McGovern: 1 yr @ start of 2016, 3 years at the end of 2017 - confirmed legend

[Sloane4pm]

Anyone needing a good laugh head over to the WC trading thread on their board. Apparently a second is all he's worth and if we get a first we are sending our second over with Gov

 

[Elite Crow]

I'm so sick of this lie that people don't want to live in Adelaide . We have loads of players that have stayed from other states but they get conveniently left out of these arguments. Danger would have gone home from anywhere. Nothing to do with Adelaide. Davis is an sa kid who moved for money . Gunston is one but what about Talia , Douglas, Sloane etc...

But we have lost players haven't we?

 

[marty36]

But we have lost players haven't we?

The fact we lose a lot doesnt go well. Like I said speculative picks like Sloane you would do everyday of the week and hope the player respects the faith shown in him even if he did leave we would get a top 10 pick for him. But top end talent like Davis, Danger and Gunston may need to be considered it looked like the right choice to get Danger and a lot said we should have gone ebert, who will play over 200 AFL games not a superstar but wouldnt be bad in our Mid this year in extracting the footy. We pretty much traded danger for pick 13 and a second after using pick 10 to get him so we didnt really incraese our position you may even call it a break even on the initial purchase but a waste of 7 years of developing

How will the last two years go, will Galluci wanting to go home or will Doedee want to go, should we have considered the available SA talent ATM.

Seriously if we dont win a flag in the next two years, however if I am honest Danger was really the only one that had a quality SA kid availble Davis may have seen us take Shoenmakers and Gunston there was mo SA kid availabe, so maybe Redden got those right apart from Danger

Did we get the last two years right?????????????

 

[jenny61_99]

I dont think mitch will leave. People need to chill.

Why so confident?

 

[jenny61_99]

Seriously? You didnt see those coming? Both of those were pretty obvious. Look if either Lever or Gov take this down to the end of the season, they are both gone. But as long as this stupid ******* CBA is still outstanding then I dont think we need to panic.

He'd told the Club he was staying (they were getting the paperwork prepared) and then changed his mind (whilst on injury leave). And Sloaney told me he thought Danger would stay... mind you, this was five days before Walshy died. Even then, I thought he'd stay due to Walshy dying. I guess I'm old school re Club loyalty, and expect players would be the same. I am slowly coming around to understand that it's all about them and their future and I begrudgingly accept that.

 

[BRL121]

Anyone needing a good laugh head over to the WC trading thread on their board. Apparently a second is all he's worth and if we get a first we are sending our second over with Gov

So, they're like us then?

 

[BRL121]

I'm so sick of this lie that people don't want to live in Adelaide . We have loads of players that have stayed from other states but they get conveniently left out of these arguments. Danger would have gone home from anywhere. Nothing to do with Adelaide. Davis is an sa kid who moved for money . Gunston is one but what about Talia , Douglas, Sloane etc...

Yes, and he was also named in the notional SA state-of-origin team on the AFL website. However, he was an import from Canberra at age 14. What actually is the defining factor in the "home state" of a player? Age, level of first "rules" team played for,...???

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Yes, and he was also named in the notional SA state-of-origin team on the AFL website. However, he was an import from Canberra at age 14. What actually is the defining factor in the "home state" of a player? Age, level of first "rules" team played for,...???

Good question:
- Betts in Vic team
- Charlie in WA despite being a Qlder

 

[crowsup]

The fact we lose a lot doesnt go well. Like I said speculative picks like Sloane you would do everyday of the week and hope the player respects the faith shown in him even if he did leave we would get a top 10 pick for him. But top end talent like Davis, Danger and Gunston may need to be considered it looked like the right choice to get Danger and a lot said we should have gone ebert, who will play over 200 AFL games not a superstar but wouldnt be bad in our Mid this year in extracting the footy. We pretty much traded danger for pick 13 and a second after using pick 10 to get him so we didnt really incraese our position you may even call it a break even on the initial purchase but a waste of 7 years of developing

How will the last two years go, will Galluci wanting to go home or will Doedee want to go, should we have considered the available SA talent ATM.

Seriously if we dont win a flag in the next two years, however if I am honest Danger was really the only one that had a quality SA kid availble Davis may have seen us take Shoenmakers and Gunston there was mo SA kid availabe, so maybe Redden got those right apart from Danger

Did we get the last two years right?????????????

