Rumour Bluemour Discussion XXXIX

[GT619]

Not so sure swans would allow it anyway
Swans were rubbish this season without him. Then he came in and suddenly they looked okay. They’d be crazy to even consider it … hope that they do…

they will and they will like it

 

[The Bighouse]

Wednesday the announcement for CD as HoF??

 

[dragonsblues]

No chance (unless we trade Curnow) we will be getting a big name this offseason.

The club had conducted a mini list refresh and seems intent on rebuilding depth on the list. I suspect a bit of a Collingwood strategy, or lots of ‘play their role’ types.

27 and 28’ should we get Walker and the kids come on we will be all in on a big fish.


Plus the narrative surrounding the club isn’t ideal for attracting a superstar….

 

[Crippa#9]

So Saints fans should prepare for premiership glory no 2?

Let the Saints believe they landed two really big fish in TDK and SOS. That’ll make em’ feel better for paying the ridiculous overs.

 

[BlueTongue]

Ah, OK. Never Doubted you!

 

[Crippa#9]

They landed a big fish.

If you are referring to TDK who has barely finished Top ten in a club B&F then you’re stretching…

 

[WalshYouLegend]

Riley and possibly Merrett want out of the Dons...

I didn't know Vossy was also coaching the Bombers!

He’s not, but his ex-teammate is and let’s face it, they were both pretty fierce players . Maybe not the most likeable characters for some underlings.

 

[Manhattanite]

The money we’ve banked on TDK, JSOS & the return on draft picks would nearly enable us to go Carte Blanche on a big name.

If you really think about it.

But you don’t

In theory yes but in the spirit of Groucho Mark I feel that right now given what’s going on with Curnow and JSOS any player willing to come to our club is probably just in it for the money and not to play selflessly and help get us a flag

But that could very well change - if we can’t get a deal done for Charlie and he returns from the states re-committing to the club then just maybe we can get some of the right people in to the club

 

[Gethelred]

All good points, all I know is, lots of people want to go play under Scott, Fagan and Hardwick.

Not just when they were good in the case of Brisbane and GC.

That says quite a bit about how they are rated.

Players 'want to play' everywhere. Player movement occurs every season, to every club, from every club.

There is no such thing as a destination club.

 

[Gethelred]

Never trust me.

Especially after 12pm.

 

[Navy Cream]

Let the Saints believe they landed two really big fish in TDK and SOS. That’ll make em’ feel better for the paying the ridiculous overs.

Correct. We had them both throughout their careers to date and we’ve achieved as much as the Aints as well…..’s. Time to cut our loses. Going to the Aints, neither of them will get a flag. Let’s move on and get what we can for them and unfortunately try to strengthen the list AGAIN

 

[Gointocarlton]

When I say big fish I mean a gun player we are screaming out for butters merret or a gun kdp to help out weiters. st kilda didn't need tdk

I was being facetious mate.

 

[Sam The Doc]

It’s funny how people think Austin can orchestrate an above value trade for us . Errol , Butters etc. when has he done a deal which has been in our favour ? Even to get pick 3 for Jagga gave up 2x1sts and a second. Best we could hope for is draft picks and b graders unfortunately .

It’s hopefully a fairly simple scenario for anyone in charge. So cox met curnow,
Gulden or forget about it..

 

[Pixelshooter]

The money we’ve banked on TDK, JSOS & the return on draft picks would nearly enable us to go Carte Blanche on a big name.

If you really think about it.

But you don’t

Not really. TDK and JSOS weren't on huge money...so any cap savings will be modest.

 

[Garters]

Not really. TDK and JSOS weren't on huge money...so any cap savings will be modest.

There'll be a bit to play with.
McG say 650 last yr of contract
TDK would have been around similar
JSOS circa 450k
1.75m freed up.

Could buy TDK back....

 

[Faucon Bleu]

Mate I’m all for driving a hard bargain but this is…a little out there

It's a joke, but Gulden a first and next year first for Curnow and maybe some popcorn thrown in.

 

[Faucon Bleu]

Gulden is comfortably one of the best players in the league, and is 23 years old. Sydney are not going to offer him up for Charlie Curnow. Sydney are not going to offer him up alongside another gun and two first round draft picks for Charlie Curnow. This place is an insane asylum

You do know it was a joke?

 

[macky99]

Not really. TDK and JSOS weren't on huge money...so any cap savings will be modest.

Not sure that is accurate with the departures our cap is not a issue, we have added nothing to our list in 2-3 years aside from young kids.
TDK was previously offered large amounts from other clubs, he would have been on probably close to 750-800k.
Docherty & Jack would have been mid range $. Other departures as well.

