Player Watch Darcy Fogarty

How many goals will Darcy Fogarty kick in 2023?


  • Total voters
    129
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

mcattack

All Australian
Apr 14, 2019
678
521
AFL Club
Adelaide
Of all the arguments one can mount on why he’s not in the side, this one is the worst.

I can begrudgingly accept the team balance one, and the fact he’s not really a like-for-like replacement of either Jenkins or Lynch. The fact we’ve been in pretty good form for two months is another one.

But the “he can’t be selected until he dominates the SANFL” is such a rancid, lazy, robotic, unenterprising and worst of all, historically incorrect argument that just won’t ever die on this board.

SANFL performances are a really crap measure of a player’s AFL potential/career success, and most of all they’re a really crap measure of his ability to play well in the big leagues the week after.

We pulled this **** with Jack Gunston all those years ago (including the playing in defence part) and he went off and played in four grand finals in the next four years, for three flags.

We sure showed him!
Not disagreeing at all. I find the focus on sanfl crows Being development is an odd thing when all the otherside sanfl are going for the win at all costs. be good to see AFL seconds comp. Not sure it will happen might make it easier to manage young players that aren't there yet but have potential.
 
You mean the Hawthorn that keeps throwing Sicily in the forward line despite him sucking every time they do?

Crap on a crust, talk about some hyperbole. People acting like it's the first time a player ever struggles in their second year.

I mean the Hawthorn that have won 4 premierships in 11 years, and constantly manage to re-fresh their lists by poaching elite talent from feeder clubs.

LOL, those losers tho, amiright?
 

Mego Red

The Artist Formerly Known As Kristof
10k Posts
Oct 3, 2003
26,916
30,910
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Soft spot for Brisbane
So you're making the exact same unsubstantiated assertions, but this time in bold? The issue a difficulty understanding your assertions- it was that they're made up.

Every assertion made on this subject by either of us has exactly the same level of provable basis.

They did not offer Dangerfield 1.4 million.

But the most telling, and in my view fatal, blow against your fiction is the idea that Dangerfield played along with this to the effect of dis-entitling himself to somewhere in the amount of half of the salary that he could have extracted. That he knew he could seek substantially more money which was easily available, but chose not to because *shrug*. $600,000k left on the table, for no reason whatsoever.

And this is somehow more plausible than simply looking at what actually occurred- the money that was agreed, and applying Occams razor- that Dangerfield took the deal because he understood that it was the best deal that could be extracted from Geelong, who had a maximum amount that they could pay without running into other difficulties.

Wait - your main reason for disgareeing with me comes from the fact that I said Dangerfield was offered $1.4m? Surely it's clear that I never said that.

Let me say my views - I believe the following things.

1. That Dangerfield's management let both Geelong and Adelaide know his plans well before the end of the year, and both clubs were in negotiations for four or more months before his departure.

2. That Geelong had vastly more potential salary cap room than Adelaide, due to the departures (or potential departures) of Jimmy Bartel, Corey Enright, Steve Johnson, James Kelly, Tom Lonergan, Andrew Mackie, Hamish McIntosh, Jared Rivers and Mathew Stokes.

3. That Geelong didn't want the nuclear option of throwing their salary structure out, and was looking for a mutually beneficial solution - a trade, where the Crows received better than compensation, and Geelong maintained their salary position.

However, if things went nuclear, if the brinksmanship took it to the next level and Adelaide overplayed their hand, Geelong has a mutually damaging Plan B - which was to keep their picks and outbid us for Dangerfield.

Obviously, that didn't happen - but one of the reasons it didn't was because Adelaide and Geelong both chose the mutually beneficial path and behaved like professionals. They reached a deal that probably pissed off both groups of fans.

Maybe Adelaide should have held out for more. It feels to me like it's at least approaching the top of what it feels reasonable to expect Geelong to pay for a free agent.

I'm not sure I really need to deal with your draft rantings much more than to say that when you start an argument by saying that your position is 'based upon what actually occured', the ordinary convention would be to follow with a description of events that actually occured, and not an entirely made up hypothetical. What you're suggesting is not what actually occurred. It's what you tell us must inevitably have happened. Except there's no real reason to think it was inevitable at all.