I think we would have still lost Ebert to Power, anyway!
But I do, somewhat, agree with you. I believe that, when they do the list of draftees the club would like, if there's a South Australian that they would take within 1-3 positions of their preferred draftee, they should choose the SA prospect. Mind you, I would choose this option only for the first pick, where the speculation would be a lot less obvious.
As an example, we would not change our mind with the likes of Sloane, McGovern and even Gunston and Atkins, for that matter.

 

[marty36]

I think we would have still lost Ebert to Power, anyway!
But I do, somewhat, agree with you. I believe that, when they do the list of draftees the club would like, if there's a South Australian that they would take within 1-3 positions of their preferred draftee, they should choose the SA prospect. Mind you, I would choose this option only for the first pick, where the speculation would be a lot less obvious.
As an example, we would not change our mind with the likes of Sloane, McGovern and even Gunston and Atkins, for that matter.

Definetly top end picks only

Like I said the last two drafts we have had we have taken Galluci over Hayward and Dioedee over Burton, regardless of how much difference there is, if its only a slight diffrence in ability the go home factor puts us on the back foot immediatly

And I understand players dont always go home, you can look at the Crouches and put that one in there, but is everyone confident they are going to be one team players and not want to go home

 

[hippyhippy]

gov + our second pick for their first might sound fair.

their first pick may be around 12 or so, our second will be very late, maybe early 30s... i would take that if gov wanted out.

i'd rather keep him, but what can you do ...

 

[marty36]

gov + our second pick for their first might sound fair.

their first pick may be around 12 or so, our second will be very late, maybe early 30s... i would take that if gov wanted out.

i'd rather keep him, but what can you do ...

You would think that is fair

Gunston snags us a second and third so it could be around the mark

 

[Crowbots are dead]

But we have lost players haven't we?

Not denying that but the analysis gives unfair weighting to those that leave over those that stay . Not sure of the numbers but I think at least half of our squad would be from interstate. As a club you have to back yourself in to hold the best available talent and if you can't then get the best deal . Buying local only will be a major step backwards

 

[Elite Crow]

Not denying that but the analysis gives unfair weighting to those that leave over those that stay . Not sure of the numbers but I think at least half of our squad would be from interstate. As a club you have to back yourself in to hold the best available talent and if you can't then get the best deal . Buying local only will be a major step backwards

Ok then, of the established interstate sides, we've lost more than any other club. Now is that because they've recruited less interstaters, done a better job at retaining them or we've been unlucky?

 

[marty36]

Ok then, of the established interstate sides, we've lost more than any other club. Now is that because they've recruited less interstaters, done a better job at retaining them or we've been unlucky?

I would say GC,Brisbane and GWS are ahead of us in lost players interesting they are all non victorian aswell, there is no doubt a trend that a non victorian club will lose more, how do we counter that, the AFL have assisted the northern states with Cola and the Acadamys. No doubt the drafting sees more from victoria that is a purely population driven. Realistically we should be given SA as an acadamy to be shared with Port but whilst the Victorian clubs can control the AFL commission that will never happen

We arent losing 50% of our players as our tope end picks arent 50% of the squad but it doesnt need to be, if you look at the quality of top end pick we are losing it certainly needs to be considered what we are doing

We just need to be mindfull how close the SA talent is to that of the pick we want to use

Looking at the last 2 years it was Galluci/Hayward or Doedee/Burton

 

[hippyhippy]

maybe we have to look down the road at what port are doing .. they really havent lost any players... attracted some decent names too... maybe they are overpaying?

 

[Miss Vanessa]

I would say GC,Brisbane and GWS are ahead of us in lost players interesting they are all non victorian aswell, there is no doubt a trend that a non victorian club will lose more, how do we counter that, the AFL have assisted the northern states with Cola and the Acadamys. No doubt the drafting sees more from victoria that is a purely population driven. Realistically we should be given SA as an acadamy to be shared with Port but whilst the Victorian clubs can control the AFL commission that will never happen

We arent losing 50% of our players as our tope end picks arent 50% of the squad but it doesnt need to be, if you look at the quality of top end pick we are losing it certainly needs to be considered what we are doing

We just need to be mindfull how close the SA talent is to that of the pick we want to use

Looking at the last 2 years it was Galluci/Hayward or Doedee/Burton

So if we had taken the next best available South Aussie instead of who we chose over the last decade, you'd get the following.

