Post BF Upgrade Feedback - Click Here

Remove this Banner Ad

Clayton Collard?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Thanks for that, seems a bit weird thta u guys didnt try to trade him and get something for him.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Mr Cannons said:
Why did you guys delist him?
Click to expand...

Don't believe all of the attitude carp!

Every time a player is delisted, dropped or benched under Harvey supporters are going to take the poor attitude excuse as the only possible rationale. Freo supporters on this board have been brainwashed into thinking that Harves is some iron forged uberhuman who can stare into a mans soul and instantly sum up his intestinal worth. It's wishful thinking to say the least.

The truth is Harvey had a hard on for a couple of his former Essendon boys (Johnson and Bradley), and wants to add other mature bodies to the senior list (hence the selection of Head). He also knew if he didn't add a couple of quick young mids he would have been lynched. To do all this he had to move the likes of Mourish, Dunn, and Collard to the rookie list where they would be given more time to develop. The only way was to delist then re-rookie them.

The gamble paid off with Dunn and Mourish, but Collard was snapped up early. The club that did the snapping got an absolute bargain.
 
Roundhouse said:
Don't believe all of the attitude carp!

Every time a player is delisted, dropped or benched under Harvey supporters are going to take the poor attitude excuse as the only possible rationale. Freo supporters on this board have been brainwashed into thinking that Harves is some iron forged uberhuman who can stare into a mans soul and instantly sum up his intestinal worth. It's wishful thinking to say the least.

The truth is Harvey had a hard on for a couple of his former Essendon boys (Johnson and Bradley), and wants to add other mature bodies to the senior list (hence the selection of Head). He also knew if he didn't add a couple of quick young mids he would have been lynched. To do all this he had to move the likes of Mourish, Dunn, and Collard to the rookie list where they would be given more time to develop. The only way was to delist then re-rookie them.

The gamble paid off with Dunn and Mourish, but Collard was snapped up early. The club that did the snapping got an absolute bargain.
Click to expand...

Pretty much agree with all that. It's one reason i think clubs should have more flexibility with their list management.

Having to delist a guy, just to rookie list him is ridiculous.
 
Roundhouse said:
Don't believe all of the attitude carp!

Every time a player is delisted, dropped or benched under Harvey supporters are going to take the poor attitude excuse as the only possible rationale. Freo supporters on this board have been brainwashed into thinking that Harves is some iron forged uberhuman who can stare into a mans soul and instantly sum up his intestinal worth. It's wishful thinking to say the least.

The truth is Harvey had a hard on for a couple of his former Essendon boys (Johnson and Bradley), and wants to add other mature bodies to the senior list (hence the selection of Head). He also knew if he didn't add a couple of quick young mids he would have been lynched. To do all this he had to move the likes of Mourish, Dunn, and Collard to the rookie list where they would be given more time to develop. The only way was to delist then re-rookie them.

The gamble paid off with Dunn and Mourish, but Collard was snapped up early. The club that did the snapping got an absolute bargain.
Click to expand...


yeah but in saying all that, he got lapped twice in a time trial at the end of this year by chris smith and one other player who's name escaped me, he had blokes like warnock tarrant and campbell beat him in these events, when he is meant to A. be a midfielder and B. be at his fittest because it was the end of the year, he WAS laconic towards his training, mourish was in the same boat. Hasleby got the same ultimatum, only he wasnt delisted because of his proven track record in games, i have no doubt that part of what your saying came into it, but im sure 95% of the reason they didnt keep him on the list was attitude or lack there of.

we are not brainwashed by believing the truth, i think you might be trying to make yourself sound smart by talking your own theories. no offence
 
Roundhouse said:
Don't believe all of the attitude carp!

Every time a player is delisted, dropped or benched under Harvey supporters are going to take the poor attitude excuse as the only possible rationale. Freo supporters on this board have been brainwashed into thinking that Harves is some iron forged uberhuman who can stare into a mans soul and instantly sum up his intestinal worth. It's wishful thinking to say the least.

The truth is Harvey had a hard on for a couple of his former Essendon boys (Johnson and Bradley), and wants to add other mature bodies to the senior list (hence the selection of Head). He also knew if he didn't add a couple of quick young mids he would have been lynched. To do all this he had to move the likes of Mourish, Dunn, and Collard to the rookie list where they would be given more time to develop. The only way was to delist then re-rookie them.

The gamble paid off with Dunn and Mourish, but Collard was snapped up early. The club that did the snapping got an absolute bargain.
Click to expand...

This post proves once and for all that you are an absolute muppet.
 
manamanah

I know Subi were concerned about Park's speed against south so Scotty played Parks on Collard ...........that tells a story
 
Roundhouse said:
Don't believe all of the attitude carp!

Every time a player is delisted, dropped or benched under Harvey supporters are going to take the poor attitude excuse as the only possible rationale. Freo supporters on this board have been brainwashed into thinking that Harves is some iron forged uberhuman who can stare into a mans soul and instantly sum up his intestinal worth. It's wishful thinking to say the least.

The truth is Harvey had a hard on for a couple of his former Essendon boys (Johnson and Bradley), and wants to add other mature bodies to the senior list (hence the selection of Head). He also knew if he didn't add a couple of quick young mids he would have been lynched. To do all this he had to move the likes of Mourish, Dunn, and Collard to the rookie list where they would be given more time to develop. The only way was to delist then re-rookie them.