 

[Big Delut]

There'll be a bit to play with.
McG say 650 last yr of contract
TDK would have been around similar
JSOS circa 450k
1.75m freed up.

Could buy TDK back....

When Gov signed up again 2 years ago it was reported as a big salary reduction, down to between 400-500k

 

[Just Kreuzing]

There'll be a bit to play with.
McG say 650 last yr of contract
TDK would have been around similar
JSOS circa 450k
1.75m freed up.

Could buy TDK back....

Who would pay that ridiculous amount for a ruckman who isn’t close to elite…….

 

[CCurnow3picks]

I really don't understand how he walks back into the club next year if we don't trade him after this. he's manager has spun so much dribble how does he look the rest of the leadership group in the eyes and say he's all in

It’s really not that hard.

His manager is spinning a yarn & most are falling for it - the club would know where it’s coming from.

No doubt the club has made clear to Charles their intention not to trade him with 4 years to go on his contract.

These guys are professional athletes in professional organisations.

Thankfully they function well beyond the emotional cloud we wheeze within.

 

[Wickzki]

Fagan where he is now, with his players at Brisbane.
Chris Scott..to say it's the luck of geography is to greatly undermine the astute and modern attitude Chris has toward his playing group. We hear feedback from players that they love the freedom and mature philosophy in play down there. A different coach and the coastal opportunities may not be so appealing. I credit Chris with the destination club Geelong has become. It doesn't sound like spin when his players talk about him.
Hardwick...again...talking about what he's done and is doing with the Suns. A place no one wanted to go and which was used as a breeding hatchery is becoming a go'to destination for players. It wasn't so under less capable coaches.

Some people here won’t like what I’m about to say, but I don’t particularly care.

If Carlton had been a better-run club—regardless of who was coach—Jack Silvagni and Charlie Curnow wouldn’t have ended up in this position.

Jack Silvagni

On Monday night I posted that while we all love how “unconditional” Jack plays, he’s actually been one of the most conditional players we’ve had in 20 years. I stand by that.

We’ve given Jack more love and latitude than almost any late draft pick in AFL history. Since the modern father-son system came in, no pick in the 50s has been indulged the way he has.

A late pick usually plays with gratitude, grabs any role offered, and fights to prove themselves. Not Jack.

Early Career
Coaches saw him as a defender—he flat-out refused. Why? Because that was Dad’s territory. Instead of embracing the challenge, he demanded to play forward. He struggled.

The club tried to reinvent him as a midfielder/utility in the VFL. Showed promise, and when tested in the seniors (on Nat Fyfe, no less), he excelled. That could’ve been his position. Instead, he dismissed it almost as soon as it started.

Voss Era
Voss finally found a role that stuck—forward/backup ruck. Jack played it well, his most consistent stretch. But let’s be clear: it was his preferred forward role with a compromise attached. He said all the right things, but history shows he only accepted roles on his terms.

Reality check: he was a fringe player. Solid, but not indispensable. And the club was almost always fair with him - a couple of omissions come to mind as the outlier rather than the norm.

The turning point.
Injury struck. The team moved on. Kemp got a chance up forward late in the year and showed traits Jack never had—separation, leap, athleticism. Combine Kemp with Charlie and Harry and suddenly the forward line looked set.

Jack saw the writing on the wall. Almost a decade in, he finally requested to be considered as a defender. At last.

To his credit, he trained hard, came into the season looking fit, and showed glimpses down back. But injuries again ended his season early.
We’re talking about pick 53 who twice refused the roles the club identified for him. He only accepted the defender role when his forward spot was gone.

Any other pick 53 who pushed back like that would’ve been cut long before they got the chance to “figure it out.”

Carlton didn’t just tolerate Jack. We bent over backwards for him—showing him more love and patience than almost any other player in his draft range would ever get.

Instead, Jack demonstrates that he's entitled.

You want players to have freedom? Jack had it at a level never before seen.


Charlie Curnow

Some people won’t like this either, but let’s talk about Charlie Curnow.

We all know he’s a freakish talent. When he’s on, he’s unstoppable. Back-to-back Colemans don’t happen by accident. But the path to get here? It’s not just about perseverance—it’s also about freedom and agency that most players would never be granted.

Charlie hasn’t exactly lived like a monk. Many off-field activities that most footballers would never get clearance for—he’s indulged them. Those freedoms have directly contributed to setbacks. His injuries haven’t all been “bad luck”—some of them trace back to lifestyle and choices outside the club’s control.

