- Jun 15, 2005
- 69,233
- 60,483
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- AUFC, Everton, Sturt
We made the right choice regardless.Yeah, you’re right, if Butters career is ruined by injury then it is closer
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We made the right choice regardless.Yeah, you’re right, if Butters career is ruined by injury then it is closer
The whole premise of your argument that we would have been better off losing him. That's absolute rubbish.
If he moves forward he's a 40 goal a year forward with his skillset, what he's being paid to do that is largely irrelevant.
Did he kill your dog or something ??You want get any reality based views from HS on Sloane, you shouldn't waste your breath.
The argument is whether we'd be better off without him.because you're blinded. How about you address each individual point.
I'd love you to find the posts where I mentioned that.
You love to make up stories
As opposed to your view where you not only dismiss him as a footballer but attack him as a person.It's simply how value Sloane. Wouldn't trade him for anyone as we might as well pack up the club without him.
Yeah, you’re right, if Butters career is ruined by injury then it is closer
Ahhh here we go.....hey wouldn't straight swap for Cerra if Cerra chose us. There's something God like about Sloane in HS eyes.
Hardly worth debating. Sloane injury free still has good footy left in him. He is a loyal, important figurehead for the young group. IMO not a big problem for us at the moment.Both sides of the Sloane talk have points
Yes, he’s on way too much money and we gave him too many years back in 2018
Yes, he’s still a pretty good player that will be able to make an impact off a flank for the next two seasons, before retirement
The contract would hurt more if we weren’t rebuilding
The argument is whether we'd be better off without him.
We wouldn't be.
There's no point discussing Sloane with 1970.As opposed to your view where you not only dismiss him as a footballer but attack him as a person.
Yep, there was that pressure and Sloane took advantage of it, I wonder if Tex would have?If we had lost Sloane that year, they may as well have shut down the club.
Absolutely, as he's doing now.Yep, there was that pressure and Sloane took advantage of it, I wonder if Tex would have?
As opposed to your view where you not only dismiss him as a footballer but attack him as a person.
40 is the right numberCould do so yes, you only have to look at my comments on Rendell throughout this entire board to know I'm not a fan.
40 is a stretch but 30-35 is well in the ball park.
The addition of Burgess hopefully will benefit Sloane‘s footy too.We are playing Sloane to be a captain and get the best out of kids on and off the track.
I don't think its coincidence we have alot of young player's having a crack like Sloane did in his prime.
We are not paying Sloane to get 30 disposables and 3 goals a game to win a premiership.
We are paying him to speed track our rebuild and development of our young guns
Should help everyone.The addition of Burgess hopefully will benefit Sloane‘s footy too.
That’s ok if he was a mid ranged salary player, but he’d be our highest paid player but hasn’t played like that for the last 2 years and his next 2 will see him decline further. Now we have to find him other roles because he’s not capable of playing the role we are paying him for.
This is panning out exactly like some of us thought it would when we buckled and gave him this long term deal.
40 is the right number
Remember when it was announced over the ground against Geelong in July 2018 - here we were giving a 28yo (and would 29yo at the start of the next season) a five year contract - thought at the time, wtf! It should have been a maximum 3 years.
Another glorious decision by our previous administration.