2007: Danger - Ebert (but now have Milera)
2008: Davis (we got Kerridge with our priority pick)
2009: Talia - Christian Howard
2010: Smith
2011: Kerridge - Alex Forster (but now have Menzel)
2012:
2013: M. Crouch - Sean Lemmens
2014: Lever - Sam Durdin
2015: Doedee - Ryan Burton
2016: Gallucci - Will Hayward

So essentially the question is would we rather have

1. Ebert, Howard, Forster, Lemmens, Durdin, Burton, Hayward or
2. Milera, Talia, Menzel, M. Crouch, Lever, Doedee and Gallucci

Though the last couple of years might be questionable - though that is debatable - surely you still just have to go for what you think is the best available talent at the time. I think that Option 2 is the better one.

 

[fuddrooster]

Not denying that but the analysis gives unfair weighting to those that leave over those that stay . Not sure of the numbers but I think at least half of our squad would be from interstate. As a club you have to back yourself in to hold the best available talent and if you can't then get the best deal . Buying local only will be a major step backwards

We won back to back flags with the majority of the team from SA, West Coast won their flags with mainly West Aussies playing. There's nothing wrong with picking our best kids, after all we are a footy state and our kids are pretty bloody good.

 

[adelaidecrows]

Ok then, of the established interstate sides, we've lost more than any other club. Now is that because they've recruited less interstaters, done a better job at retaining them or we've been unlucky?

For us it's a combination of bad luck and poor club management. The clubs better image and player closeness is only just over 12 months old. I think we need to draw a line in the sand after the loss of Dangerfield to symbolise the end of the old poor Trigg and Sando era and use 2015 as a club cultural rebuild around Walsh and 2016 was this start of a new exciting era that the players seem interested in being a part of. If more players walk out it means we still have issues that the club has yet to identify.

 

[CrowsAlways83]

Lever - from his own mouth - says he wants to stay so I don't think he's an issue. Club just has to give him the right offer. Gov I'm not so sure.

Didn't Lever say when recruited something along the lines of being very grateful we gave him a shot and he wanted to play for us for 10 years? I wouldn't have thought the club has done anything to cause that to change (hopefully) so also think he is not an issue. Gov on the other hand.... needs to toughen up if he can't bear to be away from his dear older brother ffs lol - why can't he convince Jeremy to come to Adelaide!

 

[ftmch]

If we lost Gov and got say H Himmelberg from GWS for the pick we got for Gov, would that be a decent result?

Doesn't have to be like for like. If we lose Gov but inadvertently get Brodie Grundy, I'd be very happy with that

 

[FantasticShirt]

We won back to back flags with the majority of the team from SA, West Coast won their flags with mainly West Aussies playing. There's nothing wrong with picking our best kids, after all we are a footy state and our kids are pretty bloody good.

They really aren't. SA's draft prospects and in recent years have been okay. Certainly very few that appear to be able to go on and be elite players.

 

[MRB37]

He'd told the Club he was staying (they were getting the paperwork prepared) and then changed his mind (whilst on injury leave). And Sloaney told me he thought Danger would stay... mind you, this was five days before Walshy died. Even then, I thought he'd stay due to Walshy dying. I guess I'm old school re Club loyalty, and expect players would be the same. I am slowly coming around to understand that it's all about them and their future and I begrudgingly accept that.

I thought Walsh passing was what slammed the door shut on Danger staying. Was a reminder about family, which would trump loyalty to your teammates any day.

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

That is because we don't have a contested mark other than Gov.

That's just factually incorrect. McGovern averaged 1.2 contested marks per game last year. Jenkins averaged the same, while Tex averaged 1.9 contested marks per game.

Both players also had McGovern covered in every other statistical category except tackles.

 

[happy_knackers]

That's just factually incorrect. McGovern averaged 1.2 contested marks per game last year. Jenkins averaged the same, while Tex averaged 1.9 contested marks per game.

Both players also had McGovern covered in every other statistical category except tackles.

tackles.... he meant tackles!