At Carlton, that behaviour didn’t see him reined in. Instead, he was trusted to keep doing his thing while the club absorbed the consequences. Any other player—especially one without Charlie’s raw talent—would’ve been pulled into line, told to focus on footy, or quietly shown the door.

And when the injuries piled up, Charlie wasn’t treated like a standard player. He had a say in his rehab. When the club wanted one approach, he wanted another—and more often than not, he got his way. He stepped away from standard timelines, rebuilt his body on his terms, and the club gave him the latitude to do it.

That’s not how it works for most footballers. Usually, it’s “do the program or you’re out.” Charlie got trust and space

Eventually, it worked. Carlton’s patience and indulgence paid off—he returned, dominated, and has become everything we hoped he’d be.

But let’s not pretend this treatment was normal. If a lesser player had suffered repeated setback from personal choices, they’d have faced greater scrutiny. Charlie’s once-in-a-generation talent bought him freedoms that others wouldn’t even dream of.

Charlie’s game style reflects the same freedom. He plays with a laid-back, individual-first approach. He’ll pull off the spectacular, but when the contest demands a second effort or a hard chase, too often he doesn’t deliver. He’s not a gut-buster. He’s not the type to grind away for a teammate’s benefit.


That’s been part of the package from day one: mercurial, brilliant, but not always team-first in the one-percenters. Again, it’s tolerated because he can turn a game on its head with one burst of brilliance.

Charlie Curnow is a superstar. But he’s also the beneficiary of a system that bent over backwards—not just for his recovery, but for the freedoms he took off the field that played a role in his injuries.

That gamble paid off for Carlton from 2022 through most of 2024. But let’s be honest: almost no one else would’ve been given that much rope.

The Common Thread​

Carlton bent over backwards for both Jack Silvagni and Charlie Curnow. Jack was indulged when he knocked back roles and only accepted positions on his terms. Charlie was indulged when his off-field choices contributed to injuries and when his laid-back, individual-first mindset meant he wasn’t always giving second efforts.

Both were given freedoms, patience, and agency that most AFL players would never receive. Their talent (in Charlie’s case) and surname (in Jack’s case) bought them leeway that others simply wouldn’t have had.

A better-managed football club would have struck the balance: giving both players some freedom to be themselves, but holding them accountable early, setting hard boundaries, and keeping them in line. Instead, Carlton blurred those lines and let indulgence become the norm.

 

[CCurnow3picks]

MEDIUM DEFENDER, OUTSIDE MIDFIELDER

#7​

Campbell Chesser​

Height: 186cm
Weight: 83kg
D.O.B: 27-04-2003

POSITION: Balanced Midfielder/Defender

SNAPSHOT: "A speedy and productive mover on the outside, Chesser breaks the lines from half-back or the wing but has also shown a good balance in his ball winning."

What Chesser had shown in the previous fixture and his Under 16s year, was his clean ball use and athleticism, allowing him to strive through the midfield with his classy ball movement going forward.

To complement this, Chesser is a two-way runner, winning possession in the defensive 50 and moving it on well, then generally running hard to impact up the field in the same passage of play.

At the next level, Chesser is going to offer classy use of the footy, particularly by foot, whether he’s playing on the wing, off half-back or through the middle.

Chesser remains composed going in the thick of things, threading kicks out to teammates in space with solid placement to make them as easy to mark as possible.

STRENGTHS:

• Speed
• Kicking
• Class
• Versatility
• Outside run
• Breaking the lines

IMPROVEMENTS:

• Contested game
• Tackling

Sounds like a god - freakin sign the young fellow up!

 

[Rosscoe 17]

Why do they need defending? He isn't trashing them, just being clear about where things sit

It was like mum showing off naked baby photos to visiting guests…

 

[Schoonerman]

Some people here won’t like what I’m about to say, but I don’t particularly care.


If Carlton had been a better-run club—regardless of who was coach—Jack Silvagni and Charlie Curnow wouldn’t have ended up in this position.

Jack Silvagni

On Monday night I posted that while we all love how “unconditional” Jack plays, he’s actually been one of the most conditional players we’ve had in 20 years. I stand by that.

We’ve given Jack more love and latitude than almost any late draft pick in AFL history. Since the modern father-son system came in, no pick in the 50s has been indulged the way he has.


A late pick usually plays with gratitude, grabs any role offered, and fights to prove themselves. Not Jack.

Early Career

Coaches saw him as a defender—he flat-out refused. Why? Because that was Dad’s territory. Instead of embracing the challenge, he demanded to play forward. He struggled.


The club tried to reinvent him as a midfielder/utility in the VFL. Showed promise, and when tested in the seniors (on Nat Fyfe, no less), he excelled. That could’ve been his position. Instead, he dismissed it almost as soon as it started.

Voss Era

Voss finally found a role that stuck—forward/backup ruck. Jack played it well, his most consistent stretch. But let’s be clear: it was his preferred forward role with a compromise attached. He said all the right things, but history shows he only accepted roles on his terms.

Reality check: he was a fringe player. Solid, but not indispensable. And the club was almost always fair with him - a couple of omissions come to mind as the outlier rather than the norm.

The turning point.

Injury struck. The team moved on. Kemp got a chance up forward late in the year and showed traits Jack never had—separation, leap, athleticism. Combine Kemp with Charlie and Harry and suddenly the forward line looked set.


Jack saw the writing on the wall. Almost a decade in, he finally requested to be considered as a defender. At last.


To his credit, he trained hard, came into the season looking fit, and showed glimpses down back. But injuries again ended his season early.

We’re talking about pick 53 who twice refused the roles the club identified for him. He only accepted the defender role when his forward spot was gone.

Any other pick 53 who pushed back like that would’ve been cut long before they got the chance to “figure it out.”

Carlton didn’t just tolerate Jack. We bent over backwards for him—showing him more love and patience than almost any other player in his draft range would ever get.

Instead, Jack demonstrates that he's entitled.

You want players to have freedom? Jack had it at a level never before seen.

Charlie Curnow

Some people won’t like this either, but let’s talk about Charlie Curnow.

We all know he’s a freakish talent. When he’s on, he’s unstoppable. Back-to-back Colemans don’t happen by accident. But the path to get here? It’s not just about perseverance—it’s also about freedom and agency that most players would never be granted.

Charlie hasn’t exactly lived like a monk. Many off-field activities that most footballers would never get clearance for—he’s indulged them. Those freedoms have directly contributed to setbacks. His injuries haven’t all been “bad luck”—some of them trace back to lifestyle and choices outside the club’s control.

At Carlton, that behaviour didn’t see him reined in. Instead, he was trusted to keep doing his thing while the club absorbed the consequences. Any other player—especially one without Charlie’s raw talent—would’ve been pulled into line, told to focus on footy, or quietly shown the door.

And when the injuries piled up, Charlie wasn’t treated like a standard player. He had a say in his rehab. When the club wanted one approach, he wanted another—and more often than not, he got his way. He stepped away from standard timelines, rebuilt his body on his terms, and the club gave him the latitude to do it.

That’s not how it works for most footballers. Usually, it’s “do the program or you’re out.” Charlie got trust and space

Eventually, it worked. Carlton’s patience and indulgence paid off—he returned, dominated, and has become everything we hoped he’d be.

But let’s not pretend this treatment was normal. If a lesser player had suffered repeated setback from personal choices, they’d have faced greater scrutiny. Charlie’s once-in-a-generation talent bought him freedoms that others wouldn’t even dream of.

Charlie’s game style reflects the same freedom. He plays with a laid-back, individual-first approach. He’ll pull off the spectacular, but when the contest demands a second effort or a hard chase, too often he doesn’t deliver. He’s not a gut-buster. He’s not the type to grind away for a teammate’s benefit.


That’s been part of the package from day one: mercurial, brilliant, but not always team-first in the one-percenters. Again, it’s tolerated because he can turn a game on its head with one burst of brilliance.

Charlie Curnow is a superstar. But he’s also the beneficiary of a system that bent over backwards—not just for his recovery, but for the freedoms he took off the field that played a role in his injuries.

That gamble paid off for Carlton from 2022 through most of 2024. But let’s be honest: almost no one else would’ve been given that much rope.

The Common Thread​

Carlton bent over backwards for both Jack Silvagni and Charlie Curnow. Jack was indulged when he knocked back roles and only accepted positions on his terms. Charlie was indulged when his off-field choices contributed to injuries and when his laid-back, individual-first mindset meant he wasn’t always giving second efforts.

Both were given freedoms, patience, and agency that most AFL players would never receive. Their talent (in Charlie’s case) and surname (in Jack’s case) bought them leeway that others simply wouldn’t have had.

A better-managed football club would have struck the balance: giving both players some freedom to be themselves, but holding them accountable early, setting hard boundaries, and keeping them in line. Instead, Carlton blurred those lines and let indulgence become the norm.

Well said… Again