogs have 4 players over 25 and would have struggled to meet the min 95 % cap for next year
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Bulldog15 said:
That was done because of the bargaining chip the Dogs had in Griffen and how he was contracted, so Tom wanted to go to the Dogs next year im of the strong opinion of but he seen a chance or his manager did, to get there one year earlier. The dogs sweetener was done as ive stated and the club has a few time because, without it and the the dogs have 4 players over 25 and would have struggled to meet the min 95 % cap for next year
Click to expand...

Only if your list management was done by idiots.

What the heck is the problem with frontloading new long term contracts to Bompatelli, Stringer and so on ?

Then again, the Dogs answer to "Do we lose the coach or the senior players to a player revolt" is "Why can't we have both ?", so yeah, it is possible this didnt occour to them.
 
IanW said:
Only if your list management was done by idiots.

What the heck is the problem with frontloading new long term contracts to Bompatelli, Stringer and so on ?

Then again, the Dogs answer to "Do we lose the coach or the senior players to a player revolt" is "Why can't we have both ?", so yeah, it is possible this didnt occour to them.
Click to expand...
lol, don't write stuff you know nothing about, the dogs have front loaded them, that's why the so call rumor about Bontempelli being not happy and wanted his contract revised was all about, its just the idiot journo got it wrong, where it was the dogs requesting them and managers in to revise contracts, Think about it, 4 players over 25, three on the veterans list and their highest paid player in Libba getting about $550K, even a lot of front loaded contracts means it would still hard to get to the 95%. And as for the revolt, what team wouldn't request the coach resign if about 80% of the list didn't like and want to play under their coach.
 
Bulldog15 said:
lol, don't write stuff you know nothing about, the dogs have front loaded them, that's why the so call rumor about Bontempelli being not happy and wanted his contract revised was all about, its just the idiot journo got it wrong, where it was the dogs requesting them and managers in to revise contracts, Think about it, 4 players over 25, three on the veterans list and their highest paid player in Libba getting about $550K, even a lot of front loaded contracts means it would still hard to get to the 95%. And as for the revolt, what team wouldn't request the coach resign if about 80% of the list didn't like and want to play under their coach.
Click to expand...

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/current-contract-lengths.967859/

An expiry in 2017 is not a long term contract - thats three seasons.

Take spare cap room. Lock down kids. It's not that hard.

And for crying out loud, try and avoid becoming Melbourne, with no experienced leadership, instability in coaching and pinning your hopes on importing a key forward. At the absolute minimum, rent in some high leadership players on short deals.

Oh. s**t. The window for that just closed.
 
IanW said:
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/current-contract-lengths.967859/

An expiry in 2017 is not a long term contract - thats three seasons.

Take spare cap room. Lock down kids. It's not that hard.

And for crying out loud, try and avoid becoming Melbourne, with no experienced leadership, instability in coaching and pinning your hopes on importing a key forward. At the absolute minimum, rent in some high leadership players on short deals.

Oh. s**t. The window for that just closed.
Click to expand...
well we will see if it is a bad move having most of our young group coming through together , like ummm some other club(s) it wasn't the length of contract pal it was the increase of doosha $$$ I know a bit of the in goings of my club and that's not a lot, so i fail to see why you claim to know how much and how many players contracts have been revised in $, and who knows if the ship has sailed, there are some delisted experienced players hungry for another spot.
 
IanW said:
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/current-contract-lengths.967859/

An expiry in 2017 is not a long term contract - thats three seasons.

Take spare cap room. Lock down kids. It's not that hard.

And for crying out loud, try and avoid becoming Melbourne, with no experienced leadership, instability in coaching and pinning your hopes on importing a key forward. At the absolute minimum, rent in some high leadership players on short deals.

Oh. s**t. The window for that just closed.
Click to expand...
Anyway ill get off your board and leave each other to worry about our own clubs good's and bad's
 
Bulldog15 said:
Anyway ill get off your board and leave each other to worry about our own clubs good's and bad's
Click to expand...

Boyd saw Patton go down with an ACL and figured that could be me next year.

When the ridiculous and desperate offer came in he couldn't jump quick enough.

He was so keen to take it he was literally begging the coach and CEO to let him go via texts.

He's a textbook mercenary and I'm glad he's moved on.

With the exception of Lynch these grandfather deals have largely been terrible failures. Even if the Boyd one works he will come out of contract just when he should be peaking and will be ripe to head home to Carlton to play for his real love!!
 
This has zero base in sour grapes, personally I think the trade was win/win, but for me the most telling thing about Boyd leaving the giants was the fact that this is a team sport and a number of his team mates clearly indicated they were happy to see him leave.
I am not sure if that's a comment on his character, only they would know, but it was one on his commitment to us and their commitment to him, and that as far as I am concerned means thank * he is gone...
 
Last edited:
Determinant said:
This has zero base is sour grapes, personally I think the trade was win/win, but for me the most telling thing about Boyd leaving the giants was the fact that this is a team sport and a number of his team mates clearly indicated they were happy to see him leave.
I am not sure if that's a comment on his character, only they would know, but it was one on his commitment to us and their commitment to him, and that as far as I am concerned means thank **** he is gone...
Click to expand...

I agree we ended up doing a pretty good deal, but it's possible we may have let go a once in a generation key forward, that's the flip side.
 
The GG said:
I agree we ended up doing a pretty good deal, but it's possible we may have let go a once in a generation key forward, that's the flip side.
Click to expand...

The Essendon supporters are commenting on the Boyd trade.

And there is no evidence so far that Boyd is a once in a generation forward. He could be pretty decent, but his first year playing against men wasnt anything great.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

General Giant said:
Hardly once in a generation. Still think Jezza and Patton (if fit) are and will be better
Click to expand...

Both definitely showed more in their first year, no doubt about it, and we should be happy with the deal, nevertheless, it's not every day a club loses a number one draft pick, who is a key position player no less, in the space of 12 months.
 
Giant Pete said:
How is he once in a generation? JC is better
Click to expand...

Different players, different roles, Jezza definitely showed more from the get go.

In the history of the draft, I believe Nathan Buckley is the only other number one pick who was let go after one season (although that was pre-arranged, something that probably shouldn't have happened then, and probably could not happen today).

What we have just witnessed is something quite unique.

Going back to the Nathan Buckley example, he missed out on a hatrick of premierships, being on the losing side twice.

A portent perhaps?

By the way, in no way am I saying we did a bum deal, I'm not saying that at all, I think we got plenty out of the dogs, but no one should ever underestimate the value of a number one pick. The other thing that weighs on me, at least for a large chunk of next season, we go into it with neither of our number one picks (both tall timber, and tall timber is precious).
 
The GG said:
Different players, different roles, Jezza definitely showed more from the get go.

In the history of the draft, I believe Nathan Buckley is the only other number one pick who was let go after one season (although that was pre-arranged, something that probably shouldn't have happened then, and probably could not happen today).

What we have just witnessed is something quite unique.

Going back to the Nathan Buckley example, he missed out on a hatrick of premierships, being on the losing side twice.

A portent perhaps?

By the way, in no way am I saying we did a bum deal, I'm not saying that at all, I think we got plenty out of the dogs, but no one should ever underestimate the value of a number one pick. The other thing that weighs on me, at least for a large chunk of next season, we go into it with neither of our number one picks (both tall timber, and tall timber is precious).
Click to expand...

Letting go of a pick 1 for a team that has that has the equivalate of over 25 first round picks on its current list is not as big a deal as it is for your traditional footy club that almost hang there whole future on having that number 1 pick.
 
General Giant said:
And yet has still shown more. Injuries yes are an issue. Buy otherwise im happier than i would be if we kept boyd and lost general
Click to expand...
Boyd hasn't shown much but was playing as a third tall early in his games , I'm not worried yet
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top