The gamble paid off with Dunn and Mourish, but Collard was snapped up early. The club that did the snapping got an absolute bargain.
Click to expand...

Why then has someone from South personally told me that South was more disappointed in losing Sampi than Collard and they are more than happy he has left for Melbourne? Bad news he was described as.

I'm not saying who told me either but several on here have already been given the information and will vouch for the source.
 
I wonder why he dropped so far in the national draft of 06, (clearly had the talent to go top 20), and why every club overlooked him again this year in the whole National draft of 80 odd picks. Snapped up???:rolleyes:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

But since we invested our 1st pick in the 06 draft on Collard shouldn't we be trying to help him through his problems instead of just letting him go.

Collard was in his first year, it is not like he has had chance after chance like Lawerence Angwin for example. Also there was plently of space on our list for a talented young player, we could of keep Collard and still had 5 spots available for young draftees.

I know it is all done and dusted now, but it reminds me of the Dion Woods decision another player who deserved at least 1 more year.
 
Cameron_K said:
Why then has someone from South personally told me that South was more disappointed in losing Sampi than Collard and they are more than happy he has left for Melbourne? Bad news he was described as.

I'm not saying who told me either but several on here have already been given the information and will vouch for the source.
Click to expand...

The same "bad news" rumours have come out of Souths before regarding the likes of Gilmore. I remember a few seasons ago when Souths were apparently very dismayed with Gilmore's attitude and maturity. You know that if hang around a footy club for any length of time you will hear trash talked about a lot of players.

Same goes for the posters on footy sites. According to Lach a few months ago, he had inside info that Keplar Bradley had a serious attitude issue and was "bad news". Since then all you hear about the guy, on here and in the press, is people who know him praising his character. Inside info is generally bunk.

If Collard had lasted till our pick, and we'd nabbed him instead of Mourish (and we did plan to select him), most of the clowns on here would be saying that Mourish was the bad egg and a lost cause.
 
Roundhouse said:
The same "bad news" rumours have come out of Souths before regarding the likes of Gilmore. I remember a few seasons ago when Souths were apparently very dismayed with Gilmore's attitude and maturity. You know that if hang around a footy club for any length of time you will hear trash talked about a lot of players.

Same goes for the posters on footy sites. According to Lach a few months ago, he had inside info that Keplar Bradley had a serious attitude issue and was "bad news". Since then all you hear about the guy, on here and in the press, is people who know him praising his character. Inside info is generally bunk.

If Collard had lasted till our pick, and we'd nabbed him instead of Mourish (and we did plan to select him), most of the clowns on here would be saying that Mourish was the bad egg and a lost cause.
Click to expand...
roundy's dishing out some roundhouse kicks :p;)
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Roundhouse said:
The same "bad news" rumours have come out of Souths before regarding the likes of Gilmore. I remember a few seasons ago when Souths were apparently very dismayed with Gilmore's attitude and maturity. You know that if hang around a footy club for any length of time you will hear trash talked about a lot of players.

Same goes for the posters on footy sites. According to Lach a few months ago, he had inside info that Keplar Bradley had a serious attitude issue and was "bad news". Since then all you hear about the guy, on here and in the press, is people who know him praising his character. Inside info is generally bunk.

If Collard had lasted till our pick, and we'd nabbed him instead of Mourish (and we did plan to select him), most of the clowns on here would be saying that Mourish was the bad egg and a lost cause.
Click to expand...


Of course it is...footballers live in a bubble...and Ben Cousins is a virgin who suffers from bad press...

Pull your head out of your jacksey.

We don't all run around being glory hunting idiots...most of the time if I have information I put it through private messages because muppets ask for a source all the time.
For you, just for you, Roundhouse, the information I had came from a team mate of his who was due to be drafted in the same year before he blew his knee and sees him every time he comes home...and no, I won't be naming names.
 
18 year olds are sometimes immature. It was the main reason why Richmond passed up Buddy Franklin.


Now I am interested in generating some discussion in this thread about not only Clayton's situation, but Freo's list management.

First let me say that Freo is probably my '2nd team' so I barrack for you when you're on tv, I have since I saw your very first game (against Richmond).

So why do aging ex-guns get given years to prove themselves when quality kids are booted out after less than 12 months?

As you can see below, when Collard arrived he was unfit.

He has since been taken in by Richard Tambling and Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls who IMO are helping him adjust away from his (crazy?) family. He went to the NA with Bling last month to promote footy in local aboriginal communites, was fantastic to see and best of all got up early and went for a decent run every day.

I'm not saying Richmond are getting the best out of him by any means - our player development in the past has been questionable at best.

But he was Freo's top pick in the superdraft, I struggle to understand why he wasn't worth the extra time and work that was needed.

Infamy said:
April 2008

139001.jpg


June 2008

152753.jpg
Click to expand...


The picture says it all.

Blitzed his first game for Coburg seniors last week. Near BOG.

I know this post is at risk of being seen as provocative so I am making every effort to think logically and with as little bias as possible. This isn't a case of "haha you delisted a gun omg!" because Clayton has yet to achieve anything at AFL level.

My point is, if Freo weren't launching an assault on the flag in 2007/2008 then would they have delisted a senior player instead of their 1st pick in the superdraft after 12 months?

There are a few promising young players starting to come through now but it's no secret recent trades have burnt the club recently at such a critical point in the club's planning.

Good luck next week, as long as the mighty Pav Man is running around you won't be sinking down to our recent depths for a looong time :o
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom