2016 Brownlow discussion

[Red mist]

Nah, we're just crap at trading.

See the Menzel and Hampton trades. Those guys might end up playing some decent footy, but we massively overpaid for fringe players.

Maybe you are gauging massively overpaid because they didn't play first 22 this year.

 

[Interloperer]

We delisted Wright, there was nothing to come out ahead in.

Having made the decision to cut Wright, it was not unreasonable to expect the sum total of the contributions of all new players this year to exceed Wright's output at Carlton. This did not happen.

 

[gothecrows]

Having made the decision to cut Wright, it was not unreasonable to expect the sum total of the contributions of all new players this year to exceed Wright's output at Carlton. This did not happen.

Yes, it is unreasonable - carlton is a team in a completely different situation.

What you could expect, perhaps, is for the sum of their contributions to exceed the contribution Wright would have made at Adelaide.
Given our good run with injuries (and the fact that he was delisted), it's fairly safe to say that Wright would not have played any games for us this year, making any comparison impossible.

 

[Interloperer]

Yes, it is unreasonable - carlton is a team in a completely different situation.

What you could expect, perhaps, is for the sum of their contributions to exceed the contribution Wright would have made at Adelaide.
Given our good run with injuries (and the fact that he was delisted), it's fairly safe to say that Wright would not have played any games for us this year, making any comparison impossible.

Carlton have the same opposition Adelaide do.

He absolutely could have held the same 'non statistical' role as last year and even if his output halved, it's still competitive with Milera + Seedsman.

 

[Red mist]

Carlton have the same opposition Adelaide do.

He absolutely could have held the same 'non statistical' role as last year and even if his output halved, it's still competitive with Milera + Seedsman.

Point taken but who would you have played?

 

[PCORF]

The "compensation" Adelaide received for a player of Dangerfields calibre is pitiful.

That was always going to be the situation unfortunately and other players really need to step up to fill this gap. He cannot be replaced. Adelaide did very good apart from one or two games. (throwing away round 5 against Hawthorn and playing scared in round 23 vs the Eagles) But I think Adelaide would have won 18+ games if #32 stayed and easily finished in top spot.

I join the many others in the hope of zero team success for Mr Dangerfield!!

Geelong had their chance this year but relied on Dangerfield heavily at times but of course he deserved the Brownlow, his team went 17-5, he dominated in nearly every game he played. But in the end the Sydney Swans exposed them big time. At the start of the season I picked Sydney to win it all (hope I am wrong, hope the Bulldogs win this weekend) and Dangerfield to win the Brownlow without any doubt.

 

[mistylake]

And when we get pick #1, but the best SA player that year is lucky to be first round?

Like that will ever happen and we may get a dud # 1 anyway.
Nup, better to have zones. There already doing it with the indigenous zones. It would be more like state teams and the players might find some heart.

 

[Niximus]

Like that will ever happen and we may get a dud # 1 anyway.
Nup, better to have zones. There already doing it with the indigenous zones. It would be more like state teams and the players might find some heart.

Zones are just another weak point for equalisation. When there are zones there will always be stronger and weaker zones. You have more faith in the AFL ensuring that we don't end up with the worst zone that I do.

If we want to be a successful team, we need to fight for the most level playing field we can possibly get. Any inequality will not be in our favour.

 

[Interloperer]

Point taken but who would you have played?

I don't think any of the new recruits are bad. I'm just pointing out that it's questionable whether the fringe players that left have been adequately replaced, before one even gets to the matter of the player who just got the highest Brownlow vote count ever.

My main complaint about last season's trading is that faced with the dilemma of trying to force Geelong into a 'ridiculous deal' (ie. A Fair one) versus the risk of sending Dangerfield to the draft for nothing, Adelaide acquiesced to a mediocre deal almost immediately.

The jury is ultimately still out, but the trade period as a whole looks like a massive net loss as a whole

 

[Red mist]

I don't think any of the new recruits are bad. I'm just pointing out that it's questionable whether the fringe players that left have been adequately replaced, before one even gets to the matter of the player who just got the highest Brownlow vote count ever.

My main complaint about last season's trading is that faced with the dilemma of trying to force Geelong into a 'ridiculous deal' (ie. A Fair one) versus the risk of sending Dangerfield to the draft for nothing, Adelaide acquiesced to a mediocre deal almost immediately.

The jury is ultimately still out, but the trade period as a whole looks like a massive net loss as a whole

That all very good, but you still haven't answered the question.

 

[Vhaluus]

Zones are just another weak point for equalisation. When there are zones there will always be stronger and weaker zones. You have more faith in the AFL ensuring that we don't end up with the worst zone that I do.

If we want to be a successful team, we need to fight for the most level playing field we can possibly get. Any inequality will not be in our favour.

Zones are an excuse for the AFL to prop up the northern clubs.

They claim that it's because the AFL doesn't want to fund them so the northern clubs deserve compensation for doing so.

What they're ignoring is that all the northern clubs are propped up by the AFL, so the AFL gives the money to the club with the understanding between both that it pays for the academies.

Let's face it.. the AFL is signing record TV deal after record TV deal... they could EASILY pay for the academies if they wished to. The who is paying is just an excuse.

 

[Red mist]

My main complaint about last season's trading is that faced with the dilemma of trying to force Geelong into a 'ridiculous deal' (ie. A Fair one) versus the risk of sending Dangerfield to the draft for nothing, Adelaide acquiesced to a mediocre deal almost immediately.

You didn't mention Gore at all in your previous statement. Only Seedman and Milera.

 

[Niximus]

Zones are an excuse for the AFL to prop up the northern clubs.

They claim that it's because the AFL doesn't want to fund them so the northern clubs deserve compensation for doing so.

What they're ignoring is that all the northern clubs are propped up by the AFL, so the AFL gives the money to the club with the understanding between both that it pays for the academies.

Let's face it.. the AFL is signing record TV deal after record TV deal... they could EASILY pay for the academies if they wished to. The who is paying is just an excuse.

Of course they are, that's why I can't understand Crows fans who are pro zones and academies, it's digging our own grave.

Does anyone really think that the best idea the AFL could come up with to increase the amount of football talent produced in NSW was to give one of the most successful teams of recent years exclusive rights to the top-end players produced there? That's the absolute best idea they could come up with?

 

[Vhaluus]

You didn't mention Gore at all in your previous statement. Only Seedman and Milera.

Is Gore worth mentioning?

I like the theory from another poster here. Both Crows and Geelong knew Gore was a spud but him being an SA kid made the deal easier to sell to Crows fans.

 

[Vhaluus]

Of course they are, that's why I can't understand Crows fans who are pro zones and academies, it's digging our own grave.

Does anyone really think that the best idea the AFL could come up with to increase the amount of football talent produced in NSW was to give one of the most successful teams of recent years exclusive rights to the top-end players produced there? That's the absolute best idea they could come up with?

Heeney and Mills. That's all I have to say to anyone who supports the academies.

You tell me Sydney would be top 4 this year without those two.

 

[Red mist]

Is Gore worth mentioning?

I like the theory from another poster here. Both Crows and Geelong knew Gore was a spud but him being an SA kid made the deal easier to sell to Crows fans.

I like the other idea that Geelong added value where it wasn't there.

 

[Interloperer]

You didn't mention Gore at all in your previous statement. Only Seedman and Milera.

Because those are the only two that got game time.

That all very good, but you still haven't answered the question.

Who would I have played in what situation?

 

[Red mist]

Who would I have played in what situation?

Yes, cmon. Out of all three of them. * the situation. The situation doesn't matter. Who would you play?

 

[glengowan]

Proper zones would make the SA and WA teams too strong. Exactly what the AFL don't want.

 

[Interloperer]

Yes, cmon. Out of all three of them. **** the situation. The situation doesn't matter. Who would you play?

None of the above. for the loss of Dangerfield I would have expected at least one new player to walk straight into the best 22.

Seedsman *if fit* out of those three. But he rarely is fit. And if he is, his contributions aren't valued by the coaching staff anyway if club champion votes are anything to go by.

 

[MRB37]

Is Gore worth mentioning?

I like the theory from another poster here. Both Crows and Geelong knew Gore was a spud but him being an SA kid made the deal easier to sell to Crows fans.

Gore came 3rd in the Geelong VFL side B&F on only 11 games. If he's a total spud then that's a total doom and gloom outlook for the depth of Geelong.

 

[Red mist]

None of the above. for the loss of Dangerfield I would have expected at least one new player to walk straight into the best 22.

Seedsman *if fit* out of those three. But he rarely is fit. And if he is, his contributions aren't valued by the coaching staff anyway if club champion votes are anything to go by.

Wright, Seedsman and Milera. None. Yeah right. FFS Milera by a mile.

 

[Red mist]

None of the above. for the loss of Dangerfield I would have expected at least one new player to walk straight into the best 22.

Seedsman *if fit* out of those three. But he rarely is fit. And if he is, his contributions aren't valued by the coaching staff anyway if club champion votes are anything to go by.

Milera did

 

[Vhaluus]

Gore came 3rd in the Geelong VFL side B&F on only 11 games. If he's a total spud then that's a total doom and gloom outlook for the depth of Geelong.

I haven't watched him play, just going by reports.

 

[Anzacpaul]

Rowie just told paddy crows were one midfielder away from winning a flag so thanks for that