LOL - what actually occured was the number where Milera was drafted.

Based on his performance in the Nationals and his performance in the SANFL, I think it was very unlikely to expect that he would still be there six picks later. It's impossible to know for sure, but surely it would be considered very risky to assume he'd be there.


we also don't know what offers had already been made to these players for all we know the deals could have long been done and they didn't have any flexibility at all. that seems more likely.

Hey CM - good to have you in the conversation. ;-)
 

Log in to remove this ad.

May 17, 2009
32,469
51,235
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Glenelg
I mean the Hawthorn that have won 4 premierships in 11 years, and constantly manage to re-fresh their lists by poaching elite talent from feeder clubs.

LOL, those losers tho, amiright?
So you have an obvious like of the Hawks, so why are you so upset about us moving Fogarty down bacjk? It's a complete Hawthorn move, as they have continually displayed with guys like Sicilly and Burton previously. Or is it just Hawks = good Crows = bad?
 

John Who

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 16, 2017
8,729
7,096
AFL Club
Adelaide
Pick FOG not Davis, end
Bit harsh as it’s Davis’ first AFL game, and against the outright favourite at their home ground. He deserves another crack.

Having said all that, this would have been the perfect game for Fog to play. Try him up forward and see what he can bring. If it didn’t work out, I’d play him on Danger and ruffle those bruised ribs (after the Talia clash). We need to see more mongrel in the team and this is what Fog can bring, that’s understated.
 
Bit harsh as it’s Davis’ first AFL game, and against the outright favourite at their home ground. He deserves another crack.

I don't agree. He's clearly not strong enough to play against AFL bodies right now. Needs another pre-season in the gym.
 
Jul 2, 2008
1,989
2,273
Perth
AFL Club
Adelaide
We desperately need players that can nark the ball not double take. Berg, Davis are double takers, FOG isn't and he is a threat, not so Berg. He gets manhandled, good luck to any defender trying to manhandled the FOG.

FOG in a showdown, mmmmm
 

John Who

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 16, 2017
8,729
7,096
AFL Club
Adelaide
I don't agree. He's clearly not strong enough to play against AFL bodies right now. Needs another pre-season in the gym.
How is he clearly not strong enough when he already was strong enough against the Tigers in the 2nd round last year? He gave some bruises to a couple of their players, with some hard tackling.
 
Oct 7, 2018
1,345
2,735
AFL Club
Adelaide
How is he clearly not strong enough when he already was strong enough against the Tigers in the 2nd round last year? He gave some bruises to a couple of their players, with some hard tackling.
That was a comment on Davis. Fairly certain he didn't play against Richmond last year, given this was his debut.
 
Nov 1, 2012
38,542
58,992
AFL Club
Adelaide
So you have an obvious like of the Hawks, so why are you so upset about us moving Fogarty down bacjk? It's a complete Hawthorn move, as they have continually displayed with guys like Sicilly and Burton previously. Or is it just Hawks = good Crows = bad?

Of course hawks = good

What sort of asinine bilge would suggest otherwise
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Nov 1, 2012
38,542
58,992
AFL Club
Adelaide
I think the biggest evidence the danger trade was ****ed up?

The existence of dean gore in the wash, that’s classic misdirection. He was there because they knew they needed something to sell to the supporter base because the basic trade wasn’t very good

All smoke and mirrors

If dean gore didn’t exist I’d find it easier to take the trade as a win. But Gore just shows how they felt they needed to use smoke and mirrors to sell it
 

Elite Crow

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts TheBrownDog
Mar 21, 2008
56,538
77,659
adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
I think the biggest evidence the danger trade was ****** up?

The existence of dean gore in the wash, that’s classic misdirection. He was there because they knew they needed something to sell to the supporter base because the basic trade wasn’t very good

All smoke and mirrors

If dean gore didn’t exist I’d find it easier to take the trade as a win. But Gore just shows how they felt they needed to use smoke and mirrors to sell it
We ended up bloody giving a pick for Gore anyway
 
Jul 6, 2017
28,331
37,668
AFL Club
Adelaide
I don't agree. He's clearly not strong enough to play against AFL bodies right now. Needs another pre-season in the gym.
Poor kid got thrown right in the deep end. Imagine playing him at home when jenkins is also in the team against gold coast or carlton...a totally different experience for his 1st game. The way our defence and midfield were kicking he had no chance and he competed hard and stood up in the tackle when he got his chance. I am not judging him on last night
 
Jul 6, 2017
28,331
37,668
AFL Club
Adelaide
I think the biggest evidence the danger trade was ****** up?

The existence of dean gore in the wash, that’s classic misdirection. He was there because they knew they needed something to sell to the supporter base because the basic trade wasn’t very good

All smoke and mirrors

If dean gore didn’t exist I’d find it easier to take the trade as a win. But Gore just shows how they felt they needed to use smoke and mirrors to sell it
Funnily enough i saw dean gore play and play well for sturt before geelobg drafted him. He looked a decent prospect back then
 

hey shorty

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts TheBrownDog
Jun 15, 2005
69,233
60,483
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
AUFC, Everton, Sturt
Time to take a game by the scruff of the next today, pity its against my Double Blues
 

mcattack

All Australian
Apr 14, 2019
678
521
AFL Club
Adelaide
Jars was talking about fog on tripple m today. Says other clubs melb very interested. Jars saying that melb club need to stay away Fog is going no where and is working hard / long term prospect for adel and knows what he needs to do.
 
May 24, 2006
76,792
149,868
Car 55
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Redbacks, Sturt, Liverpool, Arizona
Jars was talking about fog on tripple m today. Says other clubs melb very interested. Jars saying that melb club need to stay away Fog is going no where and is working hard / long term prospect for adel and knows what he needs to do.
It's easy for young players to get their heads turned
 
Mar 21, 2016
73,865
116,794
Down South Corvus Tristis
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt, White Sox
Wait - your main reason for disgareeing with me comes from the fact that I said Dangerfield was offered $1.4m? Surely it's clear that I never said that.

Let me say my views - I believe the following things.

1. That Dangerfield's management let both Geelong and Adelaide know his plans well before the end of the year, and both clubs were in negotiations for four or more months before his departure.

2. That Geelong had vastly more potential salary cap room than Adelaide, due to the departures (or potential departures) of Jimmy Bartel, Corey Enright, Steve Johnson, James Kelly, Tom Lonergan, Andrew Mackie, Hamish McIntosh, Jared Rivers and Mathew Stokes.

3. That Geelong didn't want the nuclear option of throwing their salary structure out, and was looking for a mutually beneficial solution - a trade, where the Crows received better than compensation, and Geelong maintained their salary position.

However, if things went nuclear, if the brinksmanship took it to the next level and Adelaide overplayed their hand, Geelong has a mutually damaging Plan B - which was to keep their picks and outbid us for Dangerfield.

Obviously, that didn't happen - but one of the reasons it didn't was because Adelaide and Geelong both chose the mutually beneficial path and behaved like professionals. They reached a deal that probably pissed off both groups of fans.
4. Geelong had wind of Henderson wanting to come to Geelong and negotiations were started as Geelong wanted to use their 1st round pick to secure Henderson knowing Adelaide would blink

In no universe is Henderson worth a 1st round over Dangerfield.


Carlton's rebuild of its list continues to take shape with the Blues agreeing to trade forward Lachie Henderson to Geelong for a first-round pick in the 2016 national draft.

The 25-year-old Henderson, who was out of contract and not a free agent, had requested a trade from the Blues.
 

Mego Red

The Artist Formerly Known As Kristof
10k Posts
Oct 3, 2003
26,916
30,910
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Soft spot for Brisbane
I think the biggest evidence the danger trade was ****** up?

The existence of dean gore in the wash, that’s classic misdirection. He was there because they knew they needed something to sell to the supporter base because the basic trade wasn’t very good

All smoke and mirrors

If dean gore didn’t exist I’d find it easier to take the trade as a win. But Gore just shows how they felt they needed to use smoke and mirrors to sell it
Maybe. It feels a bit like you're overthinking it. I think he was just a last minute throw-in, the classic steak knives. He gets more attention than he deserves because the media is lazy and they need to talk about the player we got, without realising the player was the least important part.

He was a late draft pick who Geelong were reasonably happy to let go. He was probably worth an early third.
